Concept information
Terme préférentiel
Memory Binding Test
Définition
- A neuropsychological test for the assessment of associative memory.
Concept générique
Synonyme(s)
- FMBT
- MBT
- Memory Capacity Test
Appartient au groupe
Référence(s) bibliographique(s)
-
• Buschke, H., Mowrey, W. B., Ramratan, W. S., Zimmerman, M. E., Loewenstein, D. A., Katz, M. J., & Lipton, R. B. (2017). Memory Binding Test distinguishes amnestic mild cognitive impairment and dementia from cognitively normal elderly. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 32(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acw083
[Study type: empirical study / Access: free]
-
• Loewenstein, D. A., Curiel, R. E., Duara, R., & Buschke, H. (2018). Novel cognitive paradigms for the detection of memory impairment in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease. Assessment, 25(3), 348–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191117691608
[Study type: literature review / Access: closed]
-
• Mille, J., Magnon, V., Izaute, M., Dutheil, F., & T. Vallet, G. (2023). First steps toward the french validation of the Memory Binding Test (FMBTt): Adaptation, convergent validity and application to normal aging. L’Année psychologique, 123(3), 469–489. https://doi.org/10.3917/anpsy1.233.0469
[Study type: empirical study / Access: closed]
-
• Mowrey, W., Lipton, R., Katz, M., Ramratan, W., Loewenstein, D., Zimmerman, M., & Buschke, H. (2018). Memory binding test predicts incident dementia: Results from the Einstein Aging Study. Journal of Alzheimer’s Disease, 62, 293–304. https://doi.org/10.3233/JAD-170714
[Study type: empirical study / Access: closed]
Créateur
- Frank Arnould
Outil diagnostic de
Méthode d'étude de
Note éditoriale
- "The test procedure is the following. In the first step, the participant was instructed to learn the 16 word items from the first list, presented on 4 cards with 4 words on each card, 1 card at a time. For each item, after the examiner stated a category cue (e.g., flower), the participant was asked to verbally identify the correct item from the card associated with the cue (e.g., tulip) within 5 s to ensure controlled learning and encoding specificity. In the second step, the participant was instructed to recall the items from the first list after cue presentation. Five seconds were allowed for each cue and errors were not corrected. In the third step, the participant was instructed to learn 16 new items from the second list, as similarly done for the first list. In the fourth step, the participant was asked to recall items from the second list, as similarly done for the first list. In the fifth step, the paired recall condition, for each cue the participant was asked to recall both items from both lists in any order within 10 s. The total procedure takes about 6 min." (Buschke et al., 2017, p. 31-32).
Traductions
-
français
URI
http://data.loterre.fr/ark:/67375/P66-GZ969C25-L
{{label}}
{{#each values }} {{! loop through ConceptPropertyValue objects }}
{{#if prefLabel }}
{{/if}}
{{/each}}
{{#if notation }}{{ notation }} {{/if}}{{ prefLabel }}
{{#ifDifferentLabelLang lang }} ({{ lang }}){{/ifDifferentLabelLang}}
{{#if vocabName }}
{{ vocabName }}
{{/if}}