Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Boston Naming Test

No description
by

Victoria Evans-Quilloin

on 23 April 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Boston Naming Test

Boston Naming Test, 2nd Edition

Purpose and Age Ranges
Children: 5;0-12;5
Adults: 18-79
Purpose not explicit stated
Using implied purpose of vocabulary naming test, appropriate for local uses
Adequacy of Norms
Various ratings throughout evaluation
Evaluated child and adult norms separately
Online, stated that certainty on established norms for children were "largely believed" - not 100% certain
Missing information on ages 12;6 to 17;11
Sample sizes are small
Adults
Information on adult norms absent- geographic region, ethnicity, SES
Only "G" ratings- age and language most often used at home because of different translations and large age group (18-79)
Sample size small- 178 adults total
Children
Assuming client is being tested in U.S., writers aware of language most used at school- English
Can use in city and surrounding suburbs based on referenced norms
Can use different language translations for populations where English isn't L1
No normative values for 12;6-17;11
Small population size for norm- 356 children
Linguistic and Cultural Appropriateness
"Fair" to "Good" cultural appropriateness
Task type appropriate
Some content debatable
Christmas wreath
"Rope"/Noose
Lattice
Linguistic Appropriateness "N/A"
No written directions, only multiple choice
Translated into 12+ languages if necessary
Test Interpretation cont.
Unclear whether short form uses same scoring- no normative values
Interpretation information absent
SD and mean given, but nothing else to interpret client's abilities or deficiencies
Construction/Short Form
Based on research by Mack, Freed, Williams and Henderson from 1992.
Development based on current theoretical frameworks
Adequate content development
Gradual increased difficulty
Specific start/stop points
Ability to cue- stimulus or phonemic
Multiple choice
Procedures and Scoring
Procedures given and described adequately, appropriate for population
Scoring procedures given and age norms given- reference for children, none for adults
Test interpretation absent
Instructions
60 black/white pictures- children start at Q1, age 10+, start at Q30
Give patient up to 20 seconds to answer
Latency and all answers recorded
Stimulus cue given if answer is misrepresentation or patient doesn't know
Phonemic cue given after stimulus- beginning sound of target word
Correct response counted: only if spontaneous or after stimulus cue
Multiple Choice
After testing- go back to 1st wrong answer after phonemic cue
Read 4 multiple choices, patient picks which one is correct
Continue until all missed pictures have been given multiple choice options
Adequacy of Test Validity
Face, Contact, Construct- Assesses naming ability, allows for different cues to be given and time for each picture to be ID-ed
Time- needed for aphasics to process the task
Concurrent- BNT is the standard, not compared to other tests
Predictive- No accounting for gains in therapy or active vocabulary practice
Adequacy of Test Reliability
Test-retest reliability- Online states there is no test-retest reliability for child population, good reliability for adults
Alternate form reliability- No information on standards for aphasia
Split-half or internal consistency- test increases in difficulty so odd/even are fairly matched
Clinical Use:
Supplement to Boston Diagnostic Aphasia Examination (BDAE-2)
Allows for inferences regarding language and possible localization of cerebral damage
Translated in 12+ languages for non-native English speakers
30 item all Spanish test made for Spanish-speaking population
By: Victoria Evans-Quilloin
Alana Fabish
Full transcript