Validation Of The Sentence Repetition Test As A Measure Of Suspect Effort

Ryan W. Schroeder · Paul Marshall

42 citations0/0 files storedThe Clinical Neuropsychologist

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Psychological Testing and Assessment Deception detection and forensic psychology Historical and Modern Theater Studies

Abstract

It has been suggested that the Sentence Repetition Test (SRT) could serve as an adequate embedded symptom validity measure identifying suspect effort during neuropsychological testing. However, very little research has examined sensitivity and specificity rates when using this measure in a variety of clinical settings. The SRT was administered to 1031 patients referred for neuropsychological assessment in outpatient, inpatient, and independent medical evaluation settings. These patients were diagnosed with a wide range of psychiatric, developmental, and neurological disorders. The results of this study reveal that the SRT is a valid measure of suspect effort for the vast majority of these patients (sensitivity = 56.8% and specificity = 95.8% in combined clinical settings). However, analyses also indicate that the SRT is not a valid effort measure for individuals with mental retardation or dementia due to specificity rates falling well below 90% for both groups. Furthermore, the validity of the SRT as an effort measure is questionable for individuals with English as a second language, with a verbal learning disability, with a left cerebrovascular accident, or with an expressive-receptive language disorder due to small sample sizes or borderline specificity rates. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive accuracy, and negative predictive accuracy rates are provided for varying cutoff scores in inpatient, outpatient, and IME settings. The results of this extensive study confirm that the SRT can be a useful measure in detecting suspect effort in neuropsychological testing while also providing valuable clinical information.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 42 citations exist upstream.

References

1991A compendium of neuropsychological tests: administration, norms, and commentary 1993A Compendium of Neuropsychological Tests: Administration, Norms, and Commentary 2001Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III 2001Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System 2004Neuropsychological assessment, 4th ed.1999Diagnostic Criteria for Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction: Proposed Standards for Clinical Practice and Research 2004Neuropsychological assessment.2009American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology Consensus Conference Statement on the Neuropsychological Assessment of Effort, Response Bias, and Malingering

Cited by

2019A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Test of Memory Malingering in adults: Two decades of deception detection 2018Research methods in performance validity testing studies: Criterion grouping approach impacts study outcomes 2022Take Their Word for It: The Inventory of Problems Provides Valuable Information on Both Symptom and Performance Validity 2014Bridging the Gap Between Neurocognitive Processing Theory and Performance Validity Assessment among the Cognitively Impaired: A Review and Methodological Approach

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.