Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 7, 2026
Highlighting and Reducing the Impact of Negative Aging Stereotypes During Older Adults' Cognitive Testing
Published on: January 24, 2020
Initial Psychometric Evaluation of the Riga Cognitive Screening Task (RiTa) in Older Adults with Varying Levels of
Introduction:
Cognitive impairment remains underdetected in clinical practice, with prevalence estimates exceeding the official statistics. Most existing screening tools rarely extend beyond cognitive performance to capture the broader context of individual ageing, thus increasing the risk of misdiagnosis. Riga Cognitive Screening Task (RiTa) was developed to address these gaps.
Methods:
RiTa development and evaluation were conducted in three phases. The item development phase combined a literature review, exploratory factor analysis, and analysis of cognitive screening tools. Content validity was assessed by three experts, and face validity was assessed with nine older adults. 134 older adults (aged 51-92, M = 68.34, 35.8% male) participated in the pilot study. Cognition and protective factors were assessed with RiTa, while Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was used for convergent validity. A subset of participants (n=107) underwent structural MRI.
Results:
Expert evaluations and participant interviews supported the content and face validity of RiTa. The Cognitive Assessment scale differentiated between diagnostic groups in most tasks, with the overall group effect remaining significant after adjustment for age and education. It also demonstrated strong convergent validity with MoCA. ROC analyses indicated solid discrimination between normal cognition and MCI and near-perfect discrimination for MNcI. Criterion validity was supported by strong correlations with medial temporal atrophy scores. The Protective Factors scale showed an emerging conceptual structure, but no significant association with cognitive performance in this pilot sample.
Conclusion:
RiTa demonstrates encouraging validity as a multidomain screening tool. Further refinement of the Protective Factor scale and validation in larger samples are warranted.
