Test-retest reliability and practice effects of the virtual environment grocery store (VEGS).
Saved in:
| Title: | Test-retest reliability and practice effects of the virtual environment grocery store (VEGS). |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Weitzner, Daniel S. (AUTHOR), Calamia, Matthew (AUTHOR), Parsons, Thomas D. (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology. Aug 2021, Vol. 43 Issue 6, p547-557. 11p. 3 Charts, 2 Graphs. |
| Subjects: | Statistical reliability, Virtual reality, Grocery industry, Psychometrics, Neuropsychological tests, Verbal learning |
| Abstract: | The use of virtual reality (VR) technology has been suggested as a method to increase ecological validity in neuropsychological assessments. Although validity has been a focus in VR research, little attention has been paid to other psychometric properties such as test-retest reliability and practice effects. Practice effects are common on traditional neuropsychological tests and can be impacted by novelty. Because VR is not widely used it was expected that participants would demonstrate higher practice effects on VR as compared to paper-and-pencil testing. To compare test-retest reliability and practice effects in VR and traditional paper-and-pencil testing, the Virtual Environment Grocery Store (VEGS) and California Verbal Learning Test – Second Edition (CVLT-II) were used in healthy adults (n = 44). Participants received follow-up testing approximately 2 weeks after the initial visit. Significant practice effects of similar magnitude were seen on memory scores (i.e., total learning, long-delay free recall, and long-delay cued recall) on the VEGS and the CVLT-II. The VEGS and CVLT-II memory scores also demonstrated strong test-retest reliability (r's >.71). Lastly, total learning scores (d =.32) and long-delay cued recall (d =.70) scores were significantly higher on the CVLT-II compared to the VEGS (p's <.01). Results suggested similar test-retest reliability and practice effects of the VEGS and CVLT-II, although the VEGS has the benefit of being an immersive technology that simulates an everyday activity. The study replicated past findings that the VEGS is more difficult than the CVLT-II which may be a useful property for clinical assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Journal of Clinical & Experimental Neuropsychology is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | The use of virtual reality (VR) technology has been suggested as a method to increase ecological validity in neuropsychological assessments. Although validity has been a focus in VR research, little attention has been paid to other psychometric properties such as test-retest reliability and practice effects. Practice effects are common on traditional neuropsychological tests and can be impacted by novelty. Because VR is not widely used it was expected that participants would demonstrate higher practice effects on VR as compared to paper-and-pencil testing. To compare test-retest reliability and practice effects in VR and traditional paper-and-pencil testing, the Virtual Environment Grocery Store (VEGS) and California Verbal Learning Test – Second Edition (CVLT-II) were used in healthy adults (n = 44). Participants received follow-up testing approximately 2 weeks after the initial visit. Significant practice effects of similar magnitude were seen on memory scores (i.e., total learning, long-delay free recall, and long-delay cued recall) on the VEGS and the CVLT-II. The VEGS and CVLT-II memory scores also demonstrated strong test-retest reliability (r's >.71). Lastly, total learning scores (d =.32) and long-delay cued recall (d =.70) scores were significantly higher on the CVLT-II compared to the VEGS (p's <.01). Results suggested similar test-retest reliability and practice effects of the VEGS and CVLT-II, although the VEGS has the benefit of being an immersive technology that simulates an everyday activity. The study replicated past findings that the VEGS is more difficult than the CVLT-II which may be a useful property for clinical assessment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 13803395 |
| DOI: | 10.1080/13803395.2021.1960277 |
