错误的编码反应提高了单词选择测试的分类准确性。

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
John-Christopher A Finley, Laszlo A Erdodi, Taylor N Parks, Cady Block, David W Loring, Felicia C Goldstein
{"title":"错误的编码反应提高了单词选择测试的分类准确性。","authors":"John-Christopher A Finley, Laszlo A Erdodi, Taylor N Parks, Cady Block, David W Loring, Felicia C Goldstein","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2025.2479850","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigated whether responses from the Word Choice Test (WCT) encoding trial could provide a supplemental index of performance validity in addition to the traditional Summary score. Participants were 196 adult outpatients who underwent neuropsychological evaluations for various referral reasons related to, but not limited to epilepsy, stroke, and age-related cognitive decline. Participants were classified into valid or invalid performance groups using a criterion-grouping approach based on multiple independent performance validity tests. We derived a supplemental validity indicator, entitled the \"Encoding\" score, based on the number of correct responses from 43 items on the initial WCT trial, which were identified via critical item analysis. Using cutoffs of ≤40 for the Encoding score and ≤42 for the Summary score together enhanced classification accuracy, yielding an area under the curve of .83. Compared to using the WCT Summary score alone, the combined use of the Encoding and Summary scores increased the sensitivity by .10 to yield a total sensitivity of .58, while maintaining high (.92) specificity. Findings suggest the WCT Encoding score may provide a useful index of performance validity alongside the Summary score. Employing these indicators together can optimize the WCT without adding cost or much time to the evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":" ","pages":"1-8"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incorrect encoding responses improve the classification accuracy of the Word Choice Test.\",\"authors\":\"John-Christopher A Finley, Laszlo A Erdodi, Taylor N Parks, Cady Block, David W Loring, Felicia C Goldstein\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23279095.2025.2479850\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study investigated whether responses from the Word Choice Test (WCT) encoding trial could provide a supplemental index of performance validity in addition to the traditional Summary score. Participants were 196 adult outpatients who underwent neuropsychological evaluations for various referral reasons related to, but not limited to epilepsy, stroke, and age-related cognitive decline. Participants were classified into valid or invalid performance groups using a criterion-grouping approach based on multiple independent performance validity tests. We derived a supplemental validity indicator, entitled the \\\"Encoding\\\" score, based on the number of correct responses from 43 items on the initial WCT trial, which were identified via critical item analysis. Using cutoffs of ≤40 for the Encoding score and ≤42 for the Summary score together enhanced classification accuracy, yielding an area under the curve of .83. Compared to using the WCT Summary score alone, the combined use of the Encoding and Summary scores increased the sensitivity by .10 to yield a total sensitivity of .58, while maintaining high (.92) specificity. Findings suggest the WCT Encoding score may provide a useful index of performance validity alongside the Summary score. Employing these indicators together can optimize the WCT without adding cost or much time to the evaluation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-14\",\"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/10.1080/23279095.2025.2479850\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2025.2479850","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究探讨了单词选择测验(WCT)编码试验的回答是否可以在传统的总结分数之外提供一个补充的效度指标。参与者是196名成年门诊患者,他们因各种转诊原因接受了神经心理学评估,这些转诊原因与癫痫、中风和与年龄相关的认知能力下降有关,但不限于此。采用基于多个独立效能效度测试的标准分组方法,将参与者分为有效或无效的效能组。根据初始WCT试验中43个项目的正确回答数,我们推导出一个补充效度指标,称为“编码”分数,这些项目通过关键项目分析确定。将Encoding得分的截止值≤40和Summary得分的截止值≤42共同提高了分类精度,曲线下的面积为0.83。与单独使用WCT Summary评分相比,联合使用Encoding和Summary评分的敏感性提高了0.10,总敏感性为0.58,同时保持了较高的特异性(0.92)。研究结果表明,WCT编码得分可以提供一个有用的指标,性能有效性与总结得分。综合使用这些指标可以在不增加成本和时间的情况下优化WCT。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Incorrect encoding responses improve the classification accuracy of the Word Choice Test.

This study investigated whether responses from the Word Choice Test (WCT) encoding trial could provide a supplemental index of performance validity in addition to the traditional Summary score. Participants were 196 adult outpatients who underwent neuropsychological evaluations for various referral reasons related to, but not limited to epilepsy, stroke, and age-related cognitive decline. Participants were classified into valid or invalid performance groups using a criterion-grouping approach based on multiple independent performance validity tests. We derived a supplemental validity indicator, entitled the "Encoding" score, based on the number of correct responses from 43 items on the initial WCT trial, which were identified via critical item analysis. Using cutoffs of ≤40 for the Encoding score and ≤42 for the Summary score together enhanced classification accuracy, yielding an area under the curve of .83. Compared to using the WCT Summary score alone, the combined use of the Encoding and Summary scores increased the sensitivity by .10 to yield a total sensitivity of .58, while maintaining high (.92) specificity. Findings suggest the WCT Encoding score may provide a useful index of performance validity alongside the Summary score. Employing these indicators together can optimize the WCT without adding cost or much time to the evaluation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult
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.
×
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