Citation

Erdodi LA, Abeare CA, Medoff B, Seke KR, Sagar S, Kirsch NL. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 2018; 33(7): 845-860.

Affiliation

Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, University of Michigan, Briarwood Circle #4 Ann Arbor, MI 48108, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2018, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1093/acn/acx110

PMID

29293900

Abstract

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.

Language: en

Keywords

Alternative cutoffs; CVLT-II; Forced choice recognition; Performance validity assessment; Traumatic brain injury