TEST

Verbal Learning Test

Episodic verbal memory: acquisition, interference and delayed recall

Word-list learning across four trials, with interference, delayed recall at 30 minutes and recognition. It does not only measure how much is remembered: it measures how learning happens.

Request a demo

WHAT THE TEST IS

The shape of the curve says more than the total

Episodic verbal memory is one of the most sensitive markers of neurological, psychiatric and neurodegenerative change. Multi-trial learning paradigms allow analysis not only of how much is recalled but of the mechanisms involved: the acquisition curve, susceptibility to interference, consolidation, delayed retention, intrusions and recognition.

The test draws conceptually on the reference tasks in the field — CVLT-II, TAVEC, RAVLT and WMS-III subtests — and explores several networks together: medial temporal structures, with the hippocampus central to episodic consolidation, and frontal regions involved in strategic encoding, response monitoring and active retrieval.

One methodological decision sets it apart: the lists are made of heterogeneous words with no apparent semantic relation. Offering no explicit semantic groupings minimises facilitation from spontaneous clustering strategies, so performance depends more on encoding and consolidation than on organisational skill.

HOW IT IS ADMINISTERED

Four trials, one interference list and half an hour’s wait

The test has two parts. The first assesses immediate memory and learning: four acquisition trials of List A, an interference task using List B, and a short-delay recall afterwards. The second, after an interval of about 30 minutes, assesses delayed recall and recognition. In NeuronUP Assessment the two parts appear separately and both must be selected for full administration; part 1 can also be administered on its own.

WHAT THE TEST MEASURES

Indicators and their interpretation

First recall

Words correct on the first trial of List A. Initial auditory-verbal registration, before repetition has had any corrective effect.

High: sound initial learning, instructions understood and an attentional base sufficient for what follows.
Low: call for consideration of distractibility, slowing, anxiety or poor initial encoding. On their own they do not demonstrate an amnesic syndrome.

Trials 2 to 4 and the learning curve

Each trial scores separately, but what informs is the joint profile: how much repetition helps, and how regularly.

High: a rising curve: repetition is being exploited and a useful organisation of the material is consolidating.
Low: a flat curve → encoding or storage deficit, particularly alongside low delayed recall. An irregular curve → attentional fluctuation, fatigue or inconsistent effort.

Total immediate recall

Sum of correct responses across trials 1 to 4. Overall acquisition capacity across the whole learning phase.

High: efficient, sustained acquisition across the four trials.
Low: a global compromise of learning; worth decomposing by looking at the shape of the curve before interpreting it.

List B and short-delay recall

Performance on the interference list and on the immediate recall that follows. Measures vulnerability to proactive and retroactive interference.

High: resistance to interference and stable retrieval after the change of material.
Low: a marked drop after List B: susceptibility to interference, difficulty segregating learning contexts.

Delayed recall and recognition

Words retrieved after about 30 minutes, and recognition afterwards. This is the key comparison: low recall that recovers with recognition points to an access failure; if it does not recover, to a storage failure.

High: sound consolidation and efficient free retrieval.
Low: with recognition preserved, a retrieval deficit (frontosubcortical profile). With recognition also low, a consolidation deficit (medial temporal profile).

Intrusions and perseverations

Words never presented that appear in recall, and repetitions within a single trial. Recorded across trials 1-4 and in delayed recall.

High: abundant intrusions or perseverations indicate a failure of response monitoring and weak executive control.
Low: clean recall: supervision of what is produced is intact.

REFERENCES

Bibliography

Almkvist, O., Rennie, A., Westman, E., Wallert, J., & Ekman, U. (2025). Methods for assessment of Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test performance in memory clinic patients and healthy adults. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 39(2), 424–438.
Van der Elst, W., van Boxtel, M. P. J., van Breukelen, G. J. P., & Jolles, J. (2005). Rey’s Verbal Learning Test: Normative data for 1855 healthy participants aged 24–81 years. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 11(3), 290–302.
Bair, J. L., Patrick, S. D., Noyes, E. T., et al. (2023). Semantic clustering on common list-learning tasks: A systematic review of the state of the literature. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 45(7), 652–692.
Eichenbaum, H. (2017). Prefrontal–hippocampal interactions in episodic memory. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 18(9), 547–558.
Baddeley, A. (2000). The episodic buffer: A new component of working memory? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(11), 417–423.
Beier, M., Hughes, A. J., Williams, M. W., & Gromisch, E. S. (2019). Brief and cost-effective tool for assessing verbal learning in multiple sclerosis. Journal of the Neurological Sciences, 396, 165–169.