Temporal Stability of the Dutch Version of the Wechsler Memory Scale—Fourth Edition (WMS-IV-NL)

Zita Bouman,Marc P H Hendriks,Albert P Aldenkamp,Roy P C Kessels

doi:10.1080/13854046.2015.1137354

Zita Bouman, Marc P H Hendriks + Show 2 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2015.1137354

Copy DOI

Abstract

Objective: The Wechsler Memory Scale—Fourth Edition (WMS-IV) is one of the most widely used memory batteries. We examined the test–retest reliability, practice effects, and standardized regression-based (SRB) change norms for the Dutch version of the WMS-IV (WMS-IV-NL) after both short and long retest intervals. Method: The WMS-IV-NL was administered twice after either a short (M = 8.48 weeks, SD = 3.40 weeks, range = 3–16) or a long (M = 17.87 months, SD = 3.48, range = 12–24) retest interval in a sample of 234 healthy participants (M = 59.55 years, range = 16–90; 118 completed the Adult Battery; and 116 completed the Older Adult Battery). Results: The test–retest reliability estimates varied across indexes. They were adequate to good after a short retest interval (ranging from .74 to .86), with the exception of the Visual Working Memory Index (r = .59), yet generally lower after a long retest interval (ranging from .56 to .77). Practice effects were only observed after a short retest interval (overall group mean gains up to 11 points), whereas no significant change in performance was found after a long retest interval. Furthermore, practice effect-adjusted SRB change norms were calculated for all WMS-IV-NL index scores. Conclusions: Overall, this study shows that the test–retest reliability of the WMS-IV-NL varied across indexes. Practice effects were observed after a short retest interval, but no evidence was found for practice effects after a long retest interval from one to two years. Finally, the SRB change norms were provided for the WMS-IV-NL.

Highlights

In clinical practice, repeated neuropsychological assessments across time are often necessary to monitor patients with a variety of neurological and psychiatric disorders (Heilbronner et al, 2010; Lezak, Howieson, Bigler, & Tranel, 2012)
With the exception of the VWMI in the Adult Battery, all reliability coefficients are comparable to the test–retest reliabilities reported in the US Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS)-IV-NL Technical Manual (p < .05) (Holdnack & Drozdick, 2009)
The present study provides test–retest reliability estimates, examined practice effects and presented standardized regression-based (SRB) change norms for the WMS-IV-NL Adult and Older Adult Batteries using large independent samples of healthy participants who were re-assessed either after a short retest-interval (3–16 weeks) or a long retest-interval (12–24 months)

Summary

Introduction

In clinical practice, repeated neuropsychological assessments across time are often necessary to monitor patients with a variety of neurological and psychiatric disorders (Heilbronner et al, 2010; Lezak, Howieson, Bigler, & Tranel, 2012). As memory problems are the most prevalent cognitive deficits in a variety of clinical pathologies, reliable repeated assessment of memory functioning plays a crucial role in neuropsychological evaluations. There is a demand for evaluation of test–retest reliability and practice effects of memory tests. Several studies have examined test–retest reliability and practice effects of different versions of the WMS, such as the WMS (Dikmen, Heaton, Grant, & Temkin, 1999; McCaffrey, Ortega, & Haase, 1993; Mitrushina & Satz, 1991; Wechsler & Stone, 1945), the Wechsler Memory Scale—Revised (WMS-R: Ivnik, Smith, Malec, Petersen, & Tangalos, 1995; Theisen, Rapport, Axelrod, & Brines, 1998; Wechsler, 1987), and Wechsler Memory Scale—Third Edition (WMS-III: Iverson, 2001; Lo, Humphreys, Byrne, & Pachana, 2012; Wechsler, 1997). The test–retest reliability of the WMS-IV has been scarcely addressed so far (Wechsler, Holdnack & Drozdick, 2009; Holdnack, Drozdick, Weiss, & Iverson, 2013)

Methods

Results

Conclusion