Search

To examine the convergent validity of the Test of Effort (TOE), a performance validity test (PVT) currently under development that employs a two-subtest (one verbal, one visual), forced-choice recognition memory format. A descriptive, correlational design was employed to describe performance on the TOE and examine the convergent validity between the TOE and comparison measures. A sample of 53 individuals with chronic acquired brain injury (ABI) were administered the TOE and three well-validated PVTs (Reliable Digit Span [RDS], Test of Memory Malingering [TOMM] and Dot Counting Test [DCT]). The TOE appeared more difficult than it actually was, suggesting adequate face validity. Medium-to-large correlations were observed between the TOE and established PVTs, suggesting good convergent validity. Provisional cutoff scores are offered based on performance of a subgroup of participants with "sufficient effort." Overall, the TOE shows promise as a PVT measure for clinical use. Future studies with larger and more diverse samples are needed to more fully determine the psychometric characteristics of the TOE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Childhood acquired brain injuries can disrupt communication functions needed for success in school, work and social interaction. Cognitive-communication difficulties may not be apparent until adolescence, when academic, environmental and social-emotional demands increase. Objective: The Functional Assessment of Verbal Reasoning and Executive Strategies for Students (S-FAVRES) is a new activity-level measure of cognitive-communication skills in complex, contextual and integrative tasks that simulate real world communication challenges. It is hypothesized that S-FAVRES performance would differentiate adolescents with and without acquired brain injury (ABI) on scores for Accuracy, Rationale, Reasoning Subskills and Time. Methods: S-FAVRES was administered to 182 typically-developing (TD) and 57 adolescents with mild-to-severe ABI aged 12–19. Group differences, internal consistency, sensitivity, specificity, reliability and contributing factors to performance (age, gender, brain injury) were examined statistically. Results: Those with ABI attained statistically lower Accuracy, Rationale and Reasoning sub-skills scores than their TD peers. Time scores were not significantly different. Performance trends were consistent across tasks, administrations, gender and age groups. Inter-rater reliability for scoring was acceptable. Conclusion: The S-FAVRES provides a reliable, functional and quantifiable measure of subtle cognitive-communication difficulties in adolescents that can assist speech-language pathologists in planning treatment and integration to school and real world communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]