The reliability and validity of three short forms of the Dutch version of the Wechsler Memory Scale–Fourth Edition (WMS-IV-NL) were evaluated in a mixed clinical sample of 235 patients. The short forms were based on the WMS-IV Flexible Approach, that is, a 3-subtest combination (Older Adult Battery for Adults) and two 2-subtest combinations (Logical Memory and Visual Reproduction and Logical Memory and Designs), which can be used to estimate the Immediate, Delayed, Auditory and Visual Memory Indices. All short forms showed good reliability coefficients. As expected, for adults (16-69 years old) the 3-subtest short form was consistently more accurate (predictive accuracy ranged from 73% to 100%) than both 2-subtest short forms (range = 61%-80%). Furthermore, for older adults (65-90 years old), the predictive accuracy of the 2-subtest short form ranged from 75% to 100%. These results suggest that caution is warranted when using the WMS-IV-NL Flexible Approach short forms to estimate all four indices.
AxelrodB. N. (2001). Administration duration for the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III and Wechsler Memory Scale-III. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 16, 293-301.
2.
AxelrodB. N.RyanJ. J.WoodardJ. L. (2001). Cross-validation of prediction equations for Wechsler Memory Scale-III Indexes. Assessment, 8, 367-372. doi:10.1177/107319110100800402
3.
AxelrodB. N.WoodardJ. L. (2000). Parsimonious prediction of Wechsler Memory Scale—III memory indices. Psychological Assessessment, 12, 431-435.
4.
AxelrodB. N.WoodardJ. L.PutnamS. H.AdamsK. M. (1996). Cross-validation of predicted Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised Scores. Psychological Assessment, 8, 73-75. doi:10.1016/S0887-6177(97)00022-X
5.
BoumanZ.HendriksM. P. H.KerkmeerM. C.KesselsR. P. C.AldenkampA. P. (2015). Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the Dutch version of the Wechsler Memory Scale—Fourth Edition (WMS-IV-NL). Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 30, 228-235. doi:10.1093/arclin/acv013
6.
BucksR. S.WillisonJ. R.ByrneL. M. T.KesselsR. P. C. (2011). Location Learning Test—Revised Edition (English version). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Hogrefe.
7.
CañizaresS.BogetT.SalameroM.RumiàJ.ElicesE.ArroyoS. (2000). Reliability and clinical usefulness of the short-forms of the Wechsler memory scale (revised) in patients with epilepsy. Epilepsy Research, 41, 97-106.
8.
Centraal Bureau voor Statistiek [Central Officie of Statistics for the Netherlands]. (2011). Datalevering Enquête Beroepsbevolking. Retrieved from http://www.cbs.nl
9.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
DelisD. C.KramerH. H.KaplanE.OberB. A. (2000). California verbal learning test (2nd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
11.
DondersJ.AxelrodB. N. (2002). Two-subtest estimations of WAIS-III Factor Index Scores. Psychological Assessment, 14, 360-364.
12.
GirardT. A.ChristensenB. K. (2008). Clarifying problems and offering solutions for correlated error when assessing the validity of selected-subtest short forms. Psychological Assessment, 20, 76-80. doi:10.1177/1073191114551551
13.
Groth-MarnatG. (2009). Handbook of psychological assessment (5th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.
14.
HendriksM. P. H.BoumanZ.KesselsR. P. C.AldenkampA. P. (2014). Wechsler Memory Scale-Fourth Edition, Dutch Edition (WMS-IV-NL). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Pearson Assessment.
15.
HoffmanR. G.TremontG.ScottJ. G.AdamsR. L.MittenbergW. (1997). Cross-validation of predicted Wechsler Memory Scale-Revised scores in a normative sample of 25- to 34-year-old patients. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 12, 677-682. doi:10.1016/S0887-6177(97)00022-X
16.
KaufmanJ. C.KaufmanA. S. (2001). Time for the changing of the guard: A farewell to short forms of intelligence tests. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 19, 245-267. doi:10.1177/073428290101900305
17.
LevyP. (1967). The correction for spurious correlation in the evaluation of short-form tests. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 23, 84-86. doi:10.1002/1097-4679(196701)23:1<84::AID-JCLP2270230123>3.0.CO;2-2
18.
LezakM. D.HowiesonD. B.BiglerE. D.TranelD. (2012). Neuropsychological assessment. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
19.
MillerJ. B.AxelrodB. N.RapportL. J.MillisS. R.VandykeS.SchutteC.HanksR. A. (2012). Parsimonious prediction of Wechsler Memory Scale, Fourth Edition scores: Immediate and delayed memory indexes. Journal of Clinical Experimental Neuropsychology, 34, 531-542. doi:10.1080/13803395.2012.665437
20.
MillerJ. B.AxelrodB. N.SchutteC. (2012). Parsimonious estimation of the Wechsler Memory Scale, Fourth Edition demographically adjusted index scores: Immediate and delayed memory. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 26, 490-500. doi:10.1080/13854046.2012.665084
21.
NunnallyJ. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
22.
NunnallyJ.BernsteinI. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
23.
Pearson. (2009). Advanced clinical solutions for the WAIS-IV and WMS-IV. San Antonio, TX: Author.
24.
RabinL. A.BarrW. B.BurtonL. A. (2005). Assessment practices of clinical neuropsychologists in the United States and Canada: A survey of INS, NAN, and APA Division 40 members. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 20, 33-65.
25.
ThompsonA. P. (1987). Methodological issues in the clinical evaluation of two- and four-subtest short forms of the WAIS-R. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 43, 142-144. doi:10.1002/1097-4679(198701)43:1<142::AID-JCLP2270430123>3.0.CO;2-#
26.
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation Institute for Statistics. (2011). International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED). Montreal, Québec, Canada: Author.
