12 - In Defense of the Halstead–Reitan Battery: A Critique of Lezak’s Review

Abstract

This chapter is a republication of the first paper defending the HRB against criticism by Lezak. This critique demonstrated that Lezak confused clinical judgment used with a fixed battery, the HRB, with clinical judgment utilized in her method. Lezak's book is excellent in discussing the hypothesis-testing method and reviewing the research on single tests from that perspective. However, Reitan's method is basically not a hypothesis-testing method but a pattern-analysis method. This pattern-analysis method is generally misunderstood by Lezak and many other neuropsychologists. Because many of Lezak's criticisms are derived from this misunderstanding, a discussion of her review must involve an explanation of the method used by Reitan. The chapter discusses issues that include types of batteries, legitimate review methods, and Reitan's method. It demonstrates that almost all of Lezak's criticisms of the HRB and the HRNES are incomplete, misleading, or erroneous. Her critique of the Reitan method involved a confusion of terms. In spite of attempts to discredit the HRB, not a single sound study questioning the validity of the HRB was presented, whereas many studies have demonstrated its validity. The fallacy of nonrefutation asserts that it is a fallacy to condemn methods that have been validated while recommending procedures that have not been validated. Lezak questions Reitan's method, the HRB, and the HRNES, which have been thoroughly validated, while presenting no validating studies of her own recommended methods.