Use of Trial 1 of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) as a Screening Measure of Effort: Suggested Discontinuation Rules

Hilsabeck, Robin C.; Gordon, Shalanda; Hietpas-Wilson, Tammy; Zartman, Andrea L.

doi:10.1080/13854046.2011.589409

Cited by 63 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We note that, in the usual clinical version of the TOMM, the test stimuli are presented as 50 pairs, each containing an old drawing plus a new drawing. This is similar to our test, which is no more difficult than the clinical TOMM, so the norms (Hilsabeck et al, ) for the clinical version probably apply here. They are that a score of 41 or more (out of 50) is probably from a nonmalingerer, whereas a score of 25 or less is from a malingerer.…”

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 79%

Financial incentive does not affect P300 (in response to certain episodic and semantic probe stimuli) in the Complex Trial Protocol (CTP) version of the Concealed Information Test (CIT) in detection of malingering

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research indicated that the skin conductance response of the autonomic nervous system in the Concealed Information Test (CIT) is typically increased in subjects who are financially and otherwise incentivized to defeat the CIT (the paradoxical "motivational impairment" effect). This is not the case for RT-based CITs, nor P300 tests based on the three-stimulus protocol for detection of cognitive malingering (although these are not the same as CITs). The present report is the first attempt to study the effect of financial motivation on the P300-based Complex Trial Protocol using both episodic and semantic memory probe and irrelevant stimuli. The Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) was used to validate behavioral differences between the two groups we created by offering one (paid) group but not another (unpaid) group a financial reward for beating our tests. Group behavioral differences on the TOMM did confirm group manipulations. Probe-minus-irrelevant P300 differences did not differ between groups, although as previously, semantic memory-evoked P300s were larger than episodic memory-evoked P300s.

show abstract

Section: Methodssupporting

confidence: 79%

Financial incentive does not affect P300 (in response to certain episodic and semantic probe stimuli) in the Complex Trial Protocol (CTP) version of the Concealed Information Test (CIT) in detection of malingering

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Specifically, performances on the original RDS (RDS-T), revised RDS which included Sequencing Span (RDS-R), and age-corrected Digit Span Scaled Score (DS-SS) were examined using the TOMM as the criterion measure. A failing score on the TOMM was defined as a score of 40 or below on Trial 1 (Denning, 2012;Hilsabeck, Gordon, Hietpas-Wilson, & Zartman, 2011). Testing began with the TOMM, and Digit Span was nearly always administered after a verbal memory test, a figure drawing, and a test of processing speed, similar to Phase I described above.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Spencer

Axelrod

Drag

et al. 2013

The Clinical Neuropsychologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reliable Digit Span (RDS) is a measure of effort derived from the Digit Span subtest of the Wechsler intelligence scales. Some authors have suggested that the age-corrected scaled score provides a more accurate measure of effort than RDS. This study examined the relative diagnostic accuracy of the traditional RDS, an extended RDS including the new Sequencing task from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV, and the age-corrected scaled score, relative to performance validity as determined by the Test of Memory Malingering. Data were collected from 138 Veterans seen in a traumatic brain injury clinic. The traditional RDS (≤ 7), revised RDS (≤ 11), and Digit Span age-corrected scaled score ( ≤ 6) had respective sensitivities of 39%, 39%, and 33%, and respective specificities of 82%, 89%, and 91%. Of these indices, revised RDS and the Digit Span age-corrected scaled score provide the most accurate measure of performance validity among the three measures.

show abstract

“…Published guidelines identify a score of ≥ 45/50 correct on either the first or second learning trial as consistent with adequate effort (Gavett et al, 2005; Hilsabeck et al, 2011; O’Bryant et al, 2008), while a score < 45/50 is defined as suboptimal effort on the TOMM. Prior work suggests similar sensitivity between performance on Trial 1 alone or Trial 1 and Trial 2 (Bauer et al, 2007; Hilsabeck et al, 2011). For the present study, we administered only Trial 1 (T1) of the TOMM to reduce participant burden.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effort and neuropsychological performance in HIV-infected individuals on stable combination antiretroviral therapy

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The expression of cognitive symptoms associated with HIV varies over time and across individuals. This pattern may reflect transient contextual factors, including the degree of effort exerted by individuals undergoing cognitive testing. The present study examined whether effort corresponds to the expression of persistent HIV-related cognitive impairment among individuals receiving combination antiretroviral therapy (cART). HIV+ individuals (n = 111) averaged 48.2 (14.9) years of age 13.0 (2.7) years of education and HIV− individuals (n = 92) averaged 34.9 (17.2) years of age and 13.5 (1.9) years of education. Participants completed a neuropsychological battery and a clinically validated measure of effort (Test of Memory Malingering, Trial 1). Results revealed that the vast majority of HIV+ (85%) and HIV− (89%) individuals performed above published guidelines for adequate effort. Furthermore, the expression of cognitive impairment in HIV was not related to effort performance. The results were unchanged when examining HIV+ individuals with and without viral suppression. Finally, disability and disability-seeking status, and a proxy measure of apathy did not correspond to effort levels in HIV+ individuals. These findings suggest that variability in the expression of cognitive impairment in the cART era is unlikely to represent overt effort failures or other confounds unrelated to the disease. Persistent cognitive impairment in HIV likely represents historical and/or ongoing disease mechanisms despite otherwise successful treatment.

show abstract

Use of Trial 1 of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) as a Screening Measure of Effort: Suggested Discontinuation Rules

Cited by 63 publications

References 15 publications

Financial incentive does not affect P300 (in response to certain episodic and semantic probe stimuli) in the Complex Trial Protocol (CTP) version of the Concealed Information Test (CIT) in detection of malingering

Financial incentive does not affect P300 (in response to certain episodic and semantic probe stimuli) in the Complex Trial Protocol (CTP) version of the Concealed Information Test (CIT) in detection of malingering

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

Effort and neuropsychological performance in HIV-infected individuals on stable combination antiretroviral therapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About