A cross-validation of the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery.

The recent report on neuropsychological testing of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology (AAN) has implications for neuropsychologists as well as neurologists. The subcommittee's report omits mention of standardized neuropsychological test batteries used by a majority of practicing neuropsychologists, and of the demonstrated validity of such measures for localization and lateralization of brain impairments, in apparent ignorance of the empirical research literature on which such neuropsychological examination is based. This paper elaborates the research-based context of neuropsychological assessment in an attempt to clarify possible false conclusions concerning neuropsychological assessment that could result from noncritical reading of the subcommittee report.

show abstract

Misconceptions about the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery

Purisch

2001

NRE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery (LNNB) was introduced in the late 1970s as a fixed battery derived from clinical procedures and based upon the neuropsychological theory developed by the late Russian neuropsychologist Alexandr Luria. Considerable debate arose about the LNNB and it became the focus of harsh criticisms. The major criticisms related to the belief that the qualitative and quantitative approaches could not be fused, that the scales were too heterogeneous to produce meaningful scores, that the battery suffered from significant limitations in sampling of neuropsychological skills, and that it had questionable sensitivity to brain dysfunction. These criticisms generally reflected an unawareness of the interpretive process and theory underlying the LNNB, and have been largely negated by a large empirical literature that has evolved over many years. This article addresses the misconceptions perpetuated about the LNNB as a result of these early criticisms and discusses the applications and limitations of the battery based upon an understanding of its construction, theory, and research.

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

A cross-validation of the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery.

Cited by 3 publications

References 4 publications

Comparison of two models of hemispheric specialization with unilaterally lesioned patients: Material-specific impairment vs response-bias distortion

Comparison of two models of hemispheric specialization with unilaterally lesioned patients: Material-specific impairment vs response-bias distortion

Neuropsychological testing of adults: further considerations for neurologists

Misconceptions about the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About