The BNT-15 provides an accurate measure of English proficiency in cognitively intact bilinguals – a study in cross-cultural assessment

Ali, Sami; Elliott, Lauren; Biss, Renée K.; Abumeeiz, Mustafa; Brantuo, Maame; Kuzmenka, Palina; Odenigbo, Paula; Erdődi, László A.

doi:10.1080/23279095.2020.1760277

Cited by 19 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 134 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This pattern of performance was observed in the context of limited English proficiency (immigrated as an adult; single-word reading was >2 SDs below the normative mean, he obtained a score of 4 out of 15 on the short version of the Boston Naming Test; Ali, Elliott, et al, 2022;Brantuo et al, 2022) and a diagnosis of probable Alzheimer's disease. His WCT performance would be typically considered an unequivocal Fail based on traditional cutoffs.…”

Section: Critical Item Analysismentioning

confidence: 55%

Critical item (CR) analysis expands the classification accuracy of performance validity tests based on the forced choice paradigm—Replicating previously introduced CR cutoffs within the Word Choice Test.

Holcomb¹,

Roth²,

Tyson³

et al. 2022

Neuropsychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study was designed to replicate previous research on critical item analysis within the Word Choice Test (WCT). Method: Archival data were collected from a mixed clinical sample of 119 consecutively referred adults (Mage = 51.7, Meducation = 14.7). The classification accuracy of the WCT was calculated against psychometrically defined criterion groups. Results: Critical item analysis identified an additional 2%–5% of the sample that passed traditional cutoffs as noncredible. Passing critical items after failing traditional cutoffs was associated with weaker independent evidence of invalid performance, alerting the assessor to the elevated risk for false positives. Failing critical items in addition to failing select traditional cutoffs increased overall specificity. Non-White patients were 2.5 to 3.5 times more likely to Fail traditional WCT cutoffs, but select critical item cutoffs limited the risk to 1.5–2. Conclusions: Results confirmed the clinical utility of critical item analysis. Although the improvement in sensitivity was modest, critical items were effective at containing false positive errors in general, and especially in racially diverse patients. Critical item analysis appears to be a cost-effective and equitable method to improve an instrument’s classification accuracy.

show abstract

Section: Critical Item Analysismentioning

confidence: 55%

Critical item (CR) analysis expands the classification accuracy of performance validity tests based on the forced choice paradigm—Replicating previously introduced CR cutoffs within the Word Choice Test.

Holcomb¹,

Roth²,

Tyson³

et al. 2022

Neuropsychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We used native-level English proficiency and completion of a standard battery of neurocognitive tests as inclusion criteria. Because limited English proficiency is known to have a significant deleterious effect on BNT scores (Ali et al, 2020; Brantuo et al, 2022; Erdodi et al, 2017a; Stålhammar et al, 2020), we excluded patients who were born in non-English-speaking countries and learned the language as adults in order to eliminate a known confounding variable in cognitive testing. Table 1 provides the participants’ demographic data and scores on the neuropsychological tests.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To increase the sample size and improve the generalizability of findings, we combined the control group from the student sample above (n = 31) with the control group (n = 40) from the study by An and colleagues (2019). To prevent noncredible responding from contaminating the normative data, we excluded participants who failed two PVTs with high verbal mediation (Ali et al, 2020)—the Word Choice Test (WCT; Fail defined as ≤47 [Pearson, 2009]) or Complex Ideational Material ( Fail defined as ≤9 [Goodglass and Kaplan, 1972])—resulting in a total sample size of 63. Using domain-congruent criterion PVTs is essential to ensure internal validity during the evaluation of the credibility of BNT–15 response sets (Erdodi, 2019; Lace et al, 2020; Martin and Schroeder, 2021; Schroeder et al, 2019).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

BNT–15: Revised Performance Validity Cutoffs and Proposed Clinical Classification Ranges

Abeare

Cutler

An³

et al. 2022

Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Abbreviated neurocognitive tests offer a practical alternative to full-length versions but often lack clear interpretive guidelines, thereby limiting their clinical utility.Objective: To replicate validity cutoffs for the Boston Naming Test -Short Form (BNT-15) and to introduce a clinical classification system for the BNT-15 as a measure of object-naming skills.Method: We collected data from 43 university students and 46 clinical patients. Classification accuracy was computed against psychometrically defined criterion groups. Clinical classification ranges were developed using a z-score transformation.Results: Previously suggested validity cutoffs (≤11 and ≤12) produced comparable classification accuracy among the university students. However, a more conservative cutoff (≤10) was needed with the clinical patients to contain the false-positive rate (0.20-0.38 sensitivity at 0.92-0.96 specificity). As a measure of cognitive ability, a perfect BNT-15 score suggests above average performance; ≤11 suggests clinically significant deficits. Demographically adjusted prorated BNT-15 T-scores correlated strongly (0.86) with the newly developed z-scores. Conclusion:Given its brevity (< 5 minutes), ease of administration and scoring, the BNT-15 can function as a useful and cost-effective screening measure for both object-naming/English proficiency and performance validity. The proposed clinical classification ranges provide useful guidelines for practitioners.

show abstract

“…On the other hand, recent research has recommended using objective measures criteria to assess bilinguals' multifactorial experience (de Bruin, 2019;Tomoschuk et al, 2019;Dash et al, 2022) along with self-reported questionnaires. Picture naming task (Ali et al, 2022), lexical decision time (Pérez et al, 2013), verbal fluency (Suarez et al, 2014), and discourse performances (Dash et al, 2019(Dash et al, , 2022 are some of the tasks used to classify participants in different groups or a continuum. MINT (Gollan et al, 2012), the Boston Naming Test (Goodglass et al, 2001), and the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (Dunn and Dunn, 1997) are the most common standardized measures of expressive naming ability.…”

Section: Measures Of Bilingualism: Subjective and Objective Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multifactorial approaches to study bilingualism in the aging population: Past, present, future

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A better understanding and more reliable classification of bilinguals has been progressively achieved through the fine-tuning methodology and simultaneously optimizing the measurement tools. However, the current understanding is far from generalization to a larger population varying in different measures of bilingualism—L2 Age of acquisition (L2 AOA), L2 usage and exposure, and L2 proficiency. More recent studies have highlighted the importance of modeling bilingualism as a continuous variable. An in-depth look at the role of bilingualism, comparing groups, may be considered a reductionist approach, i.e., grouping based on one measure of bilingualism (e.g., L2 AOA) may not account for variability in other measures of bilingualism (L2 exposure, L2 use or L2 proficiency, amongst others) within and between groups. Similarly, a multifactorial dimension is associated with cognitive performance, where not all domains of cognition and subcomponents are equally influenced by bilingualism. In addition, socio-cultural and demographical factors may add another dimension to the impact of bilingualism on cognitive performance, especially in older adults. Nevertheless, not many studies have controlled or used the multiple socio-cultural and demographical factors as a covariate to understand the role of different aspects of bilingualism that may influence cognitive performance differently. Such an approach would fail to generalize the research findings to a larger group of bilinguals. In the present review paper, we illustrate that considering a multifactorial approach to different dimensions of bilingual study may lead to a better understanding of the role of bilingualism on cognitive performance. With the evolution of various fine-tuned methodological approaches, there is a greater need to study variability in bilingual profiles that can help generalize the result universally.

show abstract

The BNT-15 provides an accurate measure of English proficiency in cognitively intact bilinguals – a study in cross-cultural assessment

Cited by 19 publications

References 134 publications

Critical item (CR) analysis expands the classification accuracy of performance validity tests based on the forced choice paradigm—Replicating previously introduced CR cutoffs within the Word Choice Test.

Critical item (CR) analysis expands the classification accuracy of performance validity tests based on the forced choice paradigm—Replicating previously introduced CR cutoffs within the Word Choice Test.

BNT–15: Revised Performance Validity Cutoffs and Proposed Clinical Classification Ranges

Multifactorial approaches to study bilingualism in the aging population: Past, present, future

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About