Neurological Sciences

, Volume 32, Issue 4, pp 595–601

The Modified Five-Point Test: normative data for a sample of Italian healthy adults aged 16–60

  • Raffaella Cattelani
  • Flora Dal Sasso
  • Delfina Corsini
  • Lucio Posteraro
Original Article


The Five-Point Test is one of the various measures of figural fluency functions that have been developed as nonverbal analogues to word fluency tasks, and used in neuropsychological assessment to evaluate the ability to initiate and sustain mental productivity, and to self-monitor and regulate responding in the visual–spatial domain. The aim of the current study was to collect normative data for a version of the Five-Point Test (M-FPT) administered to a sample of Italian healthy adults aged 16–60 (n = 332). Performance on the M-FPT was scored by computing the cumulative number of unique designs (UDs) performed on a 3-min administration time. Two supplemental scores were also computed: (a) the cumulative strategies (CSs) consisting with the number of UDs incorporated into enumerative or rotational strategies; (b) the error index (ErrI), consisting with the percentage between the number of perseverative or rule-breaking errors and the number of designs overall. Multiple regression analyses revealed a significant effect of age and education, but not gender, for both UDs and CSs. Equivalent scores and cut-off scores were then determined for UDs and CSs. Descriptive statistical analyses and cut-off scores were reported for ErrI. The availability of normative data for the M-FPT will be valuable in clinical settings for assessing of executive dysfunctions on the visual-spatial subdomain of subjects with brain injury. However, in order to increase the usefulness of the test, the upper limits of the age range of the normative sample should be widened. Moreover, further analyses should be required for determining the inter-rater and test–retest reliability for M-FPT performances, and providing evidence of the sensitivity of this measure to brain disturbances generally and to frontal lobe dysfunction specifically.


Modified Five-Point Test Spatial fluency Assessment Executive functions Normative data 


  1. 1.
    Benton AL, Hamsher K, Sivan AB (1994) Multilingual aphasia examination. AJA Associates, Iowa CityGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lezak M (1995) Neuropsychological assessment. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jones-Gotman M, Milner B (1977) Design fluency: the invention of nonsense drawings after focal cortical lesions. Neuropsychologia 15:653–674PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Regard M, Strauss E, Knapp P (1982) Children’s production of verbal and non-verbal fluency tasks. Percept Mot Skills 55:839–844PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ruff RM, Light RH, Evans RW (1987) The Ruff Figural Fluency Test: a normative study with adults. Dev Neuropsychol 3:37–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Glosser G, Goodglass H (1990) Disorders in executive control functions among aphasic and other brain-damaged patients. J Clin Exper Neuropsychol 12:485–501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Delis DC, Kaplan E, Kramer JH (2001) Delis–Kaplan executive function system: manual. Psychological Corporation, San AntonioGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ruff RM, Allen CC, Farrow CE et al (1994) Differential impairment in patients with left versus right frontal lobe lesions. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 9:41–55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baldo JV, Shimamura AP, Delis DC et al (2001) Verbal and design fluency in patients with frontal lobe lesions. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 5:586–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McDonald CR, Delis DC, Norman MA et al (2005) Discriminating patients with frontal-lobe epilepsy and temporal-lobe epilepsy: utility of a multilevel design fluency test. Neuropsychol 19(6):806–813CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Varney NR, Roberts RJ, Struchen MA et al (1996) Design fluency among normals and patients with close-head injury. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 11:345–353PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Taylor AE, Saint-Cyr JA, Lang AE (1986) Frontal lobe dysfunction in Parkinson’s disease: the cortical focus of neostriatal outflow. Brain 109:845–883PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bigler ED (1995) Design fluency in dementia of Alzheimer’s type, multi-infarct dementia and dementia associated with alcoholism. Appl Neuropsychol 2:7–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fama R, Sullivan EV, Lim KO et al (2000) Structural brain correlates of verbal and nonverbal fluency measures in Alzheimer’s disease. Neuropsychology 14(1):29–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lee GP, Strauss E, Loring DW et al (1997) Sensitivity of figural fluency on the Five-Point Test to focal neurological dysfunction. Clin Neuropsychol 11:59–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Elfgren CI, Risberg J (1998) Lateralized frontal blood flow increases during fluency tasks: influence of cognitive strategy. Neuropsychologia 36(6):505–512PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Foster PS, Williamson JB, Harrison DW (2005) The Ruff Figural Fluency Test: heightened right frontal lobe delta activity as a function of performance. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 20:427–434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ruff RM (1996) Ruff Figural Fluency Test Manual. Psychological Assessment Resources, LutzGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Carter SL, Shore D, Harnadek MCS et al (1998) Normative data and interrater reliability of the Design Fluency Test. Clin Neuropsychol 12(4):531–534Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Santa Maria MP, Martin JA, Morrow CM et al (2001) On the duration of spatial fluency measures. Int J Neurosci 106:125–130PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Delis DC, Kramer JH, Kaplan E et al (2004) Reliability and validity of the Delis–Kaplan executive function system: an update. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 10:301–303PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ross TP, Foard EL, Hiott FB et al (2003) The reliability of production strategy scores for the Ruff Figural Fluency Test. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 18:879–891PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Goebel S, Fisher R, Ferstl R et al (2009) Normative data and psychometric properties for qualitative and quantitative scoring criteria of the Five-Point Test. Clin Neuropsychol 23:675–690PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Fernandez AL, Moroni MA, Carranza M et al (2009) Reliability of the Five-Point Test. Clin Neuropsychol 23:501–509PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lee GP, Strauss E, McCloskey L et al (1994) Figural fluency on the Five-Point Test: preliminary normative and validity data. Int Neuropsychol Soc Bull 1:51Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Spinnler H, Tognoni G (1987) Standardizzazione e taratura italiana di test neuropsicologici. Ital J Neurol Sci 6(8):1–120Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Capitani E (1997) Normative values and neuropsychological assessment. Common problems in clinical practice and research. Neuropsychol Rehab 7:295–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gibbons Natrella M (1966) Experimental statistic. National Bureau of Standard, Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Risser AH, Andrikopoulos J (1996) Regard’s Five-Point Test: adolescent cohort stability. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2:3–4Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR (1975) Mini-Mental State (a practical method for grading the state of patients for the clinician). J Psychiat Res 12:189–198PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Lezak MD, Howieson DB, Loring DW (2004) Neuropsychological assessment. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Harter SL, Hart CC, Harter GW (1999) Expanded scoring criteria for the Design Fluency Test: reliability and validity in neuropsychological and college samples. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 14:419–432PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Raffaella Cattelani
    • 1
  • Flora Dal Sasso
    • 2
  • Delfina Corsini
    • 3
  • Lucio Posteraro
    • 4
  1. 1.Neurology Unit, Department of NeuroscienceUniversity of ParmaParmaItaly
  2. 2.Neuropsychology Unit, Thiene HospitalVicenzaItaly
  3. 3.Rehabilitation Medicine Unit, University HospitalParmaItaly
  4. 4.Rehabilitation Medicine Unit, Suzzara HospitalMantovaItaly

Personalised recommendations