An evaluation of the Memory-for-Designs Test.

Howard, Alvin R.; Shoemaker, Donald J.

doi:10.1037/h0062873

Cited by 15 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The orientation error test-retest reliability coefficient has also been reported at .8S-.90 (Kendall, 1966). A specific, quantitative scoring system consistently results in interrater reliabilities above .90 (Anglin, Pullen, & Games, 196S;Graham & Kendall, 1946;Grundvig, Ajax, & Needham, 1973;Howard & Shoemaker, 1954;Shearn, Berry, & Fitzgibbons, 1974). This is superior to the interrater reliabilities of other tests of organicity with which the MFD is often correlated, such as the Bender-Gestalt Test, with a coefficient ranging from .67 to .87 (Anglin et al, 1965).…”

Section: Nonverbal Memory Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical memory testing: A review.

Erickson¹,

Scott²

1977

Psychological Bulletin

199

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although a great deal of attention has been given to the study of learning and memory, relatively little has been paid to the problem of preparing tests for assessing memory functioning in clinical settings. Available memory batteries and tests for verbal and nonverbal learning and memory are reviewed. Critical issues are summarized, and implications for memory testing in clinical settings and for preparing future test batteries are listed.

show abstract

Section: Nonverbal Memory Testsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical memory testing: A review.

Erickson¹,

Scott²

1977

Psychological Bulletin

199

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Factors other than diagnosis which have been shown to influence performance on these tests are IQ (Aylaian & Meltzer, 1962;Griffith & Taylor, 1960), education (Pascal & Suttell, 1951), and age and length of hospitalization (L'Abate, Boelling, Hutton, & Mathews, 1962). However, studies which do not control for these variables are common (e.g., Bowland & Deabler, 1956;Garrett, Price, & Deabler, 1957;Goldberg, 1959;Howard & Shoemaker, 1954;Mehlman & Vatovec, 1956;Niebuhr & Cohen, 1956;Robinson, 1953).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationships between performance on three tests for organicity and selected patient variables.

Brilliant¹,

Gynther²

1963

Journal of Consulting Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study compared the predictive accuracy of 3 commonly used tests for organicity: Bender Gestalt, Benton Visual Retention, and Graham-Kendall Memory-for-Designs. Each of the 147 patients admitted to the hospital during the experimental period was approached for testing. Complete data were obtained from 120 patients later classified as Chronic Brain Syndrome, Acute Brain Syndrome, Psychosis, Personality Disorder, Chronic Alcoholism, and Other. Results showed that test performance is not related to race or sex, but is significantly related to age, IQ, and education. When the effects of these variables were statistically controlled, performance on all measures predicted the clinical diagnosis of organicity at less than the .001 level of significance. The best single measure was the Bender which, scored by the Hutt-Briskin method, correctly identified 82% of all patients.

show abstract

“…This test differentiates various groups of patients with organic brain disorders, including focal epilepsy, from controls. Chronic schizophrenics were also found to perform poorly (Armstrong, 1952;Graham & Kendall, 1960;Howard & Shoemaker, 1954).…”

Section: Test Materials and Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of marijuana on divergent and convergent production cognitive tests.

Weckowicz¹,

Fedora²,

Mason³

et al. 1975

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a study of the effects of cannabis on cognitive functioning, several cognitive and psychomotor tests were administered to four groups of subjects: (a) a high-dose group (equivalent to 6 mg of A° THC), (b) a low-dose group (equivalent to 3 mg of A" THC), (c) a placebo group, and (d) a control group. Cannabis was smoked in the form of marijuana. Even the subjects who received the low dose showed impairment on the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Block Design Test and Memory-for-Designs Test. The high-dose subjects gave an impaired performance on several other cognitive tests. However, on some cognitive tests, mainly those measuring divergent production and oral fluency, the low-dose subjects performed the best and the high-dose subjects performed the worst. Consequently, there is a possibility, requiring further exploration, that cannabis at low dose levels can act as a stimulant and can improve performance on certain tests.Several studies have indicated that acute cannabis intoxication produces an impairment on several simple and complex cognitive tasks. The functions most frequently reported as affected by cannabis are short-term memory, temporal organization, sequential information processing, vigilance, encoding, time perception, and complex reaction time (Cass-

show abstract

An evaluation of the Memory-for-Designs Test.

Cited by 15 publications

References 2 publications

Clinical memory testing: A review.

Clinical memory testing: A review.

Relationships between performance on three tests for organicity and selected patient variables.

Effect of marijuana on divergent and convergent production cognitive tests.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About