Scoring Higher the Second Time Around: Meta-Analyses of Practice Effects in Neuropsychological Assessment
Abstract
In neuropsychological assessment, and many areas of research, it is common for the same test to be administered on more than one occasion to measure change. Measured changes are presumed to reflect true changes in the construct being measured by the test; for example, cognitive changes due to processes such as aging, advancing neurological disease, or treatment interventions. However, practice effects, defined as score increases due to factors such as memory for specific test items, learned strategies, or test sophistication, complicate the interpretation of change. This review presents meta-analyses of nearly 1600 individual effect sizes representing changes in mean-level performance on tests commonly used to assess core domains of neuropsychological function, with the goal of quantitatively summarizing the magnitude of practice effects on such tests. The use of alternate forms, the ages of participants, clinical diagnoses of study participants, and length of the test-retest interval were associated with the magnitude of change in many cases. These findings have important implications for the practice of clinical neuropsychology, as well as for research applications, and highlight the need for practice effects to be taken into account in interpreting change across time with multiple measurements.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Post-baseline improvements could be due to practice effects such that improvements occurred from task repetition and not the ingestion of a capsule regardless of its contents.
“these improvements could be due to practice effects (Calamia et al., 2012) such that improvements occurred from task repetition and not the ingestion of a capsule regardless of its contents”
From Effects of stimulant medication on neuropsychological functioning in college students without ADHD. (2026) · cites this paper as Calamia et al., 2012
The cognitive benefits of rTMS treatment may be underestimated in older adults with depression because practice effects may be different compared to the normative sample.
“the cognitive benefits of rTMS treatment may be underestimated in older adults with depression because the practice effects may be different compared to the normative sample.”
Cites
Morris, S. B., & DeShon, R. P. (2002) · Psychological Methods · doi:10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.105 · Cited by 2,502 · see citing works
Heilbronner, R. L., Sweet, J. J., Attix, D. K., Krull, K. R., Henry, G. K., & Hart, R. P. (2010) · The Clinical Neuropsychologist · doi:10.1080/13854046.2010.526785 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
Practice effects predict cognitive outcome in amnestic mild cognitive impairment
Duff, K., Lyketsos, C. G., Beglinger, L. J., Chelune, G., Moser, D. J., Arndt, S., Schultz, S. K., Paulsen, J. S., Petersen, R. C., & McCaffrey, R. J. (2011) · The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry · doi:10.1097/jgp.0b013e318209dd3a · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Rabin, L. A., Paolillo, E., & Barr, W. B. (2016) · Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology · doi:10.1093/arclin/acw007 · Cited by 448 · see citing works
A primer on investigating the after effects of acute bouts of physical activity on cognition
Pontifex, M. B., McGowan, A. L., Chandler, M. C., Gwizdala, K. L., Parks, A. C., Fenn, K., & Kamijo, K. (2019) · Psychology of Sport and Exercise · doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2018.08.015 · Cited by 339 · see citing works
The robust reliability of neuropsychological measures: meta-analyses of test-retest correlations
Calamia, M., Markon, K., & Tranel, D. (2013) · The Clinical Neuropsychologist · doi:10.1080/13854046.2013.809795 · Cited by 207 · see citing works
Self-citationLower practice effects as a marker of cognitive performance and dementia risk: a literature review
Jutten, R. J., Grandoit, E., Foldi, N. S., Sikkes, S. A. M., Jones, R. N., Choi, S., Lamar, M. L., Louden, D. K. N., Rich, J., Tommet, D., et al. (2020) · Alzheimer's & Dementia: Diagnosis, Assessment & Disease Monitoring · doi:10.1002/dad2.12055 · Cited by 102 · see citing works
Practice Effects: A Unique Cognitive Variable
Duff, K., Callister, C., Dennett, K., & Tometich, D. (2012) · The Clinical Neuropsychologist · doi:10.1080/13854046.2012.722685 · Cited by 94 · see citing works
Miguel, C., Chaim, T., Silva, M. A., & Louzã, M. R. (2015) · Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment · doi:10.2147/ndt.s75038 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
Göke, K., McClintock, S. M., Mah, L., Rajji, T. K., Lee, H. H., Nestor, S. M., Downar, J., Noda, Y., Daskalakis, Z. J., Mulsant, B. H., et al. (2026) · The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry · doi:10.1177/07067437251315515 · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Effects of stimulant medication on neuropsychological functioning in college students without ADHD.
Vasko, J. M., Looby, A., Serrano, J. W., Abu-Ramadan, T. M., Miller, E. A., McGee, N., Smith, D. T., & Hartung, C. M. (2026) · Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1037/pha0000853
- Authors
- Calamia, M., Markon, K., & Tranel, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Iowa (US)
- Corresponding author
- Calamia, Matthew
- Venue
- The Clinical Neuropsychologist
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2012-04-30
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 543-570
- ISSN
- 0920-1637 (ISSN-L)
- 1385-4046
- 1744-4144
- OpenAlex
- W2114815865
- Cited by
- 583
- References
- 3
- Citations by year
- 2026: 80 · 2025: 85 · 2024: 44 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 56 · 2021: 50 · 2020: 47 · 2019: 31 · 2018: 35 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 3.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- The Clinical Neuropsychologist (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Civil War Book Review (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
- Keywords
- practice effects, test-retest reliability, neuropsychological assessment, cognitive change over time, alternate forms, age effects, clinical diagnoses
- MeSH terms
- Cognition, Humans, Judgment, Memory, Neuropsychological Tests, Practice, Psychological, Problem Solving, Reproducibility of Results, Comprehension
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
