Multivariate Models of Performance Validity: The Erdodi Index Captures the Dual Nature of Non-Credible Responding (Continuous and Categorical)

László A. Erdődi

54 citations0/0 files storedAssessment

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 classification accuracy of the Erdodi Index (EI-5), a novel method for aggregating validity indicators that takes into account both the number and extent of performance validity test (PVT) failures. Archival data were collected from a mixed clinical/forensic sample of 452 adults referred for neuropsychological assessment. The classification accuracy of the EI-5 was evaluated against established free-standing PVTs. The EI-5 achieved a good combination of sensitivity (.65) and specificity (.97), correctly classifying 92% of the sample. Its classification accuracy was comparable with that of another free-standing PVT. An indeterminate range between Pass and Fail emerged as a legitimate third outcome of performance validity assessment, indicating that the underlying construct is an inherently continuous variable. Results support the use of the EI model as a practical and psychometrically sound method of aggregating multiple embedded PVTs into a single-number summary of performance validity. Combining free-standing PVTs with the EI-5 resulted in a better separation between credible and non-credible profiles, demonstrating incremental validity. Findings are consistent with recent endorsements of a three-way outcome for PVTs ( Pass, Borderline, and Fail).

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 — 54 citations exist upstream.

References

1991A Compendium of Neuropsychological Tests 2002Base Rates of Malingering and Symptom Exeggeration 1999Diagnostic Criteria for Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction: Proposed Standards for Clinical Practice and Research 2009American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology Consensus Conference Statement on the Neuropsychological Assessment of Effort, Response Bias, and Malingering 2005Symptom validity assessment: Practice issues and medical necessityNAN Policy & Planning Committee 2011Neuropsychological Assessment 1994Validation of malingered amnesia measures with a large clinical sample.2003Detection of Malingering Using Atypical Performance Patterns on Standard Neuropsychological Tests

Cited by

2022Take Their Word for It: The Inventory of Problems Provides Valuable Information on Both Symptom and Performance Validity 2022Multivariate models provide an effective psychometric solution to the variability in classification accuracy of D-KEFS Stroop performance validity cutoffs 2023Cutoff Elasticity in Multivariate Models of Performance Validity Assessment as a Function of the Number of Components and Aggregation Method 2023Replicating a Meta-Analysis: The Search for the Optimal Word Choice Test Cutoff Continues

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.