Validation and normative data of the Italian Face-Name Association Test (ItFNAT): A tool for cross-modal memory assessment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to enhance the psychometric robustness and normative utility of the Italian Face-Name Association Test (ItFNAT), designed to assess cross-modal associative memory, by validating three parallel versions and introducing scores adjusting formula and equivalent scores (ESs) for clinical application. Method: A total of 286 cognitively healthy Italian adults (ages 20–89) completed one of three equivalent ItFNAT versions, evaluating Immediate Recall (IRs), Delayed Free Recall (DFRs) and Delayed Total Recall (DTRs). Four derived indices were also computed. Internal consistency, test-retest reliability, principal component analysis (PCA), and regression-based demographic adjustments were performed. Convergent validity was examined using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). Results: All three versions showed strong psychometric performance, with high internal consistency and robust test–retest reliability. PCA confirmed a stable one-factor structure. Significant correlations with MoCA supported convergent validity. Regression models identified age (linear or transformed) as the only consistent predictor across all scores. Accordingly, adjustment spreadsheet and ES were developed. Derived indices revealed age-related shifts in memory strategies and error types, suggesting their clinical interpretability. Conclusions: The ItFNAT is a reliable and valid tool for assessing associative memory in Italian adults. Its three parallel forms and corrected norms support its clinical and research use, particularly for repeated assessments and early detection of memory impairment in neurodegenerative disorders.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".