Visual construction and memory tasks are routinely used in neuropsychological assessment, but their subjective scoring criteria can negatively affect the reliability of these instruments. The current study examined the standard scoring criteria for the Figure Copy and Recall subtests of the RBANS and compared them to a modified set of scoring criteria in two samples. In both a large community dwelling sample of older adults and in a mixed clinical sample, the original scoring criteria consistently led to lower scores than the modified criteria. Inter-rater reliability was high for the modified scoring criteria, and no age effects were found with the modified scoring criteria. In both samples, the modified scoring criteria led to Figure Copy scores that more closely approximated other performances on the RBANS compared to the standard criteria, whereas both scoring systems led to plausible Figure Recall scores. Despite these results, the present study cannot identify one scoring criterion as the "better," but only points out the significant differences between them. Such differences can have important clinical implications, and practitioners and researchers who utilize the RBANS with patient samples should be cautious when interpreting low scores on Figure Copy and Recall if the standard criteria are used.