Detecting Feigned Impairment with the Digit Span and Vocabulary Subtests of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Third Edition

Abstract

The WAIS-III Digit Span and Vocabulary subtests were investigated as indicators of feigned cognitive impairment. Participants included 64 undergraduates randomly assigned to control, symptom-coached, or test-coached groups. Six previously researched validity indicators were examined. We hypothesized that symptom-coached participants would perform worse relative to test-coached simulators. Analyses determined both simulator groups performed lower than controls on all indicators except Vocabulary. Symptom-coached participants, however, did not differ from test-coached participants on any indicator. Classification accuracies for these six indicators ranged from 42 to 78%. While the WAIS-III validity indicators hold some promise, they should not be employed as independent measures.

Detection of Malingering Using Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV for Psychiatric Patients

“…The previous studies on persistent post-concussive patients, neurocognitive dysfunction patients, and university students suggested 7pts of RDS cut-off score, which is the same cut-off score for the military service group of this study. [32][33][34] Furthermore, 6 pts of RDS cutoff score for the neurosis and psychosis groups in this study was coincided with the results of the previous study on mixed clinical patients and chronic pain patients. 30,31 On the other hand, for the TBI group in this study, the RDS cut-off score was 3 pts, which was coincided with the results of the previous study on patients with low IQs of below 70.…”

“…In order to detect malingering or intentional poor performance, a multidimensional approach is necessarily required. 34,43,44 As such, using the discriminant function formula introduced in South Korea by Moon and Hwang 39 with the RDS cut-off score would increase the validity of the detection of malingering. However, the formula is recommended to be used with the mild TBI group because the discriminant function formula was originally designed to distinguish the mild TBI group from the malingering group.…”

“…30,31 In contrast, previous studies with persistent post-concussive patients, neurocognitive dysfunction patients, and university students showed that an RDS score of 7 pts was the appropriate cut-off score. [32][33][34] Some studies have suggested an RDS score of 5 and 3 pts. One with cognitive impairment patients found that an RDS score of 5 pts was the appropriate cut-off score.…”

Derivation and Cross-Validation of Cutoff Scores for Patients With Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders on WAIS-IV Digit Span–Based Performance Validity Measures

“…Several investigators have evaluated the utility of potential PV measures embedded within objective cognitive tests such as the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV; Wechsler, 2008) and its predecessors. The most heavily researched of these measures are those based on the Digit Span subtest including the Reliable Digit Span score (RDS; Greiffenstein et al, 1994; Greiffenstein, Gola, & Baker, 1995; Meyers & Volbrecht, 1998; Schwarz, Gfeller, & Oliveri, 2006), Digit Span Age-Adjusted Scaled Score (AASS; Babikian, Boone, Lu, & Arnold, 2006), Revised RDS (RDS-R; Reese, Suhr, & Riddle, 2012; Young, Sawyer, Roper, & Baughman, 2012), and Enhanced RDS (RDS-E; Reese et al, 2012). RDS (Greiffenstein et al, 1994) is calculated by summing the longest string of digits correctly answered for two trials forward (RD Forward) to the longest string correctly answered for two trials backward (RD Backward).…”

Cross-cultural Effect on Suboptimal Effort Detection: An Example of the Digit Span Subtest of the WAIS-III in Taiwan

“…The Digit Span subtest is easily and quickly administered either individually or as part of a battery, so is particularly user friendly in a clinical setting (Jasinski et al, 2011). Therefore, indicators derived from the Digit Span subtest have been recommended as effective measures for identifying suspect effort, such as the Digit Span age-corrected scaled score (DS-SS; Axelrod, Fichtenberg, Millis, & Wertheimer, 2006;Harrison, Rosenblum, & Currie, 2010;Heinly, Greve, Bianchini, Love, & Brennan, 2005;Iverson & Tulsky, 2003), the longest forward/backward span (Heinly et al, 2005;Iverson & Franzen, 1996;Iverson & Tulsky, 2003), Reliable Digit Span (RDS; Babikian et al, 2006;Greiffenstein, Baker, & Gola, 1994;Harrison et al, 2010), and Vocabulary minus Digit Span difference score (VDS; Curtis, Greve, & Bianchini, 2009;Mittenberg et al, 2001;Schwarz, Gfeller, & Oliveri, 2006). Because borderline or impaired DS-SS (below 5 or 4) occur in less than 5% of both normal and clinical groups (Iverson & Tulsky, 2003), the Digit Span has been viewed as a promising effort indicator.…”