Advertisement

Tijdschrift voor Gerontologie en Geriatrie

, Volume 39, Issue 2, pp 64–74 | Cite as

Letterfluency: psychometrische eigenschappen en Nederlandse normen

  • B. Schmand
  • S. C. Groenink
  • M. van den Dungen
Artikel

Samenvatting

Een Nederlandstalige bewerking van de Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) werd genormeerd bij 200 gezonde personen in de leeftijd van 17 tot 89 jaar. De COWAT is een letterfluency of fonemische fluencytest, die wereldwijd veel wordt gebruikt in de neuropsychologie. Fluency is een belangrijk aspect van het executief functioneren. De psychometrische eigenschappen (normen, betrouwbaarheid, validiteit) van de Nederlandse versie kwamen goed overeen met die van de oorspronkelijke test. De test heeft een betrouwbaarheid van 0,80 (interne consistentie; paralleltest-betrouwbaarheid is 0,78), en de score hangt significant samen met het opleidingsniveau en/of de woordkennis, maar niet met de leeftijd en het geslacht van de onderzochte persoon.

In een appendix wordt een regressieformule gegeven waarmee de ruwe score kan worden gecorrigeerd voor opleiding.

Letterfluency: psychometric properties and Dutch normative data

Normative data were collected for a Dutch version of the Controlled Oral Word Association Test (COWAT) in 200 healthy subjects between 17 and 89 years of age. The COWAT is a letterfluency task that is widely used in clinical neuropsychology. Fluency is an important aspect of executive functioning. The psychometric properties of the Dutch version of the test were largely comparable to those of the original COWAT. Its reliability is 0,80, and its scores are significantly related to level of education and/or vocabulary, but not to age or gender. A regression formula is provided by which the raw scores can be corrected for level of education.

verbal fluency norms neuropsychological tests 

Literatuur

  1. 1.
    Thurstone LL. Primary mental abilities. Chicago: Chicago University Press; 1938.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Guilford JP. Three faces of intellect. American Psychologist. 1959;14:469-479.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hudson PTW. Preliminary category norms for verbal items in 51 categories in Dutch. Nijmegen: Katholieke Universiteit; 1982.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Battig WF, Montague WE. Category norms for verbal items in 56 categories: A replication and extension of the Connecticut category norms. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph 1969;80:1-46.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van Overschelde JP, Rawson KA, Dunlosky J. Category norms: An updated and expanded version of the Battig and Montague (1969) norms (vol 50, pg 289, 2004). Journal of Memory and Language 2006;54(4):633-633.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mulder JL, Dekker PH, Dekker R. Figuur-Fluency Test. Leiden: PITS; 2006.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jones-Gotman M, Milner B. Design fluency: the invention of nonsense drawings after focal cortical lesions. Neuropsychologia 1977;15(4-5):653-74.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ruff RM. Ruff Figural Fluency Test administration manual. San Francisco: Neuropsychological Resources; 1988.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cabeza R, Nyberg L. Imaging cognition II: An empirical review of 275 PET and fMRI studies. J Cogn Neurosci 2000;12(1):1-47.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Henry JD, Crawford JR. A meta-analytic review of verbal fluency deficits in depression. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2005;27(1):78-101.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Henry JD, Crawford JR. A meta-analytic review of verbal fluency deficits in schizophrenia relative to other neurocognitive deficits. Cognit Neuropsychiatry 2005;10(1):1-33.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Henry JD, Crawford JR. A meta-analytic review of verbal fluency performance in patients with traumatic brain injury. Neuropsychology 2004;18(4):621-8.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Henry JD, Crawford JR. Verbal fluency deficits in Parkinson's disease: a meta-analysis. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2004;10(4):608-22.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Henry JD, Crawford JR. A meta-analytic review of verbal fluency performance following focal cortical lesions. Neuropsychology 2004;18(2):284-95.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Henry JD, Crawford JR, Phillips LH. A meta-analytic review of verbal fluency deficits in Huntington's disease. Neuropsychology 2005;19(2):243-52.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Henry JD, Crawford JR, Phillips LH. Verbal fluency performance in dementia of the Alzheimer's type: a meta-analysis. Neuropsychologia 2004;42(9):1212-22.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lezak MD, Howieson DB, Loring DW. Neuropsychological Assessment. Fourth ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bokat CE, Goldberg TE. Letter and category fluency in schizophrenic patients: a meta-analysis. Schizophr Res 2003;64(1):73-8.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cabeza R, Nyberg L. Imaging cognition: An empirical review of PET studies with normal subjects. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 1997;9(1):1-26.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Troyer AK. Normative data for clustering and switching on verbal fluency tasks. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2000;22(3):370-8.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Audenaert K, Brans B, Van Laere K, Lahorte P, Versijpt J, van Heeringen K, et al. Verbal fluency as a prefrontal activation probe: a validation study using 99mTc-ECD brain SPET. Eur J Nucl Med 2000;27(12):1800-8.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Gazzaniga MS, Ivry RB, Mangun GR. Cognitive neuroscience. The biology of mind. 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton & Company; 2002.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Luteijn F, Barelds DPF. Groninger Intelligentie Test-2 (GIT-2). Amsterdam: Harcourt Test Publishers; 2004.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Van der Elst W, Van Boxtel MP, Van Breukelen GJ, Jolles J. Normative data for the Animal, Profession and Letter M Naming verbal fluency tests for Dutch speaking participants and the effects of age, education, and sex. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2006;12(1):80-9.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lannoo E, Vingerhoets G. Flemish normative data on common neuropsychological tests: influence of age, education, and gender. Psychologica Belgica 1997;37:141-155.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Benton AL, Hamsher K. Multilingual Aphasia Examination. Iowa City: AJA Associates; 1989.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Fernaeus SE, Almkvist O. Word production: Dissociation of two retrieval modes of semantic memory across time. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 1998;20(2):137-143.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hurks PPM, Vles JSH, Hendriksen JGM, Kalff AC, Feron FJM, Kroes M, et al. Semantic category fluency versus initial letter fluency over 60 seconds as a measure of automatic and controlled processing in healthy school-aged children. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 2006;28(5):684-695.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    CBS. Statistisch Jaarboek 2003. Voorburg/Heerlen: Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek; 2003.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kaplan E, Goodglass, H., Weintraub, S. The Boston Naming Test. Philadelphia: Lea and Febiger; 1983.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Marien P, Mampaey E, Vervaet A, Saerens J, De Deyn PP. Normative data for the Boston Naming Test in native Dutch-speaking Belgian elderly. Brain and Language 1998;65(3):447-467.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hammes JGW. De Stroop Kleur-woord test. Lisse: Swets en Zeitlinger; 1978.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Schmand B, Houx P, de Koning I. Normen voor Stroop kleur-woord tests, Trail Making test, en Story Recall van de Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test. Amsterdam: Nederlands Instituut van Psychologen; 2004. www.neuropsycholoog.nl. Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Schmand B, Lindeboom J, Van Harskamp F. Nederlandse Leestest voor volwassenen. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger; 1992.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Solomon PR, Sullivan DM, Pendlebury WW. Toward recognition of the Alzheimer's disease patient in primary care practice: The 7 minute screen. Neurology 1998;50(4):A162-A162.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Meulen EFJ, Schmand B, van Campen JP, de Koning SJ, Ponds RW, Scheltens P, et al. The seven minute screen: a neurocognitive screening test highly sensitive to various types of dementia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2004;75(5):700-705.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Benton AL, Hamsher K, Sivan AB. Multilingual Aphasia Examination, 3rd edition. Iowa City: AJA Associates; 1994.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Strauss E, Sherman EMS, Spreen O. A compendium of neuropsychological tests. Administration, norms, and commentary. Third edition. Third ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Loonstra AS, Tarlow AR, Sellers AH. COWAT metanorms across age, education, and gender. Appl Neuropsychol 2001;8(3):161-6.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Rodriguez-Aranda C, Martinussen M. Age-related differences in performance of phonemic verbal fluency measured by Controlled Oral Word Association Task (COWAT): a meta-analytic study. Dev Neuropsychol 2006;30(2):697-717.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Ruff RM, Light RH, Parker SB, Levin HS. The psychological construct of word fluency. Brain and Language 1997;57(3):394-405.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Woods SP, Fields JA, Troster AI. Neuropsychological sequelae of subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation in Parkinson's disease: A critical review. Neuropsychology Review 2002;12(2):111-126.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lacritz LH, Cullum CM, Frol AB, Dewey RB, Jr., Giller CA. Neuropsychological outcome following unilateral stereotactic pallidotomy in intractable Parkinson's disease. Brain Cogn 2000;42(3):364-78.Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Voon V, Kubu C, Krack P, Houeto JL, Troster AI. Deep brain stimulation: neuropsychological and neuropsychiatric issues. Mov Disord 2006;21 Suppl 14:S305-27.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Schmand B, de Bie RM, Koning-Haanstra M, de Smet JS, Speelman JD, van Zomeren AH. Unilateral pallidotomy in PD: a controlled study of cognitive and behavioral effects. The Netherlands Pallidotomy Study (NEPAS) group. Neurology 2000;54(5):1058-64.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Smeding HM, Speelman JD, Koning-Haanstra M, Schuurman PR, Nijssen P, van Laar T, et al. Neuropsychological effects of bilateral STN stimulation in Parkinson disease: a controlled study. Neurology 2006;66(12):1830-6.Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Smeding HM, Esselink RAJ, Schmand B, Koning-Haanstra M, Nijhuis I, Wijnalda EM, et al. Unilateral pallidotomy versus bilateral subthalamic nucleus stimulation in PD - A comparison of neuropsychological effects. J Neurol 2005;252(2):176-182.Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Evers A, van Vliet-Mulder JC, Groot CJ. Documentatie van Tests en Testresearch in Nederland, deel 1 en 2. Amsterdam/Assen: NIP/Van Gorcum; 2000.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Verhage F. Intelligentie en leeftijd: Onderzoek bij Nederlanders van twaalf tot zevenenzeventig jaar. Assen: Van Gorcum; 1964.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Hendriks M, Kessels R, Gorissen M, Schmand B. Neuropsychologische diagnostiek. De klinische praktijk. Amsterdam: Boom; 2006.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Jacobson NS, Truax P. Clinical significance: a statistical approach to defining meaningful change in psychotherapy research. J Consult Clin Psychol 1991;59(1):12-9.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Chelune G-J, Naugle R-I, Luders H, Sedlak J, et al. Individual change after epilepsy surgery: Practice effects and base-rate information. Neuropsychology 1993;7(1):41-52.Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Peters, M.J.V, Ponds, R.W.H.M, van de Ham, P, Scheltens, Ph, Verhey, F.R.J. Detectie van dementie van het Alzheimer type (DAT) met de ‘7 minuten test’ (7 MT). Tijdschr Gerontol Geriatr 2004; 35: 114-120.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Bohn Stafleu van Loghum 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Schmand
    • 1
  • S. C. Groenink
  • M. van den Dungen
  1. 1.

Personalised recommendations