Design and evaluation of a computerised version of the Benton visual retention test

The use of computers in the administration of psychological assessments is often considered standard practice. However, the evidence clearly shows that computerisation of each test needs to be evaluated independently. The current study examined the hypothesis that a computerised administration of th...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Computers in human behavior 2007-09, Vol.23 (5), p.2383-2393
Main Authors: Thompson, S.B.N., Ennis, E., Coffin, T., Farman, S.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Attitude to computers
Benton visual retention test
Biological and medical sciences
Computer preferences
Computerised assessment
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Learning. Memory
Memory
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychology. Psychophysiology
Psychometrics
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The use of computers in the administration of psychological assessments is often considered standard practice. However, the evidence clearly shows that computerisation of each test needs to be evaluated independently. The current study examined the hypothesis that a computerised administration of the Benton visual retention test (BVRT) should yield comparable results to paper-and-pencil administration of this measure. Forty participants (23 females and 17 males) from a non-clinical population were assessed using a computerised version of the BVRT and the conventional paper-and-pencil administration. Parallel forms of the test were used in the two administrations in order to eliminate practice effects. Participants found the conventional method of assessment easier to use but less fun. Importantly, performances of the participants were poorer when using the computerised version, giving rise to extreme caution when using this method of assessment administration with a clinical population.
ISSN:0747-5632
1873-7692
DOI:10.1016/j.chb.2006.03.014