Author
Listed:
- Alyssa A GamaldoPhD
- Shyuan Ching TanMA
- Angie L SardinaPhD
- Carolyn HenziBSc
- Rosalyn Guest
- Lesley A RossPhD
- Kurtis WillinghamMA
- Alan B ZondermanPhD
- Ross A AndelPhD
- Angela GutchessPhD
Abstract
ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to examine satisfaction, test anxiety, and performance using computer-based cognitive batteries versus a paper-and-pencil neuropsychological battery among older Blacks.MethodSelf-identified Black adults (n = 87, age range: 55–86; mean education = 14) completed two computer-based tests (CogState and Joggle) and a paper-and-pencil neuropsychological battery. After each battery, participants reported their testing anxiety and satisfaction using the batteries. Descriptive, correlational, and regression analyses compared satisfaction, anxiety, and performance across the batteries.ResultsMajority of the participants reported more satisfaction with the computer-based (Joggle: 66%; CogState: 77%) than the neuropsychological (52%) battery. Participants also reported less testing anxiety after completing the computer-based batteries than the neuropsychological battery, F(2, 172) = 22.96, p .05). Although testing anxiety was not associated with performance across the batteries, age and education quality were uniquely associated with performance on the CogState and neuropsychological batteries.ConclusionsComputer-based cognitive batteries appear to be less intimidating than the commonly used paper-and-pencil neuropsychological tests for Black adults. Thus, these cognitive batteries may be useful tools for monitoring older Blacks’ cognitive status.
Suggested Citation
Alyssa A GamaldoPhD & Shyuan Ching TanMA & Angie L SardinaPhD & Carolyn HenziBSc & Rosalyn Guest & Lesley A RossPhD & Kurtis WillinghamMA & Alan B ZondermanPhD & Ross A AndelPhD & Angela GutchessPhD, 2020.
"Older Black Adults’ Satisfaction and Anxiety Levels After Completing Alternative Versus Traditional Cognitive Batteries,"
The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 75(7), pages 1462-1474.
Handle:
RePEc:oup:geronb:v:75:y:2020:i:7:p:1462-1474.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
for a different version of it.
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:75:y:2020:i:7:p:1462-1474.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.