Utility of critical items within the Recognition Memory Test and Word Choice Test

László A. Erdődi · Brad T. Tyson · Christopher A. Abeare · Brandon G Zuccato · Kristian R. Seke · Sanya Sagar +1 more

43 citations0/0 files storedApplied Neuropsychology Adult

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

This study was designed to examine the clinical utility of critical items within the Recognition Memory Test (RMT) and the Word Choice Test (WCT). Archival data were collected from a mixed clinical sample of 202 patients clinically referred for neuropsychological testing (54.5% male; mean age = 45.3 years; mean level of education = 13.9 years). The credibility of a given response set was psychometrically defined using three separate composite measures, each of which was based on multiple independent performance validity indicators. Critical items improved the classification accuracy of both tests. They increased sensitivity by correctly identifying an additional 2-17% of the invalid response sets that passed the traditional cutoffs based on total score. They also increased specificity by providing additional evidence of noncredible performance in response sets that failed the total score cutoff. The combination of failing the traditional cutoff, but passing critical items was associated with increased risk of misclassifying the response set as invalid. Critical item analysis enhances the diagnostic power of both the RMT and WCT. Given that critical items require no additional test material or administration time, but help reduce both false positive and false negative errors, they represent a versatile, valuable, and time- and cost-effective supplement to performance validity assessment.

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 — 43 citations exist upstream.

References

1995Neuropsychological assessment.1999Diagnostic Criteria for Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction: Proposed Standards for Clinical Practice and Research 2011LibGuides: Assessment Tools: Revised comprehensive norms for an expanded Halstead-Reitan battery demographically adjusted neuropsychological norms for African American and Caucasian adults 1994Validation of malingered amnesia measures with a large clinical sample.2003Detection of Malingering Using Atypical Performance Patterns on Standard Neuropsychological Tests 1996The new rules of measurement.2007Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment: A neuropsychological perspective.2008The Need For Continuous and Comprehensive Sampling of Effort/Response Bias During Neuropsychological Examinations

Cited by

2020Introducing a forced choice recognition trial to the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test – Revised 2019Stronger Together: The Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale—Fourth Edition as a Multivariate Performance Validity Test in Patients with Traumatic Brain Injury 2021They are not destined to fail: a systematic examination of scores on embedded performance validity indicators in patients with intellectual disability 2021This will only take a minute: Time cutoffs are superior to accuracy cutoffs on the forced choice recognition trial of the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test – Revised

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.