Brad T Tyson, Sadie R Pyne, Iulia Crisan, Matthew Calamia, Matthew Holcomb, Luciano Giromini, Laszlo A Erdodi
{"title":"逻辑记忆、视觉再现和口头配对联想是脑外伤患者有效的嵌入式有效性指标。","authors":"Brad T Tyson, Sadie R Pyne, Iulia Crisan, Matthew Calamia, Matthew Holcomb, Luciano Giromini, Laszlo A Erdodi","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2023.2179400","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study was design to evaluate the potential of the recognition trials for the Logical Memory (LM), Visual Reproduction (VR), and Verbal Paired Associates (VPA) subtests of the Wechsler Memory Scales-Fourth Edition (WMS-IV) to serve as embedded performance validity tests (PVTs).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The classification accuracy of the three WMS-IV subtests was computed against three different criterion PVTs in a sample of 103 adults with traumatic brain injury (TBI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The optimal cutoffs (LM ≤ 20, VR ≤ 3, VPA ≤ 36) produced good combinations of sensitivity (.33-.87) and specificity (.92-.98). An age-corrected scaled score of ≤5 on either of the free recall trials on the VPA was specific (.91-.92) and relatively sensitive (.48-.57) to psychometrically defined invalid performance. A VR I ≤ 5 or VR II ≤ 4 had comparable specificity, but lower sensitivity (.25-.42). There was no difference in failure rate as a function of TBI severity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In addition to LM, VR, and VPA can also function as embedded PVTs. Failing validity cutoffs on these subtests signals an increased risk of non-credible presentation and is robust to genuine neurocognitive impairment. However, they should not be used in isolation to determine the validity of an overall neurocognitive profile.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":" ","pages":"450-459"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Logical memory, visual reproduction, and verbal paired associates are effective embedded validity indicators in patients with traumatic brain injury.\",\"authors\":\"Brad T Tyson, Sadie R Pyne, Iulia Crisan, Matthew Calamia, Matthew Holcomb, Luciano Giromini, Laszlo A Erdodi\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/23279095.2023.2179400\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study was design to evaluate the potential of the recognition trials for the Logical Memory (LM), Visual Reproduction (VR), and Verbal Paired Associates (VPA) subtests of the Wechsler Memory Scales-Fourth Edition (WMS-IV) to serve as embedded performance validity tests (PVTs).</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The classification accuracy of the three WMS-IV subtests was computed against three different criterion PVTs in a sample of 103 adults with traumatic brain injury (TBI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The optimal cutoffs (LM ≤ 20, VR ≤ 3, VPA ≤ 36) produced good combinations of sensitivity (.33-.87) and specificity (.92-.98). An age-corrected scaled score of ≤5 on either of the free recall trials on the VPA was specific (.91-.92) and relatively sensitive (.48-.57) to psychometrically defined invalid performance. A VR I ≤ 5 or VR II ≤ 4 had comparable specificity, but lower sensitivity (.25-.42). There was no difference in failure rate as a function of TBI severity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In addition to LM, VR, and VPA can also function as embedded PVTs. Failing validity cutoffs on these subtests signals an increased risk of non-credible presentation and is robust to genuine neurocognitive impairment. However, they should not be used in isolation to determine the validity of an overall neurocognitive profile.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51308,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"450-459\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"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/10.1080/23279095.2023.2179400\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/3/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2023.2179400","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/3/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Logical memory, visual reproduction, and verbal paired associates are effective embedded validity indicators in patients with traumatic brain injury.
Objective: This study was design to evaluate the potential of the recognition trials for the Logical Memory (LM), Visual Reproduction (VR), and Verbal Paired Associates (VPA) subtests of the Wechsler Memory Scales-Fourth Edition (WMS-IV) to serve as embedded performance validity tests (PVTs).
Method: The classification accuracy of the three WMS-IV subtests was computed against three different criterion PVTs in a sample of 103 adults with traumatic brain injury (TBI).
Results: The optimal cutoffs (LM ≤ 20, VR ≤ 3, VPA ≤ 36) produced good combinations of sensitivity (.33-.87) and specificity (.92-.98). An age-corrected scaled score of ≤5 on either of the free recall trials on the VPA was specific (.91-.92) and relatively sensitive (.48-.57) to psychometrically defined invalid performance. A VR I ≤ 5 or VR II ≤ 4 had comparable specificity, but lower sensitivity (.25-.42). There was no difference in failure rate as a function of TBI severity.
Conclusions: In addition to LM, VR, and VPA can also function as embedded PVTs. Failing validity cutoffs on these subtests signals an increased risk of non-credible presentation and is robust to genuine neurocognitive impairment. However, they should not be used in isolation to determine the validity of an overall neurocognitive profile.
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.