Efficacy of Test of Memory Malingering Trial 1, Trial 2, the Retention Trial, and the Albany Consistency Index in a Criterion Group Forensic Neuropsychological Sample

Schroeder, Ryan W.; Buddin, W. Howard; Hargrave, David; VonDran, E. J.; Campbell, Elizabeth B; Brockman, Callie J.; Heinrichs, Robin J.; Baade, Lyle E.

doi:10.1093/arclin/acs094

Cited by 37 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…; Schroeder et al, 2013). As a novel finding, false positives constantly proved accurate in detecting simulated performance (Bender & Rogers, 2004;Inman & Berry, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 87%

Evaluation of Various Detection Strategies in the Assessment of Noncredible Memory Performance: Results of Two Experimental Studies

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This article investigates the accuracy of individual and combined indicators based on different strategies for detecting noncredible performance as part of a new test for the continuous assessment of short-term memory. Method: In two independent studies, we assessed three groups of simulators, cognitively impaired patients, and nonimpaired community members with four tasks separated by a distractor. Results: Pairwise comparisons between receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves revealed significant differences between two clusters of indicators: mean recognition, inconsistent responses in recognition, and false positives (area under the ROC curves > .800) proved more accurate than delayed recall and false negatives (area under the ROC curves < .800) in discriminating simulators from patients. Likewise, both studies revealed that adding the false positives indicator based on cued recall to mean recognition incrementally improved classification accuracy (including sensitivity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value ) compared with the recognition indicator alone. Conclusions: Our results support the association of two distinct indicators for the assessment of noncredible performance, of which one should be a forced-choice indicator.

show abstract

“…; Schroeder et al, 2013). As a novel finding, false positives constantly proved accurate in detecting simulated performance (Bender & Rogers, 2004;Inman & Berry, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 87%

Evaluation of Various Detection Strategies in the Assessment of Noncredible Memory Performance: Results of Two Experimental Studies

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Conversely, Whitney et al classified patients solely on TOMM performance. Such an approach would be expected to further amplify rates of false negatives in the PVT pass group, as research shows that the TOMM, when not used in combination with other measures, produces false negative rates (1 = sensitivity) of approximately 50% (Bashem et al, 2014; Buddin et al, 2014; Greve, Ord, Curtis, Bianchini, & Brennan, 2008; Schroeder et al, 2013). Differences in the findings between Whitney et al (2010) and the other studies could, therefore, potentially be due to weaker separation of true valid and true invalid examinees secondary to the former’s group assignment approaches.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rates of Abnormally Low TOPF Word Reading Scores in Individuals Failing Versus Passing Performance Validity Testing

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study examined the impact of performance validity test (PVT) failure on the Test of Premorbid Functioning (TOPF) in a sample of 252 neuropsychological patients. Word reading performance differed significantly according to PVT failure status, and number of PVTs failed accounted for 7.4% of the variance in word reading performance, even after controlling for education. Furthermore, individuals failing ≥2 PVTs were twice as likely as individuals passing all PVTs (33% vs. 16%) to have abnormally low obtained word reading scores relative to demographically predicted scores when using a normative base rate of 10% to define abnormality. When compared with standardization study clinical groups, those failing ≥2 PVTs were twice as likely as patients with moderate to severe traumatic brain injury and as likely as patients with Alzheimer's dementia to obtain abnormally low TOPF word reading scores. Findings indicate that TOPF word reading based estimates of premorbid functioning should not be interpreted in individuals invalidating cognitive testing.

show abstract

“…Dr Tom Tombaugh's TOMM (a name itself surely designed to remain easily in the memory) (Tombaugh 1996) has the most empirical data supporting its validity and is the most widely used SVT (Sharland 2007;Schroeder 2013), particularly among neuropsychologists specialising in personal injury claims (Slick 2004).…”

Section: Test Of Memory Malingering (Tomm)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating malingering in cognitive and memory examinations: a guide for clinicians

Tracy¹

2014

Adv. psychiatr. treat

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryCognitive and memory testing are a common part of clinical practice, but professional concerns are sometimes raised that the individual being tested might be feigning deficits. Most clinicians have limited experience and training in detecting malingering in such cognitive testing, and the very issue raises considerable ethical dilemmas. Nevertheless, psychiatric work faces ever greater potential for legal scrutiny, and failure to appropriately evaluate potential malingering risks professional embarrassment and distress. There is a need for clinicians to make themselves aware of the ways in which malingered behaviour might be evaluated through the clinical history, the use of routine psychometric testing and, particularly, the use of symptom validity (‘malingering’) tests. This article describes these factors and gives guidance on the appropriate reporting of findings.Learning Objectives•Better understand the complexities in cognitive assessment where malingering is suspected.•Understand the types and limitations of the major symptom validity tests.•Be better prepared to produce documentation and reports stating test findings.

show abstract

Efficacy of Test of Memory Malingering Trial 1, Trial 2, the Retention Trial, and the Albany Consistency Index in a Criterion Group Forensic Neuropsychological Sample

Cited by 37 publications

References 27 publications

Evaluation of Various Detection Strategies in the Assessment of Noncredible Memory Performance: Results of Two Experimental Studies

Evaluation of Various Detection Strategies in the Assessment of Noncredible Memory Performance: Results of Two Experimental Studies

Rates of Abnormally Low TOPF Word Reading Scores in Individuals Failing Versus Passing Performance Validity Testing

Evaluating malingering in cognitive and memory examinations: a guide for clinicians

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About