Assessing the reliability and abnormality of subtest differences on the test of everyday attention

J. R. Crawford, J. Sommerville, Ian H. Robertson

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

20 Citations (Scopus)


Objectives. To assist clinicians with the analysis of an individual's profile of subtest strength and weaknesses on the Test of Everyday Attention (TEA).

Design, The study applied psychometric methods for the quantitive analysis of subtest profiles (Silverstein, 1982, 1984a, b).

Methods. Formulae to compute the standard error of the difference and standard deviation of the difference between a subtest and a client's mean subtest scores were applied to determine critical values for reliable and abnormal differences. The data used were derived from the TEA standardization sample (N = 154).

Results. Tables for examining whether an individual's TEA subtest profile contains reliable and abnormal subtest discrepancies are presented.

Conclusions. Elegant methods of analysing a subtest profile were extended for use with the Test of Everyday Attention. In keeping with the rationale underlying the measurement of neuropsychological deficit (Lezak, 1995), these methods complement the existing TEA normative comparison standards by providing individual comparison standards for a client's performance. Guidance on the use of the tables is offered; the distinction between reliable and abnormal differences is highlighted.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)609-617
Number of pages9
JournalBritish Journal of Clinical Psychology
Issue number4
Publication statusPublished - Nov 1997


  • pattern-analysis


Dive into the research topics of 'Assessing the reliability and abnormality of subtest differences on the test of everyday attention'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this