Recognition subtests of the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status: evidence for a cortical vs. subcortical distinction

ABSTRACT

Introduction

Within clinical neuropsychology, a classic diagnostic distinction is made between cortical and subcortical disorders, especially based on their memory profiles. Typically, this is based on the comparison of recall and recognition trials, where individuals with cortical conditions do not tend to benefit (i.e., score well) on recognition trials and individuals with subcortical conditions do. Although the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS) is a widely used brief cognitive battery, there is a lack of evidence to support this measure’s utility in distinguishing between the memory profiles of these conditions.

Method

Thirty-six mild Alzheimer’s disease (AD), 55 Parkinson’s disease (PD), and 105 essential tremor (ET) participants (N = 196) were administered the RBANS with additional Story and Figure Recognition subtests. Group differences on recall and recognition scores (Total Correct, Hits or True Positives, False Positive Errors, and discriminability index) were examined across the three groups, while controlling for the influence of age and gender.

Results

As expected, individuals with AD had poorer recognition scores compared to the other clinical groups across tasks (all p-values < .05), while the ET sample largely performed comparably to the PD sample. With the exception of comparable Figure Recognition and Recall in the PD sample, all groups exhibited significantly greater recognition Hit performance compared to Recall (all p-values < .05).

Conclusions

The group differences in performance across RBANS recognition subtests suggest support for traditional “cortical” and “subcortical” profiles. However, all groups, including the mild AD sample, demonstrated a benefit from recognition cues compared to free recall. Overall, these findings support the inclusion of the newly developed Story and Figure Recognition subtests in future clinical practice and research endeavors.

KEYWORDS:

• Essential tremor
• Parkinson’s disease
• Alzheimer’s disease
• RBANS
• recognition

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

Data set can be made available by the second author (KD) upon request. The study was not preregistered.

Additional information

Funding

The work was supported by the National Institute on Aging [R01AG055428].