Search

Objective Nonliteral language comprehension disorders in individuals with acquired brain injuries (ABI) are frequently reported in the literature but rarely assessed in clinical settings. A major reason is the lack of tools available to clinicians. Therefore, the present study aimed to further promote the pragmatic assessment routine by creating a new nonliteral language comprehension tool for ABI individuals: the IRRI test. This tool is intended to be standardized and capable of directing clinicians to cognitive deficits underlying a poor understanding of nonliteral language—context processing, executive functions, and theory of mind. Method Three studies were conducted. The first study aimed at constructing the two IRRI test tasks: the irony and indirect requests comprehension tasks. These tasks integrate the cognitive processes within them. The second study aimed at analyzing the tasks’ psychometric qualities in a sample of 33 ABI participants and 33 healthy participants (HC). Preliminary normative data obtained from 102 healthy French-speaking subjects were collected in the third study. Results Significant differences in the IRRI test’s performances were observed between the ABI and HC individuals. The indirect requests task demonstrated robust convergent validity and good sensibility to discriminate altered participants among ABI participants. Both IRRI test’s tasks also showed excellent test–retest and inter-rater reliability. The preliminary norms were stratified according to the conditions of interest in relation to the cognitive mechanisms underlying the understanding of nonliteral language. Conclusions The IRRI test is a promising new standardized test of nonliteral language comprehension, which contributes to identifying cognitive-pragmatic profiles to guide therapy.

Objective This study examined the degree to which verbal and visuospatial memory abilities influence performance validity test (PVT) performance in a mixed clinical pediatric sample. Method Data from 252 consecutive clinical pediatric cases (Mage=11.23 years, SD=4.02; 61.9% male) seen for outpatient neuropsychological assessment were collected. Measures of learning and memory (e.g., The California Verbal Learning Test-Children’s Version; Child and Adolescent Memory Profile [ChAMP]), performance validity (Test of Memory Malingering Trial 1 [TOMM T1]; Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Fifth Edition [WISC-V] or Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition Digit Span indices; ChAMP Overall Validity Index), and intellectual abilities (e.g., WISC-V) were included. Results Learning/memory abilities were not significantly correlated with TOMM T1 and accounted for relatively little variance in overall TOMM T1 performance (i.e., ≤6%). Conversely, ChAMP Validity Index scores were significantly correlated with verbal and visual learning/memory abilities, and learning/memory accounted for significant variance in PVT performance (12%–26%). Verbal learning/memory performance accounted for 5%–16% of the variance across the Digit Span PVTs. No significant differences in TOMM T1 and Digit Span PVT scores emerged between verbal/visual learning/memory impairment groups. ChAMP validity scores were lower for the visual learning/memory impairment group relative to the nonimpaired group. Conclusions Findings highlight the utility of including PVTs as standard practice for pediatric populations, particularly when memory is a concern. Consistent with the adult literature, TOMM T1 outperformed other PVTs in its utility even among the diverse clinical sample with/without learning/memory impairment. In contrast, use of Digit Span indices appear to be best suited in the presence of visuospatial (but not verbal) learning/memory concerns. Finally, the ChAMP’s embedded validity measure was most strongly impacted by learning/memory performance.

Objective The current study aimed to validate the Performance Validity Test Coin in Hand-Extended Version (CIH-EV) in groups of healthy older adults and older adults with dementia. Method Using an analog simulation paradigm, the healthy control group and the clinical group were instructed to perform to the best of their ability, whereas the feigning older adults were instructed to simulate a memory deficit to obtain allowance, financial aid, or early retirement. Results Results showed that the control and clinical groups performed more optimally than the feigning group, although the clinical group had superior response times. The CIH-EV was insensitive to sociodemographic variables and neurocognitive functioning in all groups, demonstrated good convergent validity with other performance validity measures, and showed a reduced rate of false positives. Conclusions This study corroborates the CIH-EV’s effectiveness in detecting the simulation of cognitive deficits in healthy older adults and older adults with dementia.

Objective To assess the validity of embedded measures of performance validity, the effort index (EI) and effort scale (ES) of the repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status (RBANS), in Veterans with seizures; to compare the frequency of failure on the test of memory malingering (TOMM) in patients with epileptic versus psychogenic nonepileptic seizures (PNES). Methods Seizure diagnosis was established for 309 participants in epilepsy monitoring units using conventional diagnostic criteria who completed both the TOMM and RBANS. The criterion for performance invalidity was failure on any trial of the TOMM. We examined multiple EI and ES cutoffs to establish optimal sensitivity and specificity. Results An RBANS EI cutoff score of greater than three was optimal with specificity of .98, sensitivity of.19, and positive Likelihood Ratio of 10 but was not useful when below this cutoff. Confidence intervals indicate the need for confirmation of a failed EI with another performance validity test (PVT). No ES cutoff had sufficient specificity for clinical use. Invalid TOMM performance but not invalid RBANS performance was significantly more common in persons with PNES than in persons with epileptic seizures. Conclusions In Veterans undergoing seizure monitoring, the RBANS EI was useful as a screen when positive that requires confirmation with another PVT. The RBANS ES was not useful. Invalid performance on the TOMM was more common in persons with PNES than in persons with epileptic seizures.

Objective This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) in pediatric examinees. It adheres to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Method A systematic literature search was conducted using PsycINFO and PubMed, reviewing articles from January 1997 to July 2019. Books providing data on pediatric validity testing were also reviewed for references to relevant articles. Eligibility criteria included publication in a peer-reviewed journal, utilizing a pediatric sample, providing sufficient data to calculate specificity and/or sensitivity, and providing a means for evaluating validity status external to the TOMM. After selection criteria were applied, 9 articles remained for meta-analysis. Samples included clinical patients and healthy children recruited for research purposes; ages ranged from 5 to 18. Fixed and random effects models were used to calculate classification accuracy statistics. Results Traditional adult-derived cutoffs for Trial 2 and Retention were highly specific (0.96–0.99) in pediatric examinees for both clinical and research samples. Sensitivity was relatively strong (0.68–0.70), although only two studies reported sensitivity rates. A supplemental review of the literature corroborated these findings, revealing that traditional adult-based TOMM cutoffs are supported in most pediatric settings. However, limited research exists on the impact of very young age, extremely low cognitive functioning, and varying clinical diagnoses. Conclusions The TOMM, at traditional adult cutoffs, has strong specificity as a performance validity test in pediatric neuropsychological evaluations. This meta-analysis found that specificity values in children are comparable to those of adults. Areas for further research are discussed.

Objective Object location learning and memory may be important for older adults to successfully complete some everyday activities. Method This cross-sectional, correlational study investigated the ecological relevance of the Location Learning Test-Revised (LLT-R) in 195 community-dwelling, older adults in Western Australia. The LLT-R assesses object location learning and memory for everyday objects over five learning trials and after a 30-min delay. Knowledgeable informants provided structured ratings of participants’ activities of daily living and memory symptoms. Results A greater number of errors on LLT-R total learning trials were associated with mild problems in activities of daily living (particularly in travel and household domains), but not with memory symptoms. The LLT-R’s association with activities of daily living was accompanied by a small-to-medium effect size and was not better explained by demographics, global cognitive functioning, mood, or chronic medical conditions. Conclusions Findings provide some support for the ecological relevance of the LLT-R among older community-dwelling adults and suggest that object location learning may play a role in some everyday functioning problems that accompany typical aging.

Objective A reduction in lexical access is observed in normal aging and a few studies also showed that this ability is affected in individuals with subjective cognitive decline. Lexical access is also affected very early in mild cognitive impairment as well as in major neurocognitive disorders. The detection of word-finding difficulties in the earliest stages of pathological aging is particularly difficult because symptoms are often subtle or mild. Therefore, mild anomia is underdiagnosed, mainly due to the lack of sensitivity of naming tests. In this article, we present the TDQ-30, a new picture-naming test designed to detect mild word-finding deficits in adults and elderly people. Method The article comprises three studies aiming at the development of the test (Study 1), the establishment of its validity and reliability (Study 2), and finally, the production of normative data for French-speaking adults and elderly people from Quebec (Study 3). Results The results showed that the TDQ-30 has good convergent validity. Also, the TDQ-30 distinguished the performance of healthy controls from those of participants with mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer’s disease, and post-stroke aphasia. This suggests good discriminant validity. Finally, this study provides normative data computed from a study sample composed of 227 participants aged 50 years and over. Conclusions The TDQ-30 has the potential to become a valuable picture-naming test for the diagnosis of mild anomia associated with pathological aging.

Objective The purpose of this study was to evaluate the presence of demographic, injury and neuropsychological correlates of distinct patterns of performance validity test and symptom validity test results in persons with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Method One hundred and seventy-eight persons with mTBI completed the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM; performance validity) and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF; symptom validity) within 1–12 months postinjury. Four groups were compared: (a) pass both TOMM and MMPI-2-RF validity criteria, (b) pass TOMM and fail MMPI-2-RF, (c) fail TOMM and pass MMPI-2-RF, and (d) fail both TOMM and MMPI-2-RF. Results Compared to Group a, participants in combined Groups b–d were more than twice as likely to be engaged in financial compensation-seeking and about four times less likely to have neuroimaging evidence of an intracranial lesion. The average performance of Group d on an independent test of verbal learning was more than 1.5 standard deviations below that of Group a. Participants in Group b were more likely to have intracranial lesions on neuroimaging than participants in Group c. Conclusion Performance and symptom validity tests provide complementary and non-redundant information in persons with mTBI. Whereas financial compensation-seeking is associated with increased risk of failure of either PVT or SVT, or both, the presence of intracranial findings on neuroimaging is associated with decreased risk of such.

Background Performance Validity Testing (PVT) decision-making rules may be indeterminate in patients with neurological disease in which PVT characteristics have not been adequately studied. We report a patient with multiple sclerosis (MS) who failed computerized PVT testing but had normal memory scores with a neuropsychological profile consistent with expected MS disease-related weaknesses. Method Neuropsychological testing was conducted on two occasions in a middle-aged woman with an established MS diagnosis to address concerns of possible memory decline. Testing was discontinued after PVT scores below recommended cut-points were obtained during the first evaluation. During the second assessment, subthreshold PVT scores on a different computerized PVT were obtained, but unlike the first assessment, the entire neuropsychological protocol was administered. Results Despite subthreshold computerized PVT scores, normal learning and memory performance was obtained providing objective data to answer the referral question. Other neuropsychological findings included decreased processing speed, poor working memory, and poor executive function consistent with her MS diagnosis. Embedded PVT scores were normal. Conclusions We speculate that poor computerized PVT scores resulted from the disease-related features of MS, although we also discuss approaches to reconcile apparently contradictory PVT versus neuropsychological results if the contributions of disease-related variables on PVTs scores are discounted. This case demonstrates the value of completing the assessment protocol despite obtaining PVT scores below publisher recommended cutoffs in clinical evaluations. If subthreshold PVT scores are considered evidence of performance invalidity, it is still necessary to have an approach for interpreting seemingly credible neuropsychological test results rather than simply dismissing them as invalid.

Objective The feasibility and reliability of neuropsychological assessment at a distance have been demonstrated, but the validity of this testing medium has not been adequately demonstrated. The purpose of this study was to determine the ability of video teleconferencing administration of neuropsychological measures (teleneuropsychology) in discriminating cognitively impaired from non-impaired groups of older adults. It was predicted that measures administered via video teleconference would distinguish groups and that the magnitude of differences between impaired and non-impaired groups would be similar to group differences achieved in traditional administration. Methods The sample consisted of 197 older subjects, separated into two groups, with and without cognitive impairment. The cognitive impairment group included 78 individuals with clinical diagnoses of mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer’s disease. All participants completed counterbalanced neuropsychological testing using alternate test forms in both a teleneuropsychology and a traditional face-to-face (FTF) administration condition. Tests were selected based upon their common use in dementia evaluations, brevity, and assessment of multiple cognitive domains. Results from FTF and teleneuropsychology test conditions were compared using individual repeated measures ANCOVA, controlling for age, education, gender, and depression scores. Results All ANCOVA models revealed significant main effects of group and a non-significant interaction between group and administration condition. All ANCOVA models revealed non-significant main effects for administration condition, except category fluency. Conclusions Results derived from teleneuropsychologically administered tests can distinguish between cognitively impaired and non-impaired individuals similar to traditional FTF assessment. This adds to the growing teleneuropsychology literature by supporting the validity of remote assessments in aging populations.

Objective The Forced Choice Recognition (FCR) trial of the California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition (CVLT-II) was designed to serve as a performance validity test (PVT). The present study was designed to compare the classification accuracy of a more liberal alternative (≤15) to the de facto FCR cutoff (≤14). Method The classification accuracy of the two cutoffs was computed in reference to psychometrically defined invalid performance, across various criterion measures, in a sample of 104 adults with TBI clinically referred for neuropsychological assessment. Results The FCR was highly predictive (AUC: .71-.83) of Pass/Fail status on reference PVTs, but unrelated to performance on measures known to be sensitive to TBI. On average, FCR ≤15 correctly identified an additional 6% of invalid response sets compared to FCR ≤14, while maintaining .92 specificity. Patients who failed the FCR reported higher levels of emotional distress. Conclusions Results suggest that even a single error on the FCR is a reliable indicator of invalid responding. Further research is needed to investigate the clinical significance of the relationship between failing the FCR and level of self-reported psychiatric symptoms.

Objective Classification accuracy of embedded performance validity tests (PVTs) is unknown in cases involving bilingual examinees evaluated in English. This study examined false positive rates in bilingual individuals in an older adult sample. Method The project involved secondary analysis of a deidentified dataset (N = 22,688) from the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC). Exclusion criteria were diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI; n = 5160) or dementia (n = 5550). The initial sample included 11,513 participants grouped as cognitively normal (89.6%) or impaired but not MCI. A subset of 275 participants was identified with a primary language other than English who were evaluated in English. Propensity score matching was conducted by diagnostic group to match bilingual to monolingual participants on age, education, gender, and MMSE score. The final sample included 450 and 100 participants in normal and impaired groups, respectively. Failure rates on five embedded PVTs in the NACC cognitive test battery were examined by language and by diagnosis. Results Age, education, gender, and MMSE score were not significantly different by language in either diagnostic group. In the normal group, 4.9% of bilingual and 2.2% of monolingual participants failed two or more PVTs (n.s.). In the impaired group, 12% of bilingual and 6% of monolingual participants failed two or more PVTs (n.s.). Conclusions PVT failure rates were not significantly different between bilingual participants evaluated in English and monolingual participants in either diagnostic group. Failure rates, however, increased slightly above a common false positive threshold of 10% in bilingual participants in the impaired group.

Objective Embedded performance validity tests (PVTs) may show increased false positive rates in racially diverse examinees. This study examined false positive rates by race in an older adult sample. Method The project involved secondary analysis of a deidentified dataset (N = 22,688) from the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC). Participants were included if their identified race was African American or white. Exclusion criteria included diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment (MCI; n = 5160) or dementia (n = 5550). The initial sample included 11,114 participants grouped as cognitively normal (89.9%) or impaired but not MCI of whom 16.4% identified as African American. Propensity score matching was conducted by diagnostic group to match African American and white participants on age, education, gender, and MMSE score. The final sample included 3024 and 482 participants in normal and impaired groups, respectively, with 50% of participants identifying as African American in each group. Failure rates on five embedded PVTs in the NACC cognitive test battery were examined by race and by diagnosis. Results Age, education, gender, and MMSE score were not significantly different by race in either diagnostic group. In the normal group, 4.7% of African American and 1.9% of white participants failed two or more PVTs (p Conclusions PVT failure rates were significantly higher among African American participants in the normal group but not in the impaired group. Failure rates remained below a common false positive threshold of 10%.

Objective Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) can be easily presented in a non-credible manner, through non-credible report of ADHD symptoms and/or by non-credible performance on neuropsychological tests. While most studies have focused on detection of non-credible performance using performance validity tests, there are few studies examining the ability to detect non-credible report of ADHD symptoms. We provide further validation data for a recently developed measure of non-credible ADHD symptom report, the Conner's Adult ADHD Rating Scales (CAARS) Infrequency Index (CII). Method Using archival data from 86 adults referred for concerns about ADHD, we examined the accuracy of the CII in detecting extreme scores on the CAARS and invalid reporting on validity indices of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Format (MMPI-2-RF). We also examined the accuracy of the CII in detecting non-credible performance on standalone and embedded performance validity tests. Results The CII was 52% sensitive to extreme scores on CAARS DSM symptom subscales (with 97% specificity) and 20%-36% sensitive to invalid responding on MMPI-2-RF validity scales (with near 90% specificity), providing further evidence for the interpretation of the CII as an indicator of non-credible ADHD symptom report. However, the CII detected only 18% of individuals who failed a standalone performance validity test (Word Memory Test), with 87.8% specificity, and was not accurate in detecting non-credible performance using embedded digit span cutoffs. Conclusions Future studies should continue to examine how best to assess for non-credible symptom report in ADHD referrals.

This investigation adds to the burgeoning body of research concerned with discriminating performance and symptom validity tests (SVTs) through examination of their differential relationships with cognitive performance and symptom self-report measures. To the authors' current knowledge, prior studies have not assessed differences between participants who fail either a performance validity test (PVT) or an SVT but not both. As part of their neuropsychological evaluations at four Veterans Affairs medical centers across the United States, participants were administered a fixed, standardized battery that consisted of performance validity, symptom validity, cognitive performance, and symptom self-report measures. Compared with participants who failed a PVT and an SVT, participants who passed both and participants who only passed a PVT demonstrated better cognitive performance and self-reported fewer symptoms. Results support differential clinical utility of performance validity and SVTs when assessing cognitive performance and symptom self-report.

Few studies have examined base rates of suboptimal effort among healthy, undergraduate students recruited for neuropsychological research. An and colleagues (2012, Conducting research with non-clinical healthy undergraduates: Does effort play a role in neuropsychological test performance? Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 27, 849-857) reported high rates of performance invalidity (30.8%-55.6%), calling into question the validity of findings generated from samples of college students. In contrast, subsequent studies have reported much lower base rates ranging from 2.6% to 12%. The present study replicated and extended previous work by examining the performance of 108 healthy undergraduates on the Dot Counting Test, Victoria Symptom Validity Test, Word Memory Test, and a brief battery of neuropsychological measures. During initial testing, 8.3% of the sample scored below cutoffs on at least one Performance Validity Test, while 3.7% were classified as invalid at Time 2 (M interval = 34.4 days). The present findings add to a growing number of studies that suggest performance invalidity base rates in samples of non-clinical, healthy college students are much lower than An and colleagues initial findings. Although suboptimal effort is much less problematic than suggested by An and colleagues, recent reports as high as 12% indicate including measures of effort may be of value when using college students as participants. Methodological issues and recommendations for future research are presented.

Objective The present study aimed to investigate demographic differences in performance validity test (PVT) failure in a Veteran sample. Method Data were extracted retrospectively from neuropsychological evaluations at a southeastern Veterans Affairs (VA) Medical Center. Only male Veterans who were either European American/White (EA) or African American/Black (AA), and for whom complete data were available were included in the study (N = 1271). We investigated whether performance on two frequently used PVTs, the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) and the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT), significantly differed by age, education, race, and VA service connection using separate logistic regressions. Results Veterans with younger age, less education, and VA service-connected disability were significantly more likely to fail both PVTs. Race was not a significant predictor of MSVT failure, but AA patients were significantly more likely than EA patients to fail the TOMM. For all significant demographic predictors in the models, effects were small. In a subsample of patients who were given both PVTs (n = 467), the pattern of differences based on race remained; 46% of AA patients and 36% of EA patients failed the TOMM, while 44% of AA patients and 43% of EA patients failed the MSVT. Conclusions Performance on the TOMM and MSVT systematically differed based on demographics. Results were not consistent across PVTs, with performance on the TOMM differing between EA and AA patients, but performance on the MSVT did not differ by race. These results suggest that demographic factors may play a small but measurable role in performance on specific PVTs.

Objective Performance validity tests (PVTs) are widely used in neuropsychological evaluations but are often lengthy and time-consuming. Therefore, development of more efficient PVTs is critical. The current study evaluated the utility of the first 10 items of the Warrington Recognition Memory Test (RMT) as an indicator of performance validity. Methods This study utilized archival data from 134 veterans presenting for a clinical neuropsychological evaluation at a southeastern Veterans Affairs hospital. Patients were deemed “credible” if they failed less than two unrelated PVT measures, had a FSIQ > 70, and did not carry a diagnosis of dementia. This resulted in 103 patients in the credible group [Mage = 49.76(11.67); Meducation = 14.09(2.88); 77.67% Male]. The 31 patients in the non-credible group met Slick et al. (1999) criteria[Mage = 45.13(11.18); Meducation = 12.77(2.53); 87.10% Male]. Frequency counts were run to determine sensitivity and specificity values at established cut-offs and to create new cut-offs for the first 10 items. Results Using established cut-off scores, the RMT total score had adequate specificity (91%) with a corresponding sensitivity of 84%, and the RMT time score had adequate specificity (93%) with a corresponding sensitivity of 34%. When examining the first 10 items on the RMT, a score of Conclusions The established cutoffs for the RMT performed well in this patient sample. Additionally, using a cutoff score of ≤ 8 on the first 10 items of the RMT may be a useful indicator of probable failure on the RMT, significantly reducing test administration time.

Objective The Boston Naming Test (BNT) has recently been proposed as an embedded performance validity test (PVT) with high specificity/low sensitivity; however, this has not been replicated. This study therefore aimed to cross-validate findings in a mixed clinical neuropsychiatric sample. Method This cross-sectional study of 136 primary monolingual English-speaking patients who completed the BNT during outpatient evaluation was 57% female/43% male, 38% Caucasian, 39% African American, 16% Hispanic, and 6% Asian with mean age of 47.7 years (SD = 16.6) and mean education of 14.0 years (SD = 2.7). In total, 109/136 (80%) were classified as valid and 27/136 (20%) as invalid based on 4 independent criterion PVTs. Results Respective mean BNT raw/T-scores were 49.5 (SD = 9.2)/45.3 (SD = 10.9) for the valid group and 45.8 (SD = 8.2)/41.1 (SD = 7.8) for the invalid group. Analyses of variance fell just above significance for both BNT raw F(1, 134) = 3.75, p = .05 and T-scores F(1, 134) = 3.55, p = .06. Receiver operator characteristic curve analysis for the raw score was significant, with an area under the curve (AUC) of .67 (p Conclusions Overall, results showed that the BNT cannot psychometrically distinguish valid versus invalid performance and therefore has questionable utility as a PVT in a mixed clinical setting. Findings contribute to a growing literature base cautioning against the indiscriminate use of measures of actual cognitive ability as validity indicators, particularly in populations with cognitive impairment.

Objective Eglit and colleagues (2019) found that the sum of the four age-corrected scaled scores from the Color Word Interference Test (CWIT) of the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS) could act as a useful embedded performance validity test (PVT). As such, we attempted to cross-validate their findings. Method Patients included 312 individuals who completed neuropsychological evaluations. Individuals were excluded if they were not administered CWIT, were not administered at least 4 criterion PVTs, had diagnoses of dementia or intellectual disability, or had indeterminate validity results (i.e., failure of one PVT). Valid performers (n = 231) were those who passed all criterion PVTs while invalid performers (n = 81) failed two or more criterion PVTs. A receiver operating characteristic curve was conducted for the CWIT embedded PVT. Results Area under the curve (AUC) was .804. At a cutoff of Conclusions These results cross-validate Eglit et al.’s findings, indicating that the sum of age-corrected scaled scores across the four CWIT trials can effectively serve as an embedded PVT. A more liberal cutoff was able to be applied in our sample but, even at conservative cutoffs documented in Eglit et al., sensitivity rates were adequate enough to warrant use of the index as an embedded PVT.

Objective Outside of Reliable Digit Span (RDS), there has been minimal research examining the utility of Digit Span (DS) score combinations from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—4th Edition (WAIS-IV) as possible performance validity tests (PVTs). We sought to determine if other DS scores/score combinations might work more effectively than RDS as a PVT. Method Patients included 318 individuals who completed neuropsychological evaluations. Individuals were excluded if they were not administered DS; were not administered at least 4 criterion PVTs; had diagnoses of dementia, intellectual disability, or left hemisphere cerebrovascular accident; or had indeterminate validity results (i.e., failure of one PVT). Valid performers (n = 248) were those who passed all criterion PVTs while invalid performers (n = 70) failed two or more criterion PVTs. Receiver operating characteristic curves were conducted for multiple DS indices. Results Area under the curve (AUC) was highest for the DS index that combined raw scores from all three trials (Digit Span Raw; AUC = .821). Likewise, when examining cutoffs that maintained 90% specificity for each DS index, a Digit Span Raw cutoff of Conclusions Results suggest that the most effective embedded DS index might be a new one, which we term Digit Span Raw. Cross-validation of these findings could provide support for using this index instead of the more commonly examined RDS.

The ability of both the non-credible score of the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT NC) and the recognition score of the RAVLT (RAVLT Recog) to predict credible versus non-credible neuropsychological test performance was examined. Credible versus non-credible group membership was determined according to diagnostic criteria with consideration of performance on two stand-alone performance validity tests. Findings from this retrospective data analysis of outpatients seen for neuropsychological testing within a Veterans Affairs Medical Center (N = 175) showed that RAVLT Recog demonstrated better classification accuracy than RAVLT NC in predicting credible versus non-credible neuropsychological test performance. Specifically, an RAVLT Recog cutoff of ≤9 resulted in reasonable sensitivity (48%) and acceptable specificity (91%) in predicting non-credible neuropsychological test performance. Implications for clinical practice are discussed. Note: The views contained here within are those of the authors and not representative of the institutions with which they are associated.

Performance validity test (PVT) error rates using Monte Carlo simulation reported by Berthelson and colleagues (in False positive diagnosis of malingering due to the use of multiple effort tests. Brain Injury, 27, 909-916, 2013) were compared with PVT and symptom validity test (SVT) failure rates in two nonmalingering clinical samples. At a per-test false-positive rate of 10%, Monte Carlo simulation overestimated error rates for: (i) failure of ≥2 out of 5 PVTs/SVT for Larrabee (in Detection of malingering using atypical performance patterns on standard neuropsychological tests. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 17, 410-425, 2003) and ACS (Pearson, Advanced clinical solutions for use with WAIS-IV and WMS-IV. San Antonio: Pearson Education, 2009) and (ii) failure of ≥2 out of 7 PVTs/SVT for Larrabee (Detection of malingering using atypical performance patterns on standard neuropsychological tests. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 17, 410-425, 2003; Malingering scales for the Continuous Recognition Memory Test and Continuous Visual Memory Test. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23, 167-180, 2009 combined). Monte Carlo overestimation is likely because PVT performances are atypical in pattern or degree for what occurs in actual neurologic, psychiatric, or developmental disorders. Consequently, PVT scores form skewed distributions with performance at ceiling and restricted range, rather than forming a standard normal distribution with mean of 0 and standard deviation of 1.0. These results support the practice of using ≥2 PVT/SVT failures as representing probable invalid clinical presentation.

Objective Traditional performance validity tests (PVTs) often yield high false positive rates in dementia evaluations. The current study examined the frequency of extremely low scores (≤ 2 percentile) on WAIS-IV Digit Span Forward (DSF) in older adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) or dementia to evaluate its possible utility as a PVT in these populations. Method Archival data from outpatient neuropsychological evaluations were analyzed. Individuals who were not diagnosed with a neurocognitive disorder, had missing data, or were believed to be invalidly performing were excluded. Participants (n = 195; mean age = 72.8; mean education = 13.2 years) were classified according to their evaluation diagnosis of MCI (n = 72; mean RBANS Total Score = 86.8) or dementia. Dementia patients were further divided by MoCA score into groups of mild dementia (n = 90; MoCA≥15; mean RBANS Total Score = 71.0) or moderate dementia (n = 33; MoCA < 15; mean RBANS Total Score = 55.9). Frequencies of scaled scores were analyzed to calculate specificity values for each group. Results A WAIS-IV DSF scaled score of ≤4 (≤ 2 percentile) resulted in specificity values of 0.99 and 0.94 in MCI and mild dementia, respectively. Conversely, in moderate dementia, ≥0.90 specificity was achieved only when using a more conservative cutoff of ≤2. Conclusions Low DSF scaled scores occurred infrequently in MCI and mild dementia, indicating strong specificity and potential utility as a PVT in these populations. However, in moderate dementia, low DSF scores were more common, requiring use of a more stringent cutoff. Future research should examine DSF sensitivity to invalid performance, as well as DSF specificity according to specific etiologies of MCI and dementia.

Neuropsychological baseline testing is commonplace in the assessment of concussion; however, claims of "sandbagging" the baseline have led neuropsychologists to ask to what extent athletes can perform intentionally poorly on baseline testing without reaching threshold on the test validity indicators. Seventy-five undergraduate athletes were re-administered the ImPACT neurocognitive battery, which they had previously taken to establish baseline functioning, but were instructed to perform more poorly than their baseline without reaching threshold on the test validity indicators. Eight participants were able to successfully fake significantly lower scores without detection by validity indicators. Concussion history was not related to performance. Successful fakers did not perform significantly worse on the Reaction Time Composite and Three Letters Total Letters Correct, questioning the utility of these measures for detecting "sandbagging." Successful fakers reported using less purposeful faking strategies which naturally facilitated errors. The data suggest that "sandbagging" the baseline, even under conditions involving motivation, instruction, and experience with the test, is difficult to accomplish without being detected.

This joint position paper of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology and the National Academy of Neuropsychology sets forth our position on appropriate standards and conventions for computerized neuropsychological assessment devices (CNADs). In this paper, we first define CNADs and distinguish them from examiner-administered neuropsychological instruments. We then set forth position statements on eight key issues relevant to the development and use of CNADs in the healthcare setting. These statements address (a) device marketing and performance claims made by developers of CNADs; (b) issues involved in appropriate end-users for administration and interpretation of CNADs; (c) technical (hardware/software/firmware) issues; (d) privacy, data security, identity verification, and testing environment; (e) psychometric development issues, especially reliability, and validity; (f) cultural, experiential, and disability factors affecting examinee interaction with CNADs; (g) use of computerized testing and reporting services; and (h) the need for checks on response validity and effort in the CNAD environment. This paper is intended to provide guidance for test developers and users of CNADs that will promote accurate and appropriate use of computerized tests in a way that maximizes clinical utility and minimizes risks of misuse. The positions taken in this paper are put forth with an eye toward balancing the need to make validated CNADs accessible to otherwise underserved patients with the need to ensure that such tests are developed and utilized competently, appropriately, and with due concern for patient welfare and quality of care.

Evaluation of post-deployment conditions such as post-concussive syndrome (PCS) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) frequently relies upon brief, self-report checklists which are face valid and highly susceptible to potential symptom validity issues such as symptom exaggeration. We investigated the psychometric prope1rties of a 5-item measure of symptom exaggeration (mild brain injury atypical symptoms [mBIAS] scale) embedded in commonly used PCS and PTSD screening instruments in a sample of 403 patients seen in a brain injury clinic at a large military medical center. Exploratory factor analysis, examining measures of posttraumatic stress, post-concussive symptoms, and symptom over-reporting revealed a 6-factor model with the mBIAS scale items representing a unique factor. Analysis of psychometric properties demonstrated that a score of 8 on the mBIAS was optimal for the detection of symptom over-reporting (sensitivity = 0.94, specificity = 0.92) and appears to be the most favorable cut score for interpretive use. The findings provide a strong initial support for the use of the mBIAS in post-deployment populations.

The Children's Category Test (CCT) is a widely used measure of problem solving with adequate psychometric properties. Yet, Shriver and Vacc (n.d.) were fairly critical of the CCT in The Mental Measurement Yearbook and highlighted its limitations. Thus, to explore the clinical validity of the widely used CCT-Level 2 (CCT-2) version, results of that test were analyzed post hoc in a sample of 265 children with mixed etiology referred for neuropsychological testing at a private outpatient laboratory. Overall, the CCT-2 correctly classified 57.7% of the sample, with 72.2% accuracy in classifying the Neuropsychologically Normal Clinical Comparison group but only 54% for the Brain Injured group. Predictive power was further reduced when the Brain Injury group was subdivided. Predictive power fell to 27.2%, with the best predictions coming for the Mental Retardation (MR) group (58.3%) and the lowest for the Learning Disorder NOS group (2.5%). The current findings suggest that the CCT's clinical application should be used with caution.

Adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are frequently prescribed stimulant medication and eligible for accommodations at work or school that serve as potent incentives to feign ADHD symptoms. The current investigation examined the predictive validity of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) validity scales in detecting and accurately classifying individuals attempting to feign ADHD. An archival ADHD clinical group (n = 34), normal control group (n = 37), and group instructed to feign ADHD symptoms (n = 32) completed the MMPI-2 and ADHD Current and Childhood Symptoms Scales. Behavior rating scales were unable to differentiate the clinical group from the simulated malingering group. Logistic regressions revealed that Infrequency-Psychopathology scale best detected response bias, followed by Infrequency scale, Back-Infrequency scale, Response Bias Scale (RBS), Henry-Heilbronner Index scale (HHI), and Fake Bad Scale (FBS). Results also indicate that recommended cutoffs for HHI, RBS, and FBS display inadequate sensitivity and specificity. Nevertheless, the MMPI-2 offers a number of validity indices that may assist in detecting individuals attempting to feign ADHD.

Retrospective review of a consecutive patient series (n = 115) referred for neuropsychological examinations for traumatic brain injury was undertaken to evaluate an embedded measure of symptom validity for the Continuous Visual Memory Test (CVMT). Performance on the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) and Word Memory Test (WMT) was used for classification. Individuals who failed the TOMM or WMT were almost six times more likely to fail the CVMT validity criteria than those who passed the TOMM or WMT. The addition of compensation seeking increased this odds ratio to 9.80. The area under the curve for the latter classification was 0.74. Maximum likelihood ratio optimization of the CVMT validity test cutoff score indicated sensitivity of 0.25 and specificity of 0.99 at a revised cutoff of

A computer-administered version of the Word Memory Test (WMT) was compared with the orally administered version in two clinical samples to assess equivalency of the two versions. The two samples included inpatients at an epilepsy center (n = 67) and forensic and clinical referrals to a private practice (n = 58). A randomized procedure was used to assign participants to either version of the WMT. Only the results of the WMT primary effort measures were analyzed. Between-group comparisons of the WMT effort measures were conducted using Mann-Whitney nonparametric analysis. No significant differences were found between versions for several diagnostic subgroups. The data generally support equivalency of the orally administered version and the computerized version of the WMT effort measures in a mixed outpatient sample.

The Post-concussive Symptom Questionnaire (PCSQ) and its short forms were evaluated to determine their utility in measuring symptom validity as brief self-report measures in 112 individuals referred for a neuropsychological evaluation. First, the relationships between the PCSQ forms and measures of cognitive performance (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth Edition Full-Scale IQ, California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition Trials 1-5 Total T-score, Trails B, FAS), general distress (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory [MMPI]-2 M8), and self-report symptom validity (MMPI-2 FBS Symptom Validity Scale [FBS] and Response Bias Scale [RBS]) were investigated to determine construct validity. Measures of self-report symptom validity explained the greatest amount of variance. Second, receiver operating characteristics curve analyses were conducted to determine the predictive value of the PCSQ forms in detecting over reporting on the FBS and the RBS in addition to establishing optimal cutoff scores. On the basis of the proposed cutoff scores, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive power, negative predictive power, and hit rates were calculated.

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) often results in long-term negative effects in attention, memory, perception, language, and executive functioning. Children and adolescents are the most vulnerable as TBIs are the leading cause of death and disability for this age group. Despite these high proportions and detrimental effects, few studies have utilized a developmentally appropriate, standardized measure to assess executive functioning within a pediatric TBI population. The current study compared children and adolescents who had sustained a TBI with a non-injured, matched control group on executive functioning using the Comprehensive Trail Making Test (CTMT). Data analyses revealed significant differences between groups on the CTMT Composite Index, each individual trail, and a combination of trails but with no within-group differences. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed that a single-factor model was a better fit for the present sample of TBI participants than the two-factor model evident within the CTMT standardization sample.

Failure on effort tests usually implies insufficient effort to produce valid cognitive test scores. However, many people with very severe cognitive impairment, such as dementia patients, will produce failing scores on nearly all effort tests. In such patients, effort tests have low specificity. The Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT) and the nonverbal MSVT (NV-MSVT) were designed to address this problem. They produce profiles of scores across multiple subtests to facilitate discrimination between low scores from people trying to feign impairment and low scores attributable to severe impairment. To study the specificity of the MSVT and NV-MSVT in people with very severe memory impairment, we tested (a) 10 institutionalized patients with dementia and (b) 10 volunteers who were asked to simulate memory impairment. It was hypothesized that the "possible dementia profile" would be found significantly more often in the dementia patients than in the simulators. The MSVT and the NV-MSVT both displayed 100% specificity in the dementia group, while retaining a combined sensitivity of 80% to suboptimal effort in the simulator group.

Coin-rotation task (CRT), a measure of rapid, coordinated finger movements, was devised as a convenient, easily administered bedside test of motor dexterity; however, very little psychometric data exist regarding this task. The current project was undertaken to (a) provide preliminary normative data, (b) examine the convergent and discriminant validity of the task when compared with other standardized motor measures, and (c) examine the diagnostic accuracy of the CRT. The sample of 86 male participants included 60 controls and 26 patients with unilateral lesions of the left (n = 13) and right (n = 13) hemispheres. The CRT was not significantly correlated with age or education; non-adjusted left- and right-hand normative data are provided. The CRT demonstrated good convergent and divergent validity when compared with other standardized motor measures. The CRT was successful in differentiating control and brain damaged groups with mild motor impairment, and demonstrated an overall classification rate of 84.9%. Levels of sensitivity and specificity of the CRT were comparable with or better than other standardized tests of manual dexterity. The CRT offers a valid, quick, and convenient bedside measure of subtle motor impairment.

The clinical utility of the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT) for soldiers returning from service in Operation Iraqi Freedom or Operation Enduring Freedom was preliminarily investigated through retrospective chart review. Results showed that 17%, or 4 of 23, Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom patients at a Polytrauma Network Site (Level 2), performed below cut-offs on the MSVT. On "easy" subtests of the MSVT, the group of individuals who failed the MSVT performed significantly worse than the group of individuals who passed. However, there were no significant group differences on the "hard" subtests of the MSVT. When the profiles of individuals who failed the MSVT were examined, none of them met the criteria for the Dementia Profile. These preliminary findings and additional test data supported the conclusion that participants who failed the MSVT were exhibiting diminished symptom validity, suggesting that the specificity of the MSVT was 100%.

Previous studies have typically focused on the ability of cognitive symptom validity tests to identify cognitive symptom exaggeration in the context of head injury or memory loss. Few published studies have examined the detection of simulated attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) or reading disorder (RD). The present study examined the accuracy of symptom validity measures in the detection of simulated ADHD and RD. Results indicated that several commonly used symptom validity measures show good validity for detecting simulated ADHD and RD. Total Validity Indicator Profile (VIP) scores and hard item accuracy score from the Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT) were the most accurate at distinguishing simulation of ADHD and RD from adequate effort. Percentages of control participants and participants in simulation conditions scoring below a specified cut score are provided to give clinicians an estimate of the simulator (true) positive and control (false) positive rates.

This study examined the construct validity of the Groton Maze Learning Test (GMLT) in assessing processing speed, working memory, and aspects of executive function in healthy adults. Performance on GMLT outcome measures was compared to performance on tests of psychomotor speed, working memory, and learning from the CogState computerized cognitive test battery (CGS; http://www.cogstate.com/). The factor structure of the GMLT was evaluated using exploratory factor analysis. The stability of this factor structure was examined in a large sample of patients undergoing parathyroidectomy or thyroidectomy. Results of this study suggest that the GMLT measures of spatial learning efficiency and error monitoring correlate with CogState measures of attention, working memory, and learning. Exploratory factor analysis yielded a two-factor solution of error monitoring and learning efficiency, which was stable across repeated assessments.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the psychometric properties of the Test of Everyday Attention for Children (TEA-Ch) in the context of a Chinese setting. METHODS: Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to examine the construct validity of the Chinese version of the TEA-Ch among a group of 232 children without attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Test–retest reliability was tested on a random sub-sample of 20 children at a 4-week interval. Clinical discrimination was also examined by comparing children with and without ADHD (22 in each group) on the performances of the TEA-Ch. RESULTS: The current Chinese sample demonstrated a three-factor solution for attentional performance among children without ADHD, namely selective attention, executive control/switch, and sustained attention (χ 2 (24) = 34.56; RMSEA = .044; p = .075). Moreover, the whole test demonstrated acceptable test–retest reliability at a 4-week interval among a small sub-sample. Children with ADHD performed significantly more poorly than healthy controls in most of the subtests of the TEA-Ch. CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study demonstrate that the test items remain useful in China, a culture very different from that in which the test originated. Finally, the TEA-Ch also presents several advantages when compared to other conventional objective measures of attention. © 2008 National Academy of Neuropsychology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The classification accuracy of the Portland digit recognition test (PDRT) in detecting cognitive malingering was studied in patients claiming cognitive deficits due to exposure to environmental or industrial toxins. Twenty-nine patients alleging toxic exposure and who met Slick et al. [Slick, D. J., Sherman, E. M. S., & Iverson, G. L. (1999). Diagnostic criteria for malingering neurocognitive dysfunction: Proposed standards for clinical practice and research. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 13, 545-561] criteria for malingered neurocognitive dysfunction were compared to 14 toxic exposure patients negative for evidence of malingering. The published cutoffs were associated with a false positive error rate of 0% and sensitivity of more than 50%. When criterion for a PDRT failure was a positive PDRT finding on more than one section, the FP rate remained 0% while sensitivity improved to about 70%. The results indicate that a failed PDRT is an indication of malingering and not the neurological effect of a toxic substance or some other clinical phenomenon. The PDRT can be used with confidence as an indicator of negative response bias in cases of alleged exposure to neurotoxic substances.

The current study examined the psychometric properties and sensitivity to brain dysfunction of a popular test of abstraction and problem solving ability, the Children’s Category Test Level 2 (CCT-2; Boll, 1993). Participants were 113 children with various forms of structural brain damage (n = 82) or with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (n = 31). Results indicated that while there is some support for the validity of the CCT-2, the test is not particularly sensitive to brain dysfunction. The composite T-score, subtest scores and factor scores did not distinguish children with ADHD from those with structural brain damage and the T-scores of both groups were within the normal range. These results illustrate the importance of validating measures of neurocognitive function with clinical populations as even tests with otherwise excellent psychometric properties may not be sensitive to brain dysfunction. It is recommended that the CCT-2 not be used to draw conclusions regarding the impact of brain damage on abstraction and problem solving abilities. © 2007 National Academy of Neuropsychology. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Rapidly expanding interest in neuropsychological assessment in Greece has made the development of appropriate culture-specific normative data for core neuropsychological measures essential. In the present study, we sought to establish normative, test-retest reliability and discriminant validity data for the Ruff 2 and 7 Selective Attention Test in the Greek adult population. We administered the test using standard procedures to 218 healthy Greek adults (95 men), aged 17-80 years and two adult patient groups (26 detoxified opiate addicts and 23 HIV seropositive individuals). Using linear regression analyses, we examined the contribution of age, education and gender on Ruff 2 and 7 performance. We further examined test-retest reliability by administering the test on two occasions to 40 healthy adults, with an intersession interval of 12-14 weeks. The regression analyses revealed that age and education, but not gender, contributed significantly to participants performance, with older age and lower education contributing to poorer performance on Speed scores, but only education contributing moderately to Automatic Detection Accuracy scores. Test-retest reliability was very high (.94-.98) for Speed scores, and adequate to high (.73-.89) for Accuracy scores. Younger adults also demonstrated larger practice effects compared to older participants. The test appears to discriminate adequately between the performance of detoxified opiate addicts and HIV seropositive patients and matched healthy controls, as both patient groups performed more poorly than their respective control group. We present normative data for Speed and Accuracy scores stratified by age and education for the Greek adult population.

The present study sought to establish normative and discriminant validity data for Rey's Auditory Verbal Learning Test [Rey, A. (1964). L 'examen clinique en psychologie [Clinical tests in psychology]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France; Schmidt, M. (1996). Rey auditory verbal learning test: A handbook. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services] using newly adapted learning lists for the Greek adult population. Applying the procedure suggested by Geffen et al. [Geffen, G., Moar, K. J., O'Hanlon, A. P., Clark, C. R., & Geffen, L. N. (1990). Performance measures of 16-86-year-old males and females on the auditory verbal learning test. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 4, 45-63] we administered the test to 205 healthy participants, aged 18-78 years and two adult patient groups (long-term cannabis users and HIV symptomatic patients). Stepwise linear regression analyses showed that the variables age, education and gender contributed significantly to most trials of the RAVLT. Performance decreased in an age-dependent manner from young adulthood. Women, young adults and higher educated participants outperformed men, older adults and less educated individuals. The test appears to discriminate adequately between the performance of long-term heavy cannabis users and HIV seropositive symptomatic patients and matched healthy controls, as both patient groups performed more poorly than their respective control group. Normative data stratified by age, gender and education for the Greek adult population is presented for use in research and clinical settings.