Performance validity assessment using response time on the Warrington Recognition Memory Test

Patrick, Sarah D.; Rapport, Lisa J.; Kanser, Robert J.; Hanks, Robin A.; Bashem, Jesse R.

doi:10.1080/13854046.2020.1716997

Cited by 18 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Simulators also had larger RT variability than honest controls. RT variability, however, had lower discrimination capacity compared with the other WMT's validity measures, in general agreement with earlier studies (Elbaum et al, 2019;Lupu et al, 2018;Patrick et al, 2020). Overall, the findings suggest that feigned cognitive impairment is characterized by lower accuracy rates and longer RTs in FCRM-PVTs, with weaker evidence regarding increased RT variability.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…This interest is stimulated by studies indicating that deception, in general, affects participants' RTs (see meta-analysis; Suchotzki et al, 2017). Correspondingly, simulators (i.e., participants requested to simulate cognitive impairment) have longer RTs than honest responders in various FCRM-PVTs (Elbaum et al, 2019;Patrick et al, 2020). Despite their weaker predictive power compared with traditional accuracy measures, RT measures hold promise in advancing the field of forensic neuropsychology.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Identifying Feigned Cognitive Impairment: Investigating the Utility of Diffusion Model Analyses

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Forced-choice performance validity tests are routinely used for the detection of feigned cognitive impairment. The drift diffusion model deconstructs performance into distinct cognitive processes using accuracy and response time measures. It thereby offers a unique approach for gaining insight into examinees’ speed-accuracy trade-offs and the cognitive processes that underlie their performance. The current study is the first to perform such analyses using a well-established forced-choice performance validity test. To achieve this aim, archival data of healthy participants, either simulating cognitive impairment in the Word Memory Test or performing it to the best of their ability, were analyzed using the EZ-diffusion model ( N = 198). The groups differed in the three model parameters, with drift rate emerging as the best predictor of group membership. These findings provide initial evidence for the usefulness of the drift diffusion model in clarifying the cognitive processes underlying feigned cognitive impairment and encourage further research.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying Feigned Cognitive Impairment: Investigating the Utility of Diffusion Model Analyses

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In PVT research, a number of other studies have investigated both reaction time parameters (e.g., Stevens & Merten, 2010;Willison & Tombaugh, 2006) and response times in neuropsychological tests (e.g., Patrick et al, 2021), freestanding validity tests (e.g., Jansen et al, 2020;Kanser et al, 2019;Lupu et al, 2018), and computerized questionnaires (e.g., Cerny et al, 2021). Several studies investigated performance validity using continuous performance tests, such as the Test of Variables of Attention (T.O.V.A., Leark et al, 2008;e.g., recently, Harrison & Armstrong, 2020;Pollock et al, 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Motor Reaction Times as an Embedded Measure of Performance Validity: a Study with a Sample of Austrian Early Retirement Claimants

Czornik

Seidl

Tavakoli

et al. 2021

Psychol. Inj. and Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Among embedded measures of performance validity, reaction time parameters appear to be less common. However, their potential may be underestimated. In the German-speaking countries, reaction time is often examined using the Alertness subtest of the Test of Attention Performance (TAP). Several previous studies have examined its suitability for validity assessment. The current study was conceived to examine a variety of reaction time parameters of the TAP Alertness subtest with a sample of 266 Austrian civil forensic patients. Classification results from the Word Memory Test (WMT) were used as an external indicator to distinguish between valid and invalid symptom presentations. Results demonstrated that the WMT fail group performed worse in reaction time as well as its intraindividual variation across trials when compared to the WMT pass group. Receiver operating characteristic analyses revealed areas under the curve of .775–.804. Logistic regression models indicated the parameter intraindividual variation of motor reaction time with warning sound as being the best predictor for invalid test performance. Suggested cut scores yielded a sensitivity of .62 and a specificity of .90, or .45 and .95, respectively, when the accepted false-positive rate was set lower. The results encourage the use of the Alertness subtest as an embedded measure of performance validity.

show abstract

“…The inclusion of a clinical group is especially important to the development of new indices designed to detect malingering. Laboratory designs that contrast only healthy adults instructed to be deceptive (TBI simulators) and healthy adults instructed to perform their best often yield results with much larger effects and different patterns than are observed for designs that include the clinical group of interest (Kanser et al, 2020(Kanser et al, , 2019Patrick et al, 2020).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Biometrics yield psychophysiological markers that provide insight about effort and deception. Success in distinguishing true versus malingered memory test performance in TBI assessment has been demonstrated using biometrics such as reaction time (Kanser et al., 2019; Lupu et al., 2018; Patrick et al., 2020; Rose et al., 1998) and oculomotor gaze patterns during PVTs (Kanser et al., 2020; Tomer et al., 2020). Pupillary reactivity during testing is another promising avenue for investigation in biometrics.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Detecting simulated versus bona fide traumatic brain injury using pupillometry.

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Pupil dilation patterns are outside of conscious control and provide information regarding neuropsychological processes related to deception, cognitive effort, and familiarity. This study examined the incremental utility of pupillometry on the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) in classifying individuals with verified traumatic brain injury (TBI), individuals simulating TBI, and healthy comparisons. Method: Participants were 177 adults across three groups: verified TBI (n = 53), feigned cognitive impairment due to TBI (SIM, n = 52), and heathy comparisons (HC, n = 72). Results: Logistic regression and ROC curve analyses identified several pupil indices that discriminated the groups. Pupillometry discriminated best for the comparison of greatest clinical interest, verified TBI versus simulators, adding information beyond traditional accuracy scores. Simulators showed evidence of greater cognitive load than both groups instructed to perform at their best ability (HC and TBI). Additionally, the typically robust phenomenon of dilating to familiar stimuli was relatively diminished among TBI simulators compared to TBI and HC. This finding may reflect competing, interfering effects of cognitive effort that are frequently observed in pupillary reactivity during deception. However, the familiarity effect appeared on nearly half the trials for SIM participants. Among those trials evidencing the familiarity response, selection of the unfamiliar stimulus (i.e., dilation-response inconsistency) was associated with a sizeable increase in likelihood of being a simulator. Conclusions: Taken together, these findings provide strong support for multimethod assessment: adding unique performance assessments such as biometrics to standard accuracy scores. Continued study of pupillometry will enhance the identification of simulators who are not detected by traditional performance validity test scoring metrics.

show abstract

Performance validity assessment using response time on the Warrington Recognition Memory Test

Cited by 18 publications

References 58 publications

Identifying Feigned Cognitive Impairment: Investigating the Utility of Diffusion Model Analyses

Identifying Feigned Cognitive Impairment: Investigating the Utility of Diffusion Model Analyses

Motor Reaction Times as an Embedded Measure of Performance Validity: a Study with a Sample of Austrian Early Retirement Claimants

Detecting simulated versus bona fide traumatic brain injury using pupillometry.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About