• Login
    View Item 
    •   Shocker Open Access Repository Home
    • Graduate Student Research
    • GRASP: Graduate Research and Scholarly Projects
    • Proceedings 2020: 16th Annual Symposium on Graduate Research and Scholarly Projects
    • View Item
    •   Shocker Open Access Repository Home
    • Graduate Student Research
    • GRASP: Graduate Research and Scholarly Projects
    • Proceedings 2020: 16th Annual Symposium on Graduate Research and Scholarly Projects
    • View Item
    JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

    Invalid performance validity test but normal cognitive test performances, What does it mean?

    View/Open
    abstract (85.88Kb)
    Date
    2020-05-01
    Author
    Martinez, Karen A.
    Sayers, Courtney
    Hayes, Charles A.
    Advisor
    Clark, Charles B.; Schroeder, Ryan W.; Martin, Phillip K.
    Metadata
    Show full item record
    Citation
    Martinez, K. A., Sayers, C., Hayes, C. A. 2020. Invalid performance validity test but normal cognitive test performances, What does it mean? -- In Proceedings: 16th Annual Symposium on Graduate Research and Scholarly Projects. Wichita, KS: Wichita State University, p.49
    Abstract
    While use of performance validity tests (PVTs) has become a standard of practice in neuropsychology, there are varying opinions regarding how to interpret cognitive test data, especially 'average' range data, if PVTs are failed. This study examined whether 'average' scores underrepresent functioning when PVTs are failed. Participants, randomly assigned to either a simulated malingering group (n=50) instructed to mildly suppress test performances or a best-effort/control group (n=50), completed the California Verbal Learning Test-II (CVLT-II) and Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM). Groups were not significantly different in age, education, or predicted IQ, but simulators performed significantly worse than controls on both the TOMM and CVLT-II short delay free recall (p<.05). Of simulators who failed the TOMM, 36% scored no worse than average (>25th percentile) and 73% scored no worse than low average (>10th percentile) on the CVLT-II. Given that simulators were instructed to suppress their cognitive performances and they scored worse than controls on the TOMM and CVLT-II, it is apparent their CVLT-II test performances were indeed suppressed despite generally being no worse than low average. These results indicate 'normal' cognitive test scores cannot be interpreted as accurately reflecting an individual's cognitive capabilities when obtained in the presence of failed PVTs.
    Description
    Presented to the 16th Annual Symposium on Graduate Research and Scholarly Projects (GRASP) held online, Wichita State University, May 1, 2020.

    Research completed in the Department of Psychology, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences; Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Kansas of Medicine
    URI
    https://soar.wichita.edu/handle/10057/17610
    Collections
    • Proceedings 2020: 16th Annual Symposium on Graduate Research and Scholarly Projects
    • PSY Graduate Student Conference Papers

    Browse

    All of Shocker Open Access RepositoryCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsBy TypeThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsBy Type

    My Account

    LoginRegister

    Statistics

    Most Popular ItemsStatistics by CountryMost Popular Authors

    DSpace software copyright © 2002-2022  DuraSpace
    DSpace Express is a service operated by 
    Atmire NV