Normative data for measuring performance change on parallel forms of a 15-word list recall test

Abstract

Declarative memory evaluation is an essential step in the clinical and neuropsychological assessment of a variety of neurological disorders. It typically addresses the issue of normality/abnormality of an individual's performance. Another clinical application of the neuropsychological assessment of declarative memory is the longitudinal evaluation of an individual's performance change. In fact, in a variety of neurological conditions repeated assessments are needed to evaluate the modifications of a memory disorder as a function of time or in response to a pharmacological or rehabilitation treatment. This study was aimed at collecting data for measuring and interpreting performance change on a memory test for verbal material. For this purpose, we administered to 100 healthy subjects (age range 20-80 years; years of formal education range 8-17 years) three parallel forms of a test requiring the immediate and delayed recall of a 15-word list. The subjects performed the recall test three times (each time with a different list) at least 1 week apart. The order of the lists was randomized across subjects. Results revealed that performance on the three lists was highly correlated and did not vary as a function of the order of presentation. However, accuracy of recall was slightly better on a list compared to the others. Based on a method devised by Payne and Jones (J Clin Psychol 13:115-121, 1957), we provide normative data for establishing whether a discrepancy in recall accuracy on two versions of the test exceeds the discrepancy expected based on the performance of normal controls.