Education and demonstration – Psychology
Reexamination Certificate
2002-02-27
2003-10-07
Rovnak, John Edmund (Department: 3714)
Education and demonstration
Psychology
C434S238000
Reexamination Certificate
active
06629846
ABSTRACT:
FIELD AND BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
The present invention relates to the field of psychological evaluation and more particularly, to an improved method of recording the process by which an examinee performs a “multi-element” test.
It is often necessary to evaluate cognitive abilities of a person, such as memory, organization ability and intellectual capacity, or to identify cognitive skills that have been impaired, for example, by head injuries, neurological disorders, learning disabilities or psychiatric illnesses. To this end, various psychological tests have been developed.
In one common type of psychological tests, an examinee is asked to perform a task involving the manipulation of a finite plurality of elements. Such tasks include copying a complex geometric figure or design. Also included are tasks that include physical manipulation (relocating, assembling, reassembling) of objects with a finite number of elements, e.g. jigsaw puzzles. Also, there exist tests where the examinee is asked to reproduce, perform, recite or recall from memory a finite list of words or commands read by an examiner. For the purposes of succinctness, hereinfurther such tests shall be referred to as “multi-element tests”.
In the art, evaluation of examine performance on multi-element tests is most often based on evaluating the end result of the test, that is, how accurately the examine was able to accomplish the entire test. However, it is known that the strategy that examinees use to accomplish a complex task is indicative of cognitive abilities and deficits, see references 1 and 2. For example, the order and rate by which children copy the elements of a complex figure has been shown to reflect planning ability and visual perception.
Methods have been developed for recording the process by which an examine performs a multi-element test, allowing subsequent evaluation of the process itself. The recording methods described in the prior art include a variety of techniques for manually recording an observed process using “pencil and paper” methods
Direct manual recording by an examiner of the sequence of copying elements in a figure-copying test has been described in references 3, 4, 5 and 6.
In reference 6 is described a method whereby an examiner uses a plurality of colored pencils for recording the sequence of manipulation of figure elements by an examine.
References 5 and 6 describe a method whereby the process by which figure-copying tests are performed is recorded by the use of a plurality of colored pencils. Each time the examine copies an important element of a geometric pattern, the examiner gives the examine a different colored pencil. The order in which the important elements are copied is recorded for evaluation. The question as to which element is important is not specified. Moreover, as is clear to one skilled in the art, such a method interrupts the examine and reduces the validity of the results of such a test.
References 5 and 6 also describe a method, by which an examiner mirrors the process of copying a multi-element figure by an examine by copying what the examine copies simultaneously with the examine, and numbering the elements as they are drawn.
Since the pace of multi-element tests is fast and since manual notation is relatively time consuming, the recording methods described in the art fail to record all of the important information concerning the process by which a test is performed. Moreover, since the recording methods known in the art often fail to record a complete description of the process by which an examinee performs a test, it is not clear which part of the process should be given recording priority and how incomplete records are to be evaluated.
For example, in the art there exist more than eight different methods for evaluating the process of copying the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure, see references 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11. As known to psychologists, these evaluation methods are complicated and require considerable effort to master. Even when mastered, evaluation of the recorded results requires considerable time and skill. Once the data has been recorded, it can take in the range of 15 to 40 minutes to qualitatively score the test results, see reference 12. Consequently, the process by which an examinee performs a multi-element psychological test is rarely evaluated in a clinical setting, such as hospitals.
The above-mentioned inherent shortcomings of the prior art recording methods make it very difficult to use statistical methods for correlating performance of tests with cognitive abilities. Modem psychological testing theory stresses the advantages of using norms produced by quantitative and objective (i.e. statistical) methods rather than qualitative evaluation of the performance of a large group of examinees, see reference 13. In reference 14, the above shortcomings have been discussed in detail. Despite the increasing recognition of the need to analyze the process by which examinees perform multi-element tests, no method to prepare detailed, reliable and statistically analyzable records of such processes has been described due to the to the shortcomings of the prior art recordings methods.
Methods employing computer-based and multi-media methods for increasing the utility of psychological testing have been suggested. These methods relate to the scoring and evaluation of a test but do not provide a methodology for recording the observed process by which an examinee performs a multi-element task in an ecologically valid manner (reference 15), see for example, U.S. Pat. No. 5,961,332, U.S. Pat. No. 5,991,565 and U.S. Pat. No. 6,115,683.
Other methods have been suggested whereby an examinee actually performs a psychological test using a graphic interface (e.g. monitor) of a computer-based system, for example U.S. Pat. No. 5,211,564, U.S. Pat. No. 5,218,535, U.S. Pat. No. 5,326,270, U.S. Pat. No. 5,379,213, U.S. Pat No. 5,565,316 and U.S. Pat. No. 6,030,226. Although such testing methods have considerable merit for testing the general population, they are not adequate for psychological tests of cognitively impaired, computer illiterate or technologically illiterate populations. Indeed, in reference 15 it has been shown that tasks performed on a graphic interface of a computer-based system lack ecological validity, and do not reproduce the results obtained in a naturally performed task. Thus, computerized tests are qualitatively different and require preparation of dedicated sets of norms.
There is a need for a fast and efficient method for recording, in a complete and reliable manner, the process of performing a multi-element psychological test.
REFERENCES
1. Goldstein, K. “After effects of brain injury in war”. (1942) New York: Grune and Stratton.
2. Werner, H. “Process and achievement: A basic problem of education and developmental psychology”
Harvard Educational Review
, 1937, 7, 353-368.
3. Binder, L. M. “Constructional strategies on complex figure drawings after unilateral brain damage”
Journal of Clinical Neuropsychology
, 1982, 4, 51-88.
4. Waber, D. P.; Holmes, J. M. “Assessing children's memory productions of the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure”
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology
, 1986, 8, 563-580.
5. Osterrieth, P. A. “Le test de copie d'une figure complexe: contribution a l'etude de la perception et de la memoire”
Archives de Psychologie
, 1944, 30, 206-356.
6. Rey, A. “L'examen psychologique dans les cas d'encephalopathie traumatique”
Archives de Psychologie
, 1941, 28, 286-340.
7. Visser, R. S. H. Manual of Complex Figure Test, (1973) Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
8. Bennet-Levy, J. “Determinants of performance on the Rey-Osterrieth Complex Figure Test: An analysis and a new technique for single case assessment”
British Journal of Clinical Psychology
, 1984, 23, 109-119.
9. Hamby, S. L.; Wilkins, J. W.; Barry, N. S. “Organizational quality on the Rey-Osterrieth and Taylor Complex Figure Tests: A new scoring system”
Psychological Assessment
, 1993, 5, 27-33.
10. Stem, R. A.; Singer E. A.
Friedman Mark M.
Rovnak John Edmund
LandOfFree
Method for recording performance in psychological tests does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.
If you have personal experience with Method for recording performance in psychological tests, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Method for recording performance in psychological tests will most certainly appreciate the feedback.
Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3174921