Psychometric Equivalence of Standard and Prorated Boston Naming Test Scores

Danielle Zimmerman, J. Attridge, Summer Rolin, Jeremy Davis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Scopus citations


This study compared prorated Boston Naming Test (BNT-P; omitting the noose item) and standard administration (BNT-S) scores in physical medicine and rehabilitation patients (N = 480). The sample was 34% female and 91% White with average age and education of 46 (SD = 15) and 14 (SD = 3) years, respectively. BNT-P was calculated by summing correct responses excluding item 48 and estimating the 60-item score with cross multiplication and division. BNT-P and BNT-S scores were compared via concordance correlation (CC) coefficients; reflected and log transformed data were examined with equivalence tests. BNT-P and BNT-S scores showed almost perfect agreement (CC =.99). Transformed scores demonstrated equivalence (±1.1 points). Raw and scaled score differences were 0 in 88% and 96% of cases, respectively. Race and ethnicity accounted for item 48 outcomes while controlling for age and education. Findings support the utility of prorated BNT scores in rehabilitation patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)527-534
Number of pages8
Issue number3
StatePublished - Apr 2022
Externally publishedYes


  • Boston Naming Test
  • equivalence
  • naming
  • prorated
  • rehabilitation

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Applied Psychology


Dive into the research topics of 'Psychometric Equivalence of Standard and Prorated Boston Naming Test Scores'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this