The ABCs of computerized naming: Equivalency, reliability, and predictive validity of a computerized rapid automatized naming (RAN) task

Abstract

Population-based studies indicate dual routes to disabled reading in adolescence and adulthood: slowed acquisition of single word reading and ADHD (particularly inattention) in early childhood. Impairments in rapid serial naming may be a factor common to both problems. The gold-standard measure of this ability, the Rapid Automatized Naming Task (RAN; [Denckla MB, Rudel R. Rapid automatized naming of pictured objects, colors, letters and numbers by normal children. Cortex 1974;10:186–202]), has traditionally been administered in a paper–pencil format. Recently however, researchers [Neuhaus GF, Carlson CD, Jeng WM, Post Y, Swank PR. The reliability and validity of rapid automatized scoring software ratings for the determination of pause and articulation component durations. Educ Psychol Meas 2001;61:490–504] have begun to use computerized versions of the RAN. Here a slightly modified computerized version of the RAN was created and the equivalency between the computerized RAN and the conventional version was investigated using a university student sample. Naming times on the conventional and computerized RAN were highly correlated, overall, and for each of the four RAN stimulus types (letters, digit, colors, objects). Conventional and computerized RAN times predicted reading rate and reading comprehension scores equally well and both showed very high test–retest reliability. With our university student sample, findings indicate equivalency between the two testing mediums in all areas examined.