Classification of performance validity and symptom validity using the Trauma Symptom Inventory-2.

IF 1.7 4区 心理学
Arlin K Pachet, Darnel N Malcolm, Irene Liu, Cassandra Brown, Sarah Vanderveen, Aiko Tan
{"title":"Classification of performance validity and symptom validity using the Trauma Symptom Inventory-2.","authors":"Arlin K Pachet, Darnel N Malcolm, Irene Liu, Cassandra Brown, Sarah Vanderveen, Aiko Tan","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2022.2141632","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Trauma Symptom Inventory-Second Edition (TSI-2) is garnering research interest as a symptom validity test in the evaluation of trauma-related disorders. However, there has been limited empirical validation of its validity scales in clinical and forensic real-world settings. This study evaluated the ability of the TSI-2 Atypical Response (ATR) scale to discriminate response bias in cognitive performance and symptom reporting in a large sample of disability and compensation-seeking claimants. This retrospective chart review included 296 adults with a known history of trauma exposure or claimed trauma-related psychological injury who underwent neuropsychological and/or comprehensive psychological assessment in a private neuropsychology clinic. The discriminability of the ATR scale to classify credible versus non-credible cognitive profiles and symptom reporting were analyzed by AUC-ROCs. Overall, the ATR scale demonstrated poor discriminability of assessment validity based on the Word Memory Test, Victoria Symptom Validity Test, and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form. The ATR scale had fair discriminatory ability of only one of the over-reporting scales (F-r), with an ROC area of .73, <i>p</i> = .001. However, the test publisher's proposed ATR cut-offs of ≥8 for screening, research, and normal groups, and ≥15 in forensic and clinical settings revealed significant issues with sensitivity and specificity. These results suggest that the TSI-2 should be paired with other established performance validity and symptom validity tests in clinical assessments and not be used as the primary or sole indicator of assessment validity.</p>","PeriodicalId":50741,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-15","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/10.1080/23279095.2022.2141632","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Trauma Symptom Inventory-Second Edition (TSI-2) is garnering research interest as a symptom validity test in the evaluation of trauma-related disorders. However, there has been limited empirical validation of its validity scales in clinical and forensic real-world settings. This study evaluated the ability of the TSI-2 Atypical Response (ATR) scale to discriminate response bias in cognitive performance and symptom reporting in a large sample of disability and compensation-seeking claimants. This retrospective chart review included 296 adults with a known history of trauma exposure or claimed trauma-related psychological injury who underwent neuropsychological and/or comprehensive psychological assessment in a private neuropsychology clinic. The discriminability of the ATR scale to classify credible versus non-credible cognitive profiles and symptom reporting were analyzed by AUC-ROCs. Overall, the ATR scale demonstrated poor discriminability of assessment validity based on the Word Memory Test, Victoria Symptom Validity Test, and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form. The ATR scale had fair discriminatory ability of only one of the over-reporting scales (F-r), with an ROC area of .73, p = .001. However, the test publisher's proposed ATR cut-offs of ≥8 for screening, research, and normal groups, and ≥15 in forensic and clinical settings revealed significant issues with sensitivity and specificity. These results suggest that the TSI-2 should be paired with other established performance validity and symptom validity tests in clinical assessments and not be used as the primary or sole indicator of assessment validity.

使用创伤症状量表-2对表现效度和症状效度进行分类。
创伤症状量表-第二版(TSI-2)作为评估创伤相关疾病的症状有效性测试,正在引起研究人员的兴趣。然而,在临床和法医实际环境中对其有效性量表的实证验证却很有限。本研究评估了 TSI-2 非典型反应量表(ATR)对认知表现和症状报告中的反应偏差进行判别的能力,该量表的样本为大量残疾和寻求赔偿的索赔者。这项回顾性病历审查包括 296 名已知有创伤暴露史或声称有创伤相关心理损伤的成年人,他们在一家私人神经心理学诊所接受了神经心理学和/或综合心理评估。通过AUC-ROCs分析了ATR量表对可信与不可信认知概况和症状报告的区分度。总体而言,根据单词记忆测试、维多利亚症状有效性测试和明尼苏达多相人格量表-2-重组表,ATR量表在评估有效性方面表现出了较差的辨别能力。ATR 量表仅对其中一个过度报告量表(F-r)具有较好的判别能力,其 ROC 面积为 0.73,p = 0.001。然而,测试出版商提出的 ATR 临界值在筛查、研究和正常群体中为≥8,在法医和临床环境中为≥15,这揭示了灵敏度和特异性方面的重大问题。这些结果表明,在临床评估中,TSI-2 应与其他已确立的表现效度和症状效度测试搭配使用,而不应作为评估效度的主要或唯一指标。
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
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-PSYCHOLOGY
自引率
11.80%
发文量
0
审稿时长
>12 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信