Validation of grooved pegboard cutoffs as an additional embedded measure of performance validity.

Objective: Using embedded performance validity (PVT) comparisons, Erdodi et al. suggested that Grooved Pegboard (GPB) T-score cutoffs for either hand ( ≤ 29) or both hands ( ≤ 31) could be used as additional embedded PVTs. The current study evaluated the relationship between these proposed cutoff scores and established PVTs (Medical Symptom Validity Test [MSVT]; Non-Verbal Medical Symptom Validity Test [NV-MSVT], and Reliable Digit Span [RDS]).
Method: Participants (N = 178) were predominately Caucasian (84%) males (79%) with a mean age and education of 41 (SD = 11.7) and 15.8 years (SD = 2.3), respectively. Participants were stratified as "passing" or "failing" the GPBviaErdodi's proposed criteria. "Failures" on the MSVT, NV-MSVT, and RDS were based on conventional recommendations.
Results: Moderate correlations between GPB classification and a condition of interest (COI; i.e. at least two failures on reference PVTs) were observed for dominant (χ ² (1, n = 178) = 34.72, ϕ = .44, p < .001), non-dominant (χ ² (1, n = 178) = 16.46, ϕ = .30, p = .001), and both hand conditions (χ ² (1, n = 178) = 32.48, ϕ = .43, p < .001). Sensitivity, specificity, and predictive power were generally higher than Erdodi et al.'s initial findings.
Conclusion: These findingsprovide supportfor the clinical utility of the GPB as an additional embedded PVT. More specifically, dominant and both hand cutoffs were found to be more robust measures ofnon-genuine performance in those without motor deficits. While promising, sensitivity continues to be low; therefore, it is ill-advised to use the GPB as a sole measure of -performance validity.