The Efficiency and Accuracy of The Test of Memory Malingering Trial 1, Errors on the First 10 Items of The Test of Memory Malingering, and Five Embedded Measures in Predicting Invalid Test Performance

Test of Memory Malingering: Cutoff Scores for Psychometrically Defined Malingering Groups in a Military Sample

“…A recent excellent review of the research by Denning (2012) provides cutoffs for a variety of populations and settings. In TBI samples using Slick et al (1999) criteria to establish groups, Denning's data reveals a mean specificity of .95 with a mean cutoff of 40.…”

“…Schroeder, Baade, Peck, and Heinrich (2011) found a cutoff of 39 produced a specificity of 1.0 in a sample of mTBI litigants who failed two or more SVTs and PVTs, and is similar to the PM group used in the current research. Denning (2012) indicates that the research he reviewed reveals that those who score at cutoffs in the range 25-33 do not pass the other two TOMM trials, which he said suggests that the other TOMM trials do not have to be administered when performance is at this level. This recommendation appears reasonable, and a cutoff of 31 for the current research was required to obtain the results that Denning reports.…”

WAIS-IV Reliable Digit Span is no More Accurate Than Age Corrected Scaled Score as an Indicator of Invalid Performance in a Veteran Sample Undergoing Evaluation for mTBI

“…The test provides useful information, but also requires extended administration time to give it in its standard form. Denning (2012) suggested that abbreviating the test to one learning trial and one test trial not only greatly reduces administration time, it also improves the test's sensitivity to invalid performance.…”

Motivated to do well: An examination of the relationships between motivation, effort, and cognitive performance in schizophrenia

“…The low proportion of participants in this study exhibiting reduced effort also represents a limitation in that this translates to a small sample size in the RE group, which limits statistical power in the group comparisons. In addition, the use of only trial 1 of the TOMM, although exhibiting good sensitivity and specificity in relation to performance on trial 2 and the retention trial (Hilsabeck et al, 2011;Denning, 2012), represents an abbreviated form of this PVT. Moreover, the use of multiple PVTs, rather than a single PVT would add incremental validity to any conclusions regarding effort per se.…”

“…In this study the first recognition trial of the TOMM (TOMM1) was used, with a TOMM1 score b41 (i.e., b82% correct) indicative of failure on the TOMM (i.e., reduced effort). This threshold on the TOMM1 exhibits high levels of sensitivity and specificity in mixed psychiatric populations, and may serve as a better measure of performance validity compared to the original scoring procedure involving the second and retention trials (Hilsabeck et al, 2011;Denning, 2012). Immediately following the TOMM, cognitive functioning was measured with the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS), which assesses verbal memory (List Learning), working memory (Digit Sequencing Task), motor speed (Token Motor Task), verbal fluency (Category Instances, and Letter Fluency), attention/processing speed (Symbol Coding), and reasoning and problem solving (Tower of London) (Keefe et al, 2004).…”