Ross Thomas P
Department of Psychology, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC, USA
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2014 Dec;29(8):806-17. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acu052. Epub 2014 Oct 14.
The reliability and validity of standard and qualitative scores for the Ruff Figural Fluency Test (RFFT; Ruff, 1988) was examined in 102 healthy undergraduates. Participants (M age = 21.79; SD = 3.7; age = 80% Caucasian) were administered the RFFT and measures assessing executive functions (EF) and other cognitive domains. Inter-scorer reliability was excellent (0.9 range) for most RFFT indices. Test-retest coefficients (M interval = 7 weeks) ranged from 0.64 for the error ratio score to 0.87 for unique designs. RFFT indices correlated with Block Design performance and nonverbal measures of working memory, but were unrelated to measures of verbal fluency, verbal learning, or working memory for verbal material. RFFT novel design output correlated with most measures of EF supporting the convergent validity of this measure. In contrast, correlations between measures of EF and qualitative scores were absent or weak. RFFT score interpretation is discussed in light of relevant models of EF and directions for future research are presented.
在102名健康本科生中检验了鲁夫图形流畅性测验（RFFT；鲁夫，1988）标准分数和定性分数的信度与效度。参与者（年龄均值M = 21.79；标准差SD = 3.7；80%为白种人）接受了RFFT以及评估执行功能（EF）和其他认知领域的测量。大多数RFFT指标的评分者间信度极佳（范围为0.9）。重测系数（间隔均值M = 7周）从错误率分数的0.64到独特设计的0.87不等。RFFT指标与积木设计表现以及工作记忆的非言语测量相关，但与言语流畅性、言语学习或言语材料工作记忆的测量无关。RFFT新颖设计产出与大多数EF测量相关，支持了该测量的聚合效度。相比之下，EF测量与定性分数之间的相关性不存在或较弱。根据相关的EF模型对RFFT分数解释进行了讨论，并提出了未来研究的方向。
