We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Objective clinical evaluation of memory frequently requires serial testing but the issue of whether multiformed tests are equivalent and can be used interchangeably is seldom examined. An added problem in bilingual Canadian settings is the extent to which it is appropriate to measure French speakers’ performance on translations of English tests. The present work used the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) and a nonverbal analog, the Aggie Figures Learning Test (AFLT), to examine whether a) different forms of the same test are equivalent, b) performance on the two tests is comparable, c) two language groups perform similarly, and d) the RAVLT can detect dysfunction in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE).
Methods:
We compared three French versions of the RAVLT and three forms of the AFLT in 114 healthy francophone adults. We subsequently compared the performance of the same francophone subjects to a previously obtained sample of anglophones on both tests, and then administered the RAVLT to anglophone or francophone patients with TLE.
Results:
For both tasks the three forms were equivalent and performance on the RAVLT was comparable to that on the AFLT. Francophone subjects performed slightly worse on the RAVLT compared to anglophones but performance of the two language groups did not differ on the AFLT. Finally, left TLE patients were impaired compared to right on the RAVLT, but no performance differences were observed across the two language groups in the patient sample.
Conclusions:
The RAVLT and AFLT are useful tools for examination of learning and memory in French and English speaking populations. On the RAVLT, the lesion effect in patients is not affected by differences in performance between language groups.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.