One of the best texts on intellectual assessment has been revised: Flanagan & Harrison's Contemporary Intellectual Assessment

Just in time for your XMAS shopping!!!! One of the best texts on intellectual assessment and theories related to the practice of intellectual assessment.

The publisher has given me permission to post this information. The text below does not show all the formatting in the original document sent to me, so if you want a nicer PDF version to share with others, click here.


Conflict of interest disclosure: I have coauthored a chapter in the book and will be splitting an honorarium check (not big, trust me) and will be receiving a free copy. But, I get no royalties (I wish I did).


Kudos to Dr. Flanagan and Harrison for revising what I consider one of the best texts on intellectual assessment.




NEW FROM THE GUILFORD PRESS (​Revised and Expanded!)

Contemporary Intellectual Assessment, Third Edition
Theories, Tests, and Issues
Edited by Dawn P. Flanagan, PhD, Department of Psychology, St. John's University; and
Patti L. Harrison, PhD, Department of Educational Studies in Psychology, Research Methodology, and Counseling, University of Alabama

Available to Ship: December 2011
Copyright: 2012
Pages: 926
Size: 7" x 10"
Hardcover: ISBN 978-1-60918-995-2
Hardcover Price: $95.00 tentative/short discount
Prior edition copyright: 2005
Prior edition cloth ISBN: 978-1-59385-125-5
Website Category: EDUCATION: Educational Psychology; School Psychology. PSYCHOLOGY: School Psychology; Neuropsychology & Neuroscience; Child/Adolescent Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry.
Subject Areas/Keywords: adults, assessment instruments, batteries, children, cognitive assessments, developmental, educational psychology, evaluations, intellectual assessments, intellectual disabilities, intelligence testing, learning disabilities, response to intervention, RTI, tests
Internal Code: F
Date Issued: August 15, 2011

CRITICAL ACCLAIM
"This is the most comprehensive, authoritative, and up-to-date text on intellectual assessment available. It covers current theories of intelligence, methods of intelligence testing, and their applications to special populations. The chapters are all written by leading scholars and combine clear research summaries with practical advice, making this a valuable book for graduate students and professionals interested in both research and practice."—Paul J. Frick, PhD, University Distinguished Professor and Chair, Department of Psychology, University of New Orleans

"A single source for essential, detailed information on the past, present, and future of intellectual and cognitive assessment practices. The table of contents provides an objective sweep of all major theories, tests, and evaluation procedures at a glance; the expertise of the chapter authors results in a work that is consistently outstanding. The third edition reflects the latest efforts in clinical inquiry that explore cognitive abilities and processes as they relate to the real world. It emphasizes cross-cultural issues in assessment and incorporates new approaches and instruments related to learning and developmental problems. This is an essential text for graduate-level assessment courses."
—Elaine Fletcher-Janzen, EdD, Department of School Psychology, Chicago School of Professional Psychology

"This updated volume is a valuable addition to the field of intellectual and psychological assessment. The editors have assembled the leaders in the field to present the most up-to-date information available. Many of the chapters are written by the test authors and theory creators themselves; readers will benefit from the firsthand approach to test and theory interpretation. The book is written in a way that will appeal to both experienced practitioners and graduate students just starting out in the field."—Andrew S. Davis, PhD, Department of Educational Psychology, Ball State University

"A superb theoretical and clinical overview....The standards of theoretical and methodological rigor, comprehensive topical coverage, balanced and objective critical analysis, life span cognitive evaluation, and advocacy for special populations...are beautifully balanced. One could not ask for more from a review and critical evaluation of this extensive, rich, and complex literature."—PsycCRITIQUES

"Should be required reading in all intelligence testing courses and by anyone involved in the assessment of human and cognitive abilities."—Psychotherapy in Private Practice

DESCRIPTION
In one volume, this authoritative reference presents a current, comprehensive overview of intellectual and cognitive assessment, with a focus on practical applications. Leaders in the field describe major theories of intelligence and provide the knowledge needed to use the latest measures of cognitive abilities with individuals of all ages, from toddlers to adults. Evidence-based approaches to test interpretation, and their relevance for intervention, are described. The book addresses critical issues in assessing particular populations—including culturally and linguistically diverse students, gifted students, and those with learning difficulties and disabilities—in today's educational settings.

New to This Edition
*Incorporates major research advances and legislative and policy changes.
*Covers recent test revisions plus additional tests: the NEPSY-II and the WNV.
*Expanded coverage of specific populations: chapters on autism spectrum disorders, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, sensory and physical disabilities and traumatic brain injury, and intellectual disabilities.
*Chapters on neuropsychological approaches, assessment of executive functions, and multi-tiered service delivery models in schools.

KEY POINTS
> An authoritative reference, revised and expanded: features 11 new chapters.
> Comprehensive and current: covers all major tests and how they relate to educational services and policy.
> Chapters are written by the test developers themselves.
> A successful practitioner handbook and graduate-level text.

AUDIENCE
Practitioners, students, and researchers in school, educational, cognitive, and child clinical psychology.

COURSE USE
Serves as a primary text in graduate-level intellectual/cognitive assessment courses.

CONTENTS
I. The Origins of Intellectual Assessment
1. A History of Intelligence Assessment: The Unfinished Tapestry, John D. Wasserman
2. A History of Intelligence Test Interpretation, Randy W. Kamphaus, Anne Pierce Winsor, Ellen W. Rowe, and Sangwon Kim
II. Contemporary Theoretical Perspectives
3. Foundations for Better Understanding of Cognitive Abilities, John L. Horn and Nayena Blankson
4. The Cattell–Horn–Carroll (CHC) Model of Intelligence, W. Joel Schneider and Kevin S. McGrew
5. Assessment of Intellectual Profile: A Perspective from Multiple-Intelligences Theory, Jie-Qi Chen and Howard Gardner
6. The Triarchic Theory of Successful Intelligence, Robert J. Sternberg
7. Planning, Attention, Simultaneous, Successive (PASS): A Cognitive Processing–Based Theory of Intelligence, Jack A. Naglieri, J. P. Das, and Sam Goldstein
III. Contemporary Intelligence, Cognitive, and Neuropsychological Batteries (and Associated Achievement Tests)
8. The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV) and the Wechsler Memory Scale–Fourth Edition (WMS-IV), Lisa Whipple Drozdick, Dustin Wahlstrom, Jianjun Zhu, and Lawrence G. Weiss
9. The Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence–Third Edition (WPPSI–III), the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children–Fourth Edition (WISC–IV), and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test–Third Edition (WIAT–III), Dustin Wahlstrom, Kristina C. Breaux, Jianjun Zhu, and Lawrence G. Weiss
10. The Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition (SB5), Gale H. Roid and Mark Pomplun
11. The Kaufman Assessment Battery for Children–Second Edition (KABC-II) and the Kaufman Test of Educational Achievement–Second Edition (KTEA-II), Jennie Kaufman Singer, Elizabeth O. Lichtenberger, James C. Kaufman, Alan S. Kaufman, and Nadeen L. Kaufman
12. The Woodcock–Johnson III Normative Update (WJ III NU): Tests of Cognitive Abilities and Tests of Achievement, Fredrick A. Schrank and Barbara J. Wendling
13. The Differential Ability Scales–Second Edition (DAS-II), Colin D. Elliott
14. The Universal Nonverbal Intelligence Test (UNIT): A Multidimensional Nonverbal Alternative for Cognitive Assessment, R. Steve McCallum and Bruce A. Bracken
15. The Cognitive Assessment System (CAS): From Theory to Practice, Jack A. Naglieri and Tulio M. Otero
16. The Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales (RIAS) and the Reynolds Intellectual Screening Test (RIST), Cecil R. Reynolds, Randy W. Kamphaus, and Tara C. Raines
17. The NEPSY-II, Robb N. Matthews, Cynthia A. Riccio, and John L. Davis
18. The Wechsler Nonverbal Scale of Ability (WNV): Assessment of Diverse Populations, Jack A. Naglieri and Tulio M. Otero
IV. Contemporary Interpretive Approaches and Their Relevance for Intervention
19. The Cross-Battery Assessment (XBA) Approach: An Overview, Historical Perspective, and Current Directions, Dawn P. Flanagan, Vincent C. Alfonso, and Samuel O. Ortiz
20. Cognitive Hypothesis Testing (CHT): Linking Test Results to the Real World, Catherine A. Fiorello, James B. Hale, and Kirby L. Wycoff
21. Processing Approaches to Interpreting Information from Cognitive Ability Tests: A Critical Review, Randy G. Floyd and John H. Kranzler
22. Testing with Culturally and Linguistically Diverse Populations: Moving beyond the Verbal–Performance Dichotomy into Evidence-Based Practice, Samuel O. Ortiz, Salvador Hector Ochoa, and Agnieszka M. Dynda
23. Linking Cognitive Abilities to Academic Interventions for Students with Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD), Nancy Mather and Barbara J. Wendling
V. Assessment of Intelligence and Cognitive Functioning in Different Populations
24. Cognitive Assessment in Early Childhood: Theoretical and Practical Perspectives, Laurie Ford, Michelle L. Kozey, and Juliana Negreiros
25. Use of Intelligence Tests in the Identification of Giftedness, David E. McIntosh, Felicia A. Dixon, and Eric E. Pierson
26. Use of Ability Tests in the Identification of Specific Learning Disabilities (SLD) within the Context of an Operational Definition, Dawn P. Flanagan, Vincent C. Alfonso, Jennifer T. Mascolo, and Marlene Sotelo-Dynega
27. Assessment of Intellectual Functioning in Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), Laura Grofer Klinger, Sarah E. O’Kelley, Joanna L. Mussey, Sam Goldstein, and Melissa DeVries
28. Cognitive and Neuropsychological Assessment of ADHD: Redefining a Disruptive Behavior Disorder, James B. Hale, Megan Yim, Andrea N. Schneider, Gabrielle Wilcox, Julie N. Henzel, and Shauna G. Dixon
29. Intellectual and Neuropsychological Assessment of Individuals with Sensory and Physical Disabilities and Traumatic Brain Injury, Scott L. Decker, Julia A. Englund, and Alycia M. Roberts
30. Use of Intelligence Tests in the Identification of Children with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (IDD), Kathleen Armstrong, Jason Hangauer, and Joshua Nadeau
VI. Contemporary and Emerging Issues in Intellectual Assessment
31. Using Joint Test Standards to Evaluate the Validity Evidence for Intelligence Tests, Jeffery P. Braden and Bradley C. Niebling
32. Using Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to Aid in Understanding the Constructs Measured by Intelligence Tests, Timothy Z. Keith and Matthew R. Reynolds
33: The Emergence of Neuropsychological Constructs into Tests of Intelligence and Cognitive Abilities, Daniel C. Miller and Denise E. Maricle
34. The Role of Cognitive and Intelligence Tests in the Assessment of Executive Functions, Denise E. Maricle and Erin Avirett
35. Intelligence Tests in the Context of Emerging Assessment Practices: Problem-Solving Applications, Rachel Brown-Chidsey and Kristina J. Andren
36. Intellectual, Cognitive, and Neuropsychological Assessment in Three-Tier Service Delivery Practices in Schools, George McCloskey, James Whitaker, Ryan Murphy, and Jane Rogers
Appendix. The Three-Stratum Theory of Cognitive Abilities, John B. Carroll

CONTRIBUTORS
Dynda Agnieszka, PsyD, Department of Psychology, St. John’s University, Jamaica, New York
Vincent C. Alfonso, PhD, Graduate School of Education, Fordham University, New York, New York
Kristina J. Andren, PsyD, School Psychology Program, University of Southern Maine, Gorham, Maine
Kathleen Armstrong, PhD, Department of Pediatrics, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida
Erin Avirett, BA, Department of Psychology and Philosophy, Texas Women’s University, Denton, Texas
Nayena Blankson, PhD, Department of Psychology, Spelman College, Atlanta, Georgia
Bruce A. Bracken, PhD, School of Education, The College of William and Mary, Williamsburg, Virginia
Jeffery P. Braden, PhD, Department of Psychology, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina
Kristina C. Breaux, PhD, The Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, Texas
Rachel Brown-Chidsey, PhD, School Psychology Program, University of Southern Maine, Gorham, Maine
John B. Carroll, PhD, Emeritus Professor of Psychology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
Jie-Qi Chen, PhD, Erikson Institute, Chicago, Illinois
J. P. Das, PhD, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
John L. Davis, MA, Department of Educational Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas
Scott L. Decker, PhD, Department of Psychology, Barnwell College, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina
Melissa DeVries, PhD, Neurology, Learning, and Behavior Center, Salt Lake City, Utah
Felicia A. Dixon, PhD, Department of Educational Psychology, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana
Shauna G. Dixon, MS, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Lisa Whipple Drozdick, PhD, The Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, Texas
Agnieszka M. Dynda, PsyD, Department of Psychology, St. John’s University, Jamaica, New York
Colin D. Elliot, PhD, The Gervitz School of Education, University of California, Santa Barbara, California
Julia A. Englund, BA, Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina
Catherine A. Fiorello, PhD, NCSP, School Psychology Program and Department of Psychological Studies in Education, College of Education, Temple University, Philadelphia, Philadelphia
Dawn P. Flanagan, PhD, Department of Psychology, St. John’s University, Jamaica, New York
Randy G. Floyd, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee
Laurie Ford, PhD, Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Howard Gardner, PhD, Graduate School of Education, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts
Sam Goldstein, PhD, Neurology, Learning, and Behavior Center, Salt Lake City, Utah
James B. Hale, PhD, School Psychology Program, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Philadelphia
Jason Hangauer, EdS, Department of Pediatrics, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida
Julie N. Henzel, PsyD, The Nisonger Center, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio
John L. Horn, PhD (deceased), Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California
Randy W. Kamphaus, PhD, College of Education, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia
Alan S. Kaufman, PhD, Child Study Center, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
James C. Kaufman, PhD, Department of Psychology, California State University, San Bernardino, California
Nadeen L. Kaufman, PhD, Child Study Center, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut
Timothy Z. Keith, PhD, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas
Sangwon Kim, PhD, Graduate School of Education, Fordham University, New York, New York
Laura Grofer Klinger, PhD, Department of Psychology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama
Michelle L. Kozey, MA, Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
John H. Kranzler, PhD, Special Education Program, College of Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
Elizabeth O. Lichtenberger, PhD, private practice, Carlsbad, California
Denise E. Maricle, PhD, Department of Psychology and Philosophy, Texas Women’s University, Denton, Texas
Jennifer T. Mascolo, PsyD, Department of Psychology, St. John’s University, Jamaica, New York
Nancy Mather, PhD, Department of Disability and Psychoeducational Studies, College of Education, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona
Robb N. Matthews, MA, Department of Educational Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas
R. Steve McCallum, PhD, Department of Educational Psychology and Counseling, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee
George McCloskey, PhD, Department of Psychology, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Kevin S. McGrew, PhD, Institute for Applied Psychometrics, St. Cloud, Minnesota
David E. McIntosh, PhD, Department of Educational Psychology, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana
Daniel C. Miller, PhD, Department of Psychology and Philosophy, Texas Women’s University, Denton, Texas
Ryan Murphy, EdS, Department of School Psychology, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Joanna L. Mussey, MA, Department of Psychology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama
Joshua Nadeau, MS, Department of Pediatrics, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida
Jack A. Naglieri, PhD, ABAP, Department of Psychology, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia
Juliana Negreiros, MA, Department of Educational and Counseling Psychology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Bradley C. Niebling, PhD, Midwest Instructional Leadership Council, Urbandale, Iowa
Salvador Hector Ochoa, PhD, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Texas–Pan American, Edinburg, Texas
Sarah E. O’Kelly, PhD, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurobiology, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama
Samuel O. Ortiz, PhD, Department of Psychology, St. John’s University, Jamaica, New York
Tulio M. Otero, PhD, School Psychology Program, Chicago School of Professional Psychology, Chicago, Illinois
Eric E. Pierson, PhD, NCSP, HSPP, Department of Educational Psychology, Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana
Mark Pomplun, PhD, Riverside Publishing, Itasca, Illinois
Tara C. Raines, PsyS, Gwinnett County Public Schools, Gwinnett County, Georgia
Cecil R. Reynolds, PhD, Department of Educational Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas
Matthew R. Reynolds, PhD, Department of Psychology and Research in Education, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas
Cynthia A. Riccio, PhD, Department of Educational Psychology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas
Alycia M. Roberts, BA, Department of Psychology, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina
Jane Rogers, PsyD, Department of Psychology, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Gale H. Roid, PhD, Department of Institutional Research, Warner Pacific College, Portland, Oregon
Ellen W. Rowe, PhD, Center for Psychological Services, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia
Andrea N. Schneider, BA, Department of Psychology, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
W. Joel Schneider, PhD, Department of Psychology, Illinois State University, Normal, Illinois
Fredrick A. Schrank, PhD, Woodcock–Munoz Foundation, Olympia, Washington
Jennie Kaufman Singer, PhD, College of Health and Human Services, Sacramento State University, Sacramento, California
Marlene Sotelo-Dynega, PhD, Department of Psychology, St. John’s University, Jamaica, New York
Robert J. Sternberg, PhD, Provost, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma
Dustin Wahlstrom, PhD, The Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, Texas
John D. Wasserman, PhD, Department of Psychology, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia
Lawrence G. Weiss, PhD, The Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, Texas
Barbara J. Wendling, MA, Consulting Services, Dallas, Texas
James Whitaker, PsyD, Department of Psychology, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Gabrielle Wilcox, PsyD, Department of School Psychology, Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Anne Pierce Winsor, PhD, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia
Kirby L. Wycoff, EdM, NCSP, Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, New Jersey
Megan Yim, BA, Department of Psychology, Victoria Island University, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Jianjun Zhu, PhD, The Psychological Corporation, San Antonio, Texas

GUILFORD PUBLICATIONS, INC.
72 Spring Street, New York, NY 10012
Tel: (212) 431-9800​Toll Free: (800) 365-7006
Fax: (212) 966-6708​E-mail: info@guilford.com
Visit our website: www.guilford.com


- iPost using BlogPress from Kevin McGrew's iPad

intelligence IQ tests IQ testing IQ scores CHC intelligence theory CHC theory Cattell-Horn-Carroll human cognitive abilities psychology school psychology individual differences cognitive psychology neuropsychology neuroscience psychology special education educational psychology psychometrics psychological assessment psychological measurement IQs Corner general intelligence intelligent IQ testing validity intellectual assessment Contemporary Intellectual Assessment

Generated by: Tag Generator

ADHD and the brain clock: Rhythm as a diagnostic marker?

Yet another study (n=11; a pilot study so generalization is limited) implicating the IQ brain clock (mental time-keeping) and a clinical disorder---ADHD. The possible role of the brain clock and dopamine and ADHD is nothing new and has been reported previously at this blog (click here, here, and here.)

This study found that adults with ADHD lose their ability to keep rhythm (maintaining a tapping beat) when the tempo is varied. This pilot study suggest that the "effective span of rhythmic feel" is apparently contracted (narrower) in ADHD adults when compared to normals.

Might this not suggest that a sensitive metronome-based measurement technology (e.g., the measurement component of Interactive Metronome - conflict of interest disclosure---I'm on the scientific advisory board for IM), that can carefully calibrate the ability to maintain the "feel" for varying tempo's/rhythms mights serve as a diagnostic marker for possible ADHD?

Hmmmmmmmmmmm....interesting idea.

However....caution is in order. This is a small pilot study and only with adults. Generalization to a larger population and children and adolescents is not possible. Also....ADHD is a complex diagnosis that cannot be reduced to a single test, sign, marker, etc.

I'm excited as a researcher...as this continues to point towards the importance of the IQ Brain Clock


Technorati Tags: psycholgoy, education, educational psychology, school psychology, neuropsychology, special education, LD, brain clock, dopamine, rhythm, tempo

CNTRICS: Consensus-based cognitive measurement in schizophrenia--a model worth examinig

[double click on image to enlarge]

Schizophrenia is not my cup of tea...but good cognitive measurement is. Thus, I was intrigued when doing my weekly "IQs Recent Literature of Interest" searching when I stumbled across an intriguing set of articles in the Schizophrenia Bulletin [Vol. 35 (1) 2009].

I was impressed to find that a group of scientists studying a common disorder (schizophrenia) had engaged in a consensus-building process to identify common sets of cognitive measures to use across their various research labs. This was all part of the Cognitive Neuroscience Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (CNTRICS) initiative. What a good model for improving the quality of research across researchers!

Maybe this model consensus-building activity could be adapted by those of us studying intelligence, the IQ Brain Clock, and cognitive related disorders in education and rehabilitation. Instead of our constant problem in comparing research studies with different measures used by different researchers, we could, at a minimum, at least establish a core set of "marker" measures to embed in each others favorite research batteries. Yes....at times I can be naive....but I believe in the power of consensus-building to improve research...and, more importantly, the probability of improving the quality of life for individuals with cognitive-related deficits and learning disorders. I've made a related plea for the adaptation of a common cognitive nomenclature/taxonomy (CHC theory) in many articles/chapters, most recently in the journal Intelligence.

Below are the abstracts. I've provided a link to the editorial introductory article. If anyone is interested in reading one or more of the other articles, articles that focus on measuring executive control, working memory, social cognitive and affective measures, promising paradigms, and control of attention, let me know...and I'd send a copy, but only in exchange for a guest blog post. The articles are worth a read, if for on other reason, for the nifty way many of the tasks discussed are presented via visual figures (see example of stroop task at the top of this post)--nice stuff.

Below are the abstracts:

Selecting Paradigms From Cognitive Neuroscience for Translation into Use in Clinical Trials: Proceedings of the Third CNTRICS Meeting (click here to read introductory editorial)

• This overview describes the goals and objectives of the third conference conducted as part of the Cognitive Neuroscience Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (CNTRICS) initiative. This third conference was focused on selecting specific paradigms from cognitive neuroscience that measured the constructs identified in the first CNTRICS meeting, with the goal of facilitating the translation of these paradigms into use in clinical trials contexts. To identify such paradigms, we had an open nomination process in which the field was asked to nominate potentially relevant paradigms and to provide information on several domains relevant to selecting the most promising tasks for each construct (eg, construct validity, neural bases, psychometrics, availability of animal models). Our goal was to identify 1–2 promising tasks for each of the 11 constructs identified at the first CNTRICS meeting. In this overview article, we describe the on-line survey used to generate nominations for promising tasks, the criteria that were used to select the tasks, the rationale behind the criteria, and the ways in which breakout groups worked together to identify the most promising tasks from among those nominated. This article serves as an introduction to the set of 6 articles included in this special issue that provide information about the specific tasks discussed and selected for the constructs from each of 6 broad domains (working memory, executive control, attention, long-term memory, perception, and social cognition).

CNTRICS Final Task Selection: Executive Control

• The third meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (CNTRICS) was focused on selecting promising measures for each of the cognitive constructs selected in the first CNTRICS meeting. In the domain of executive control, the 2 constructs of interest were ‘‘rule generation and selection’’ and ‘‘dynamic adjustments in control.’’ CNTRICS received 4 task nominations for each of these constructs, and the breakout group for executive control evaluated the degree to which each of these tasks met prespecified criteria. For rule generation and selection, the breakout group for executive control recommended the intradimensional/ extradimensional shift task and the switching Stroop for translation for use in clinical trial contexts in schizophrenia research. For dynamic adjustments in control, the breakout group recommended conflict and error adaptation in the Stroop and the stop signal task for translation for use in clinical trials. This article describes the ways in which each of these tasks met the criteria used by the breakout group to recommend tasks for further development.

CNTRICS Final Task Selection: Working Memory

• The third meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (CNTRICS) was focused on selecting promising measures for each of the cognitive constructs selected in the first CNTRICS meeting. In the domain of working memory, the 2 constructs of interest were goal maintenance and interference control. CNTRICS received 3 task nominations for each of these constructs, and the breakout group for working memory evaluated the degree to which each of these tasks met prespecified criteria. For goal maintenance, the breakout group for working memory recommended the AX-Continuous Performance Task/Dot Pattern Expectancy task for translation for use in clinical trial contexts in schizophrenia research. For interference control, the breakout group recommended the recent probes and operation/ symmetry span tasks for translation for use in clinical trials. This article describes the ways in which each of these tasks met the criteria used by the breakout group to recommend tasks for further development.

CNTRICS Final Task Selection: Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience–Based
Measures

• This article describes the results and recommendations of the third Cognitive Neuroscience Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia meeting related to measuring treatment effects on social and affective processing. At the first meeting, it was recommended that measurement development focuses on the construct of emotion identification and responding. Five Tasks were nominated as candidate measures for this construct via the premeeting web-based survey. Two of the 5 tasks were recommended for immediate translation, the Penn Emotion Recognition Task and the Facial Affect Recognition and the Effects of Situational Context, which provides a measure of emotion identification and responding as well as a related, higher level construct, context-based modulation of emotional responding. This article summarizes the criteria-based, consensus building analysis of each nominated task that led to these 2 paradigms being recommended as priority tasks for development as measures of treatment effects on negative symptoms in schizophrenia.

Perception Measurement in Clinical Trials of Schizophrenia: Promising Paradigms
From CNTRICS

• The third meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (CNTRICS) focused on selecting promising measures for each of the cognitive constructs selected in the first CNTRICS meeting. In the domain of perception, the 2 constructs of interest were gain control and visual integration. CNTRICS received 5 task nominations for gain control and three task nominations for visual integration. The breakout group for perception evaluated the degree to which each of these tasks met prespecified criteria. For gain control, the breakout group for perception believed that 2 of the tasks (prepulse inhibition of startle and mismatch negativity) were already mature and in the process of being incorporated into multisite clinical trials. However, the breakout group recommended that steady-state visualevoked potentials be combined with contrast sensitivity to magnocellular vs parvocellular biased stimuli and that this combined task and the contrast-contrast effect task be recommended for translation for use in clinical trial contexts in schizophrenia research. For visual integration, the breakout group recommended the Contour Integration and Coherent Motion tasks for translation for use in clinical trials. This manuscript describes the ways in which each of these tasks met the criteria used by the breakout group to evaluate and recommend tasks for further development.

CNTRICS Final Task Selection: Control of Attention

• The construct of attention has many facets that have been examined in human and animal research and in healthy and psychiatrically disordered conditions. The Cognitive Neuroscience Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (CNTRICS) group concluded that control of attention—the processes that guide selection of taskrelevant inputs—is particularly impaired in schizophrenia and could profit from further work with refined measurement tools. Thus, nominations for cognitive tasks that provide discrete measures of control of attention were sought and were then evaluated at the third CNTRICS meeting for their promise for future use in treatment development. This article describes the 5 nominated measures and their strengths and weaknesses for cognitive neuroscience work relevant to treatment development. Two paradigms, Guided Search and the Distractor Condition Sustained Attention Task, were viewed as having the greatest immediate promise for development into tools for treatment research in schizophrenia and are described in more detail by their nominators.

Technorati Tags: psychology, school psychology, educational psychology, cognition, neuropsychology, neuroscience, schizophrenia, CNTRICS, cognition, intelligence, CHC, CHC theory, Cattell-Horn-Carroll

Computerized cognitive assessments

Interesting post from the most visible brain fitness company on the
Internet.

http://www.sharpbrains.com/blog/2008/10/20/cognitive-assessments-headminder-anam-and-more/

Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile)

Insurance company exploring brain fitness testing

From BOING BOING.

http://www.boingboing.net/2008/10/02/insurance-testing-br.html

Sent from KMcGrew iPhone (IQMobile)

Butter's annual neuropsychology conference

The 17th Annual Nelson Butter's West Coast Neuropsychology Conference announcements are now circulating. The conference is scheduled March 22-25, 2007, in warm an sunny San Diego. The title is "Advances in neuropsychological assessment and treatment of school-age children with cognitive deficits."

Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, neuroscience, neuropsychology, testing, IQ, IQ test, IQ score, intelligence, cognition, cognitive, San Diego, conference, workshop, education

powered by performancing firefox

Free cognitive brain health test

Thanks to Brain Waves for the tip re: the ability to take a "free, confidential, 40-minute cognitive brain test" in partnership with the Alliance for Aging Research.

Apparently the first million people will get this assessment for free until May 14, 2007. The company involved is the Brain Resource Company. Like the author of Brain Waves, I've not taken the time to take the test nor check out the technical characteristics. If any readers do, please report back to this blog via the "comment" feature.

Hopefully I can find the 40-minutes to take this in the next few weeks. Not sure if I'll post my scores for the whole world to see :)

Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, school psychology, neuropsychology, education, intelligence, IQ, IQ test, IQ score, cognitive, cognition, psychological testing, brain health, neuroscience

powered by performancing firefox

Biofeedback to help students do better on tests?

A tip-of-that hat to SharpBrains for the FYI post about an article in Technology and Learning Magazine about how a school system is using a PC-based biofeedback program with third graders to "calm" students down before taking tests. I'd like to see an actual controlled study, but the anecdotal reports of higher test scores are interesting.

Technorati Tags: psychology, educational psychology, education, neuroscience, neuropsychology, biofeedback, learning, neurotechnology, brain fitness, testing, tests, achievement, school learning

powered by performancing firefox