Paul M Skirrow, Grace Johnstone, Katie M Douglas, Josh W Faulkner
{"title":"Measuring memory: A survey of neuropsychological practice amongst New Zealand psychologists.","authors":"Paul M Skirrow, Grace Johnstone, Katie M Douglas, Josh W Faulkner","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2023.2251635","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study sought to explore patterns of memory assessment in neuropsychological practice within New Zealand (NZ), to compare it to that previously described in Europe, North America and Australia, and to consider the implications for neuropsychology training in NZ. 80 NZ-registered psychologists completed an online survey asking them how frequently they utilized 50 commonly used tests of memory. Participants were also asked about their main areas of specialty, work context and demographic information. Whilst participants appeared, broadly, to utilize a similar set of 'core' tests to their colleagues in Europe, Australia and North America, there were a number of tests and test domains that were rarely utilized by NZ psychologists, in contrast to overseas samples. Furthermore, several of the tests in common usage have been shown to have significant validity issues for use with an NZ population. Overall, this study suggests that most NZ psychologists employ a similar approach to memory assessment, typically relying upon a small number of well-known tests. This appears to contrast with a greater variability of practice shown in studies of European, North American and Australian psychologists and raises several interesting questions for the future development of neuropsychology in NZ.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":" ","pages":"1223-1230"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2023.2251635","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/9/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study sought to explore patterns of memory assessment in neuropsychological practice within New Zealand (NZ), to compare it to that previously described in Europe, North America and Australia, and to consider the implications for neuropsychology training in NZ. 80 NZ-registered psychologists completed an online survey asking them how frequently they utilized 50 commonly used tests of memory. Participants were also asked about their main areas of specialty, work context and demographic information. Whilst participants appeared, broadly, to utilize a similar set of 'core' tests to their colleagues in Europe, Australia and North America, there were a number of tests and test domains that were rarely utilized by NZ psychologists, in contrast to overseas samples. Furthermore, several of the tests in common usage have been shown to have significant validity issues for use with an NZ population. Overall, this study suggests that most NZ psychologists employ a similar approach to memory assessment, typically relying upon a small number of well-known tests. This appears to contrast with a greater variability of practice shown in studies of European, North American and Australian psychologists and raises several interesting questions for the future development of neuropsychology in NZ.
期刊介绍:
pplied Neuropsychology-Adult publishes clinical neuropsychological articles concerning assessment, brain functioning and neuroimaging, neuropsychological treatment, and rehabilitation in adults. Full-length articles and brief communications are included. Case studies of adult patients carefully assessing the nature, course, or treatment of clinical neuropsychological dysfunctions in the context of scientific literature, are suitable. Review manuscripts addressing critical issues are encouraged. Preference is given to papers of clinical relevance to others in the field. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief, and, if found suitable for further considerations are peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees. All peer review is single-blind and submission is online via ScholarOne Manuscripts.