Response time measures on the Word Memory Test do not add incremental validity to accuracy scores in predicting noncredible neurocognitive dysfunction in mild traumatic brain injury litigants.

IF 1.4 4区心理学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY

Applied Neuropsychology-Adult Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2022-09-28 DOI:10.1080/23279095.2022.2126320

George K Henry

{"title":"Response time measures on the Word Memory Test do not add incremental validity to accuracy scores in predicting noncredible neurocognitive dysfunction in mild traumatic brain injury litigants.","authors":"George K Henry","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2022.2126320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The objective of the current study was to investigate whether response time measures on the Word Memory Test (WMT) increase predictive validity on determining noncredible neurocognitive dysfunction in a large sample of mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) litigants. Participants included 203 adults who underwent a comprehensive neuropsychological examination. Criterion groups were formed based upon their performance on stand-alone measures of cognitive performance validity (PVT). Participants failing PVTs exhibited significantly slower response times and lower accuracy on the WMT compared to participants who passed PVTs. Response time measures did not add significant incremental validity beyond that afforded by WMT accuracy measures alone. The best predictor of PVT status was the WMT Consistency Score (CNS) which was associated with an extremely large effect size (d = 16.44), followed by Immediate Recognition (IR: d = 10.68) and Delayed Recognition (DR: d = 10.10).","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2022.2126320","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/9/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

The objective of the current study was to investigate whether response time measures on the Word Memory Test (WMT) increase predictive validity on determining noncredible neurocognitive dysfunction in a large sample of mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI) litigants. Participants included 203 adults who underwent a comprehensive neuropsychological examination. Criterion groups were formed based upon their performance on stand-alone measures of cognitive performance validity (PVT). Participants failing PVTs exhibited significantly slower response times and lower accuracy on the WMT compared to participants who passed PVTs. Response time measures did not add significant incremental validity beyond that afforded by WMT accuracy measures alone. The best predictor of PVT status was the WMT Consistency Score (CNS) which was associated with an extremely large effect size (d = 16.44), followed by Immediate Recognition (IR: d = 10.68) and Delayed Recognition (DR: d = 10.10).

查看原文本刊更多论文

在预测轻度脑外伤诉讼当事人的非可信神经认知功能障碍方面，单词记忆测试的反应时间测量并不能增加准确性评分的有效性。

本研究旨在调查单词记忆测试（WMT）中的反应时间测量是否能提高对轻度脑外伤（MTBI）诉讼当事人大样本中非可信神经认知功能障碍的预测有效性。参与者包括 203 名接受过全面神经心理学检查的成年人。根据他们在认知表现有效性独立测量（PVT）中的表现划分标准组。与通过 PVT 的参与者相比，未通过 PVT 的参与者在 WMT 上的反应时间明显较慢，准确率也较低。反应时间测量并没有比单独的 WMT 准确性测量增加显著的有效性。预测 PVT 状态的最佳指标是 WMT 一致性得分 (CNS)，其相关效应大小极大（d = 16.44），其次是即时识别 (IR：d = 10.68) 和延迟识别 (DR：d = 10.10)。

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

Applied Neuropsychology-Adult CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-PSYCHOLOGY

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

11.80%

发文量

134

期刊介绍： pplied Neuropsychology-Adult publishes clinical neuropsychological articles concerning assessment, brain functioning and neuroimaging, neuropsychological treatment, and rehabilitation in adults. Full-length articles and brief communications are included. Case studies of adult patients carefully assessing the nature, course, or treatment of clinical neuropsychological dysfunctions in the context of scientific literature, are suitable. Review manuscripts addressing critical issues are encouraged. Preference is given to papers of clinical relevance to others in the field. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief, and, if found suitable for further considerations are peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees. All peer review is single-blind and submission is online via ScholarOne Manuscripts.