Examining intraindividual variability in neuropsychological test performance: Implications for identifying cognitive impairment and tracers of invalidity.

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL
Psychological Assessment Pub Date : 2026-06-01 Epub Date: 2026-02-19 DOI:10.1037/pas0001459
Mira I Leese, Maya A Marder, John-Christopher A Finley, G Whitman Kent, Hirangi K Patel, Aubry Wood, Evan P Fisher, Joseph M Bianco, Brian M Cerny, Matthew S Phillips, Troy A Webber, Ryan W Schroeder, Jason R Soble
{"title":"Examining intraindividual variability in neuropsychological test performance: Implications for identifying cognitive impairment and tracers of invalidity.","authors":"Mira I Leese, Maya A Marder, John-Christopher A Finley, G Whitman Kent, Hirangi K Patel, Aubry Wood, Evan P Fisher, Joseph M Bianco, Brian M Cerny, Matthew S Phillips, Troy A Webber, Ryan W Schroeder, Jason R Soble","doi":"10.1037/pas0001459","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Intraindividual variability dispersion (IIV-d) measures variation in a patient's test performance throughout a neuropsychological evaluation. Higher IIV-d has been identified as a potentially useful indicator of both cognitive impairment and noncredible test performance, but further exploration of the utility of these metrics for group classification is warranted. This study assessed measures of IIV-d-individual standard deviation and coefficient of variation (CoV)-for classifying levels of neurocognitive impairment and invalid test performance. Adult patients referred for outpatient neuropsychological evaluation (<i>N</i> = 421, <i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 44.49, <i>M</i><sub>education</sub> = 13.71) were administered four freestanding performance validity tests and a neuropsychological test battery yielding 18 indicator scores. Patients were classified into four groups: no neurocognitive disorder (<i>n</i> = 125), mild neurocognitive disorder (<i>n</i> = 163), major neurocognitive disorder (<i>n</i> = 45), and invalid performance (invalid; <i>n</i> = 88). Analyses of covariance revealed that both individual standard deviation (<i>F</i> = 13.75, <i>p</i> < .001, η² = 0.08) and CoV (<i>F</i> = 64.14, <i>p</i> < .001, η² = 0.31) significantly differed across groups. Results showed that high levels of variability followed increasing severity of cognitive impairment (i.e., no neurocognitive disorder < mild neurocognitive disorder < major neurocognitive disorder); performance invalidity was also associated with high variability. Additional analyses highlighted CoV as a more robust indicator of prediction utility than individual standard deviation. Overall, findings suggest that use of IIV-d metrics, particularly CoV, differentiates level of cognitive impairment. Performance invalidity can also be identified in some cases, although differentiating invalid responding from major neurocognitive disorder is more challenging using IIV-d metrics alone. Ongoing research is warranted for better understanding the use of IIV-d in facilitating diagnostic clarification and determining whether this method provides incremental value beyond other methods. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20770,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Assessment","volume":" ","pages":"474-486"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001459","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Intraindividual variability dispersion (IIV-d) measures variation in a patient's test performance throughout a neuropsychological evaluation. Higher IIV-d has been identified as a potentially useful indicator of both cognitive impairment and noncredible test performance, but further exploration of the utility of these metrics for group classification is warranted. This study assessed measures of IIV-d-individual standard deviation and coefficient of variation (CoV)-for classifying levels of neurocognitive impairment and invalid test performance. Adult patients referred for outpatient neuropsychological evaluation (N = 421, Mage = 44.49, Meducation = 13.71) were administered four freestanding performance validity tests and a neuropsychological test battery yielding 18 indicator scores. Patients were classified into four groups: no neurocognitive disorder (n = 125), mild neurocognitive disorder (n = 163), major neurocognitive disorder (n = 45), and invalid performance (invalid; n = 88). Analyses of covariance revealed that both individual standard deviation (F = 13.75, p < .001, η² = 0.08) and CoV (F = 64.14, p < .001, η² = 0.31) significantly differed across groups. Results showed that high levels of variability followed increasing severity of cognitive impairment (i.e., no neurocognitive disorder < mild neurocognitive disorder < major neurocognitive disorder); performance invalidity was also associated with high variability. Additional analyses highlighted CoV as a more robust indicator of prediction utility than individual standard deviation. Overall, findings suggest that use of IIV-d metrics, particularly CoV, differentiates level of cognitive impairment. Performance invalidity can also be identified in some cases, although differentiating invalid responding from major neurocognitive disorder is more challenging using IIV-d metrics alone. Ongoing research is warranted for better understanding the use of IIV-d in facilitating diagnostic clarification and determining whether this method provides incremental value beyond other methods. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

检查神经心理测试表现的个体变异:识别认知障碍和残疾示踪的含义。
个体内变异性离散度(iv -d)测量患者在神经心理学评估中测试表现的变化。较高的iv -d已被确定为认知障碍和不可信测试表现的潜在有用指标,但进一步探索这些指标在群体分类中的效用是有必要的。本研究评估了iv -个体标准偏差和变异系数(CoV)-用于分类神经认知障碍和无效测试表现水平的措施。接受门诊神经心理评估的成年患者(N = 421, Mage = 44.49, meeducation = 13.71)进行了4项独立效能效度测试和一组神经心理测试,共产生18个指标得分。将患者分为无神经认知障碍(125例)、轻度神经认知障碍(163例)、重度神经认知障碍(45例)、无效表现(88例)四组。协方差分析显示,个体标准差(F = 13.75, p < 0.001, η²= 0.08)和CoV (F = 64.14, p < 0.001, η²= 0.31)组间差异显著。结果表明,随着认知障碍的严重程度增加(即无神经认知障碍<轻度神经认知障碍<重度神经认知障碍),变异性水平也随之升高;表现无效也与高度可变性有关。其他分析强调,冠状病毒是比个体标准差更可靠的预测效用指标。总体而言,研究结果表明,使用iv -d指标,特别是冠状病毒,可以区分认知障碍的水平。在某些情况下,表现失能也可以被识别出来,尽管单独使用iv -d指标来区分无效反应和主要神经认知障碍更具挑战性。为了更好地理解iv -d在促进诊断澄清和确定该方法是否提供比其他方法更多的价值方面的使用,需要进行正在进行的研究。(PsycInfo数据库记录(c) 2026 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychological Assessment
Psychological Assessment PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
167
期刊介绍: Psychological Assessment is concerned mainly with empirical research on measurement and evaluation relevant to the broad field of clinical psychology. Submissions are welcome in the areas of assessment processes and methods. Included are - clinical judgment and the application of decision-making models - paradigms derived from basic psychological research in cognition, personality–social psychology, and biological psychology - development, validation, and application of assessment instruments, observational methods, and interviews
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书