牙买加人与非裔美国人之间的 NIH 工具箱流体认知测量的跨文化测量不变性评估。

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Applied Neuropsychology-Adult Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2022-09-27 DOI:10.1080/23279095.2022.2126939
Ingrid A Tennant, Darrell M Hull, Marcus A Fagan, Kaitlin B Casaletto, Robert K Heaton, Caryl James Bateman, Kirk I Erickson, Terrence Forrester, Michael Boyne
{"title":"牙买加人与非裔美国人之间的 NIH 工具箱流体认知测量的跨文化测量不变性评估。","authors":"Ingrid A Tennant, Darrell M Hull, Marcus A Fagan, Kaitlin B Casaletto, Robert K Heaton, Caryl James Bateman, Kirk I Erickson, Terrence Forrester, Michael Boyne","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2022.2126939","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The NIH Toolbox Cognitive Battery (NIHTB-CB) was developed as a common-metric, computerized cognitive screener for research. Although extensively normed and validated in Americans of different ethnicities, there is little data on how generalizable such results would be when used outside of the United States. The objective of this study was to assess measurement invariance (MI) of the NIHTB-CB across Jamaican and African-American samples and determine appropriateness of comparisons across groups. Multi-group confirmatory factor analyses using a single-factor model were conducted using five tests of fluid cognitive abilities from the NIHTB-CB, which assess working memory, episodic memory, processing speed, and executive function. MI was tested sequentially for configural, metric and scalar invariance. 125 Jamaican and 154 American adults of African descent were included. The Jamaican mean age was 31.6 ± 8.6 years (57% males) compared to 43.5 ± 15.5 years (25% males) for the African-American group. The Jamaicans had on average 11.3 ± 2.7 years of education compared to 13.9 ± 2.6 years for the African-Americans. We found metric and configural invariance across both samples but not scalar invariance. These findings suggest that the single factor emerging from the NIHTB-CB measures the same construct, i.e. fluid cognitive ability, in both groups and hence the battery is appropriate for assessments within cultures. However, lack of scalar invariance indicates that direct cross-cultural comparisons of performance levels should be interpreted with caution, also suggesting that U.S. normative standards are not generalizable to the Jamaican population.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of cross-cultural measurement invariance of the NIH toolbox fluid cognition measures between Jamaicans and African-Americans.\",\"authors\":\"Ingrid A Tennant, Darrell M Hull, Marcus A Fagan, Kaitlin B Casaletto, Robert K Heaton, Caryl James Bateman, Kirk I Erickson, Terrence Forrester, Michael Boyne\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23279095.2022.2126939\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The NIH Toolbox Cognitive Battery (NIHTB-CB) was developed as a common-metric, computerized cognitive screener for research. Although extensively normed and validated in Americans of different ethnicities, there is little data on how generalizable such results would be when used outside of the United States. The objective of this study was to assess measurement invariance (MI) of the NIHTB-CB across Jamaican and African-American samples and determine appropriateness of comparisons across groups. Multi-group confirmatory factor analyses using a single-factor model were conducted using five tests of fluid cognitive abilities from the NIHTB-CB, which assess working memory, episodic memory, processing speed, and executive function. MI was tested sequentially for configural, metric and scalar invariance. 125 Jamaican and 154 American adults of African descent were included. The Jamaican mean age was 31.6 ± 8.6 years (57% males) compared to 43.5 ± 15.5 years (25% males) for the African-American group. The Jamaicans had on average 11.3 ± 2.7 years of education compared to 13.9 ± 2.6 years for the African-Americans. We found metric and configural invariance across both samples but not scalar invariance. These findings suggest that the single factor emerging from the NIHTB-CB measures the same construct, i.e. fluid cognitive ability, in both groups and hence the battery is appropriate for assessments within cultures. However, lack of scalar invariance indicates that direct cross-cultural comparisons of performance levels should be interpreted with caution, also suggesting that U.S. normative standards are not generalizable to the Jamaican population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"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/10.1080/23279095.2022.2126939\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/9/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2022.2126939","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/9/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国国立卫生研究院工具箱认知能力测验(NIHTB-CB)是作为一种通用度量、计算机化的认知能力筛选器开发的研究工具。虽然在不同种族的美国人中进行了广泛的规范化和验证,但很少有数据表明这些结果在美国以外地区使用时的通用性如何。本研究的目的是评估 NIHTB-CB 在牙买加和非裔美国人样本中的测量不变性(MI),并确定跨组比较的适当性。使用单因素模型对 NIHTB-CB 中的五项流体认知能力测试(评估工作记忆、外显记忆、处理速度和执行功能)进行了多组确证因素分析。对多元智能依次进行了构型不变性、度量不变性和标度不变性测试。研究对象包括 125 名牙买加和 154 名美国非洲裔成年人。牙买加人的平均年龄为 31.6 ± 8.6 岁(57% 为男性),而非裔美国人的平均年龄为 43.5 ± 15.5 岁(25% 为男性)。牙买加人的平均受教育年限为 11.3 ± 2.7 年,而非裔美国人的平均受教育年限为 13.9 ± 2.6 年。我们在两个样本中都发现了度量和构型不变性,但没有发现标量不变性。这些研究结果表明,NIHTB-CB 中的单因子测量了两组人的相同构念,即流体认知能力,因此该测验适合于不同文化间的评估。然而,由于缺乏标度不变性,因此在对成绩水平进行直接的跨文化比较时应谨慎解释,这也表明美国的常模标准并不能推广到牙买加人口中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessment of cross-cultural measurement invariance of the NIH toolbox fluid cognition measures between Jamaicans and African-Americans.

The NIH Toolbox Cognitive Battery (NIHTB-CB) was developed as a common-metric, computerized cognitive screener for research. Although extensively normed and validated in Americans of different ethnicities, there is little data on how generalizable such results would be when used outside of the United States. The objective of this study was to assess measurement invariance (MI) of the NIHTB-CB across Jamaican and African-American samples and determine appropriateness of comparisons across groups. Multi-group confirmatory factor analyses using a single-factor model were conducted using five tests of fluid cognitive abilities from the NIHTB-CB, which assess working memory, episodic memory, processing speed, and executive function. MI was tested sequentially for configural, metric and scalar invariance. 125 Jamaican and 154 American adults of African descent were included. The Jamaican mean age was 31.6 ± 8.6 years (57% males) compared to 43.5 ± 15.5 years (25% males) for the African-American group. The Jamaicans had on average 11.3 ± 2.7 years of education compared to 13.9 ± 2.6 years for the African-Americans. We found metric and configural invariance across both samples but not scalar invariance. These findings suggest that the single factor emerging from the NIHTB-CB measures the same construct, i.e. fluid cognitive ability, in both groups and hence the battery is appropriate for assessments within cultures. However, lack of scalar invariance indicates that direct cross-cultural comparisons of performance levels should be interpreted with caution, also suggesting that U.S. normative standards are not generalizable to the Jamaican population.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-PSYCHOLOGY
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
134
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.
期刊最新文献
Introduction and preliminary psychometric evaluation of the assessment of functional capacity interview for older adults. Test of memory Malingering 2nd Edition: Normative data from cognitively intact adults living in Spain. Depressive symptoms in Brazilian Parkinson's disease patients treated with subthalamic nucleus deep brain stimulation: A Cross-Sectional study. Goal attainment in individual and group-based neuropsychological interventions for young adults with dyslexia in a randomized controlled trial. Cognitive processing differences between stereotype activation and semantic activation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1