Executive Functioning and the "Category test"

Page 1 of 1 [ 1 post ] 

Horus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Sep 2009
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,302
Location: A rock in the milky way

14 May 2010, 5:51 pm

The Category Test was included in at least one of the neuropsychological
evaluations i've had. The results of my performance on this test were
included in the executive functioning section of this neuropsych eval.
But for whatever reason, they weren't included in any other neuropsych
evals i've had over the years assuming I even took the category test on
the other ones (don't remember...long time ago already.)

The category test is one of eight tests included on the Halstead-
Reitan Neuropsychological Test Battery. The HR battery is used
to evaulate brain and nervous system functioning in people 15
years old and up. The category test on the HR battery is supposedly
the Halstead-Reitan's most effective test for detecting some
kind of brain damage. It does not determine where the damage
in the brain is however. I scored in the "impaired" range on the category test in
the <1st%. 8O

According to the authors of the book; "Neuropsychological assessment
of neuropsychiatric and neuromedical disorders", the category test is
"probably" the best measure on the Halstead-Reitan battery of abstraction,
reasoning and logical analysis abilites.

Assuming what the authors here claim is true and my extremely low
score on the category test, you might also assume my abstract reasoning
abilities would be very poor according to my neuropsych evals. If so....
that assumption would be wrong.


Here's what was said about my abstract reasoning abilities and
executive functioning in general on the neuropsych eval in question:


Executive Functioning:

"Horus' performance on tasks measuring conceptual tracking and
abstract reasoning falls between the superior to impaired range.
His performance falls within the superior range on a task measuring
ABSTRACT REASONING ability. His performance is in the average
range on a visual reasoning task. Average performance is shown
in the area of shifting mental sets and as well as cognitive flexibility.
Significant impairment is seen on a CONCEPT FORMATION TASK".



The "concept formation task" they're referring to here IS the
category test. So the authors of the aforementioned book are
calling the category test a measure of "abstraction, reasoning,
and logical analysis abilites". And the "authors" of my neuro
psych eval are calling it a "concept formation task". Am I
dense here or is this a bit of a contradiction? Furthermore,
if I performed so poorly on the category test which, according
to the authors of the book I mentioned, is such a great measure
of abstract reasoning, then why have my neuropsych evals
yielded *superior* scores in abstract reasoning? Is there more than
one kind of abstract reasoning? Do the authors of this book know
what they're talking about? Or maybe the psychologists who tested
me are wrong for referring to the Category test as a "concept
formation task"?

Another neuropsych eval I had also indicated a strength in
abstract reasoning. The other three evals i've had didn't say
anything about abstract reasoning whatsoever. Therefore, if the
category test really such a good measure of abstract reasoning
and I scored so poorly on it, then why do I exhibit *superior*
abstract reasoning abilities on the two neuropsych evals that
mention anything about my abstract reasoning abilities at all?