Western Aphasia Battery-Revised
Age Range: 18 to 89 years
Full battery – 30-45 minutes, additional 45-60 minutes for the reading, writing, praxis, and construction sections
Bedside – 15 minutes
Forms: Two forms: Full Battery and Bedside Tool (screening)
Scores/Interpretation: Criterion Cut Scores
Publication Date: 2006
Maintains structure, content and clinical value with key improvements
The Western Aphasia Battery–Revised (WAB–R) is the updated version of the highly respected and widely used instrument for assessing adult patients with aphasia. It is an individually administered assessment for adults with acquired neurological disorders (e.g., as a result of stroke, head injury, dementia). Like the previous edition, WAB–R assesses the linguistic skills most frequently affected by aphasia, in addition to key nonlinguistic skills, and provides differential diagnosis information.
New Features Mean Enhanced Utility
The WAB–R, a full battery of 8 subtests (32 short tasks), maintains the structure and overall content and clinical value of the current measure while creating these improvements:
- Two new supplementary tasks (reading and writing of irregular and non-words) will aid the clinician in distinguishing between surface, deep (phonological), and visual dyslexia.
- Revision of approximately 15 items
- Bedside WAB–R – provides a quick look at patient’s functioning
- Examiner’s manual with technical/psychometric properties information, test interpretation relevant to aphasic populations, historical evidence of reliability and validity, and information about the unique aspects of assessing the language ability of individuals with dementia
- Spiral-bound stimulus book replacing loose stimulus cards
- Revised administration directions – more user-friendly with directions to the examinee for all subtests
- Expanded scoring guidelines for clarity
How Is It Scored?
Criterion cut scores:
- Aphasia Quotient
- Cortical Quotient
- Auditory Comprehension Quotient
- Oral Expression Quotient
- Reading Quotient
- Writing Quotient
- Bedside WAB–R scores
What Does the WAB-R Do?
Frequently asked questions follow. Click on a question to see the response.
When a customer is interpreting a Bedside WAB-R score there aren’t severity descriptors like there are for the AQ on page 83, right? On page 84, it states, “Interpretation of the sections and tasks are consistent with the full test”.
Based on the author’s expertise, the Bedside Aphasia Score should correlate to the full diagnostic test’s Aphasia Quotient. If this is true, then the Bedside Aphasia Score can be interpreted using the severity ratings supplied for the Aphasia Quotient; however, the severity rating obtained using the Beside Aphasia Score can only be interpreted as an indicator of the severity rating that could be expected if the full test was administered and an Aphasia Quotient obtained.
How should I use the three different quotient scores (Aphasia Quotient, Language Quotient, and Cortical Quotient) in my test interpretation?
The interpretation guidance for each quotient is outlined in the test manual, pages 83-84. Essentially, these three composite scores represent a narrow vs wide view of the examinee's performance across one or more domain(s) during the test administration. The Aphasia Quotient (AQ), represents the most narrow view of performance--it relates specifically to those oral language tasks that are impacted by aphasia. More broadly, the Language Quotient (LQ) relates to oral language and written language together. Finally, the Cortical Quotient (CQ) relates to the entire cognitive-linguistic performance of the examinee during the administration, using the entire set of linguistic and nonlinguistic domains. With these different views of examinee performance and a detailed case history, you can tease out a profile of strengths and weaknesses in the examinee and make a plan of care.
May I use the raw performance (X out of X correct) on any given subtest in my report?
At most, you could report that the examinee performed "X of X items correct" for a given subtest. This would be descriptive information only. You would not be able to say with any reliability or validity that a raw score performance had any comparison to any other individual that may have been assessed or subtest that may have been given. Make any interpretive statements about raw score performance with great caution and acknowledgement of the lack of comparison ability.