Abstract
D. Delis and E. Kaplan (see record 1983-24742-001) criticized the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery for not meeting some assumptions of content validity and, by inference, construct validity. Delis and Kaplan also criticized C. J. Golden for advocating improper use of the test battery as a substitute for clinical training and knowledge. The present authors evaluate the major points of Delis and Kaplan, indicating which are cogent to the battery and which are based on misunderstandings of the manner in which the battery should be used. The theoretical structure of the scales of the battery is briefly described, as are approaches to interpretation. Studies indicating that the battery has validity as a neuropsychological test and the requirements needed for accurate application of the battery are examined. (13 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA, all rights reserved).
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 445-448 |
| Number of pages | 4 |
| Journal | Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology |
| Volume | 52 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jun 1984 |
| Externally published | Yes |
ASJC Scopus Subject Areas
- Clinical Psychology
- Psychiatry and Mental health
Keywords
- E. Kaplan
- validity of Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery, comment on article by D. Delis &
Disciplines
- Psychology
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Validity of the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS