The poorly written administration and scoring instructions for the Boston Naming Test allow too wide a range of interpretations. Three different, seemingly correct interpretations of the scoring methods were compared. The results show that these methods can produce large differences in the total score.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
FermanT. J.IvnickR. J.LucasJ. A. (1998) Boston Naming Test discontinuation rule: Rigorous versus lenient interpretations. Assessment, 5, 13–18.
2.
KaplanE.GoodglassH.WeintraubS. (1983) Boston Naming Test. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger.
LezakM. D. (1995) Neuropsychological assessment. (3rd ed.) New York: Oxford Univer. Press.
5.
NicholasL. E.BrookshireR. H.MacLennanD. L.SchumacherJ. G.PorrazzoS. A. (1989) Revised administration and scoring procedures for the Boston Naming Test and norms for non-brain-damaged adults. Aphasiology, 3, 569–580
6.
VanGorpW. G.SatzP.KierschM. E.HenryR. (1986) Normative data on the Boston Naming Test for a group of normal older adults. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 8, 702–705.
