Top

Published in:

01-03-2022 | Review

Response Time Measures as Supplementary Validity Indicators in Forced-Choice Recognition Memory Performance Validity Tests: A Systematic Review

Author: Yoram Braw

Published in: Neuropsychology Review | Issue 1/2022

Abstract

Performance validity tests (PVTs) based on the forced-choice recognition memory (FCRM) paradigm are commonly used for the detection of noncredible performance. Examinees' response times (RTs) are affected by cognitive processes associated with deception and can also be gathered without lengthening the duration of the assessment. Consequently, interest in the utility of these measures as supplementary validity indicators in FCRM-PVTs has grown over the years. The current systematic review summarizes both clinical and simulation (i.e., healthy participants simulating cognitive impairment) studies of RTs in FCRM-PVTs. The findings of 25 peer-reviewed articles (n = 26 empirical studies) indicate that noncredible performance in FCRM-PVTs is associated with longer RTs. Additionally, there are indications that noncredible performance is associated with larger variability in RTs. RT measures, however, have lower discrimination capacity than conventional accuracy measures. Their utility may therefore lie in reaching decisions regarding cases with border zone accuracy scores, as well as aiding in the detection of more sophisticated examinees who are aware of the use of accuracy-based validity indicators in FCRM-PVTs. More research, however, is required before these measures are incorporated in daily practice and clinical decision-making processes.

Allen, L. M., Conder, R. L., Green, P., & Cox, D. R. (1997). CARB'97 manual for the Computerized Assessment of Response Bias. CogniSyst.

Allen, M. D., Wu, T. C., & Bigler, E. D. (2011). Traumatic brain injury alters word memory test performance by slowing response time and increasing cortical activation: an fMRI study of a symptom validity test. Psychological Injury and Law, 4, 140–146.CrossRef

Ashendorf, L., Clark, E. L., & Sugarman, M. A. (2017). Performance validity and processing speed in a VA Polytrauma sample. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 31(5), 857–866. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2017.1285961CrossRefPubMed

*Beetar, J. T., & Williams, J. M. (1995). Malingering response styles on the memory assessment scales and symptom validity tests. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 10(1), 57–72. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14588450

Bender, S. D., & Frederick, R. (2018). Neuropsychological Models of Feigned Cognitive Deficits (ch. 3). In R. Rogers & S. D. Bender (Eds.), Clinical Assessment of Malingering and Deception (4 ed., pp. 42–60). Guilford Press.

Bigler, E. D. (2014). Effort, symptom validity testing, performance validity testing and traumatic brain injury. Brain Injury, 28(13–14), 1623–1638. https://doi.org/10.3109/02699052.2014.947627CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Binder, L. M., & Willis, S. C. (1991). Assesment of motivation after financially compensable minor head trauma. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 3(2), 175–181.CrossRef

*Bolan, B., Foster, J. K., Schmand, B., & Bolan, S. (2002). A comparison of three tests to detect feigned amnesia: The effects of feedback and the measurement of response latency. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24(2), 154–167. https://doi.org/10.1076/jcen.24.2.154.1000

Boone, K., LU, P., & Herzberg, D. S. (2002). The Dot Counting Test Manual. Western Psychological Services.

Boone, K. B. (2013). Clinical Practice of Forensic Psychology: An Evidence-Based Approach. Guilford Press.

Bush, S. S., Ruff, R. M., Troster, A. I., Barth, J. T., Koffler, S. P., Pliskin, N. H., Reynolds, C. R., & Silver, C. H. (2005). Symptom validity assessment: practice issues and medical necessity NAN policy & planning committee. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 20(4), 419–426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acn.2005.02.002CrossRefPubMed

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analyses for the behavioral sciences (2 ed.). Erlbaum.

Costa, A. S., Dogan, I., Schulz, J. B., & Reetz, K. (2019). Going beyond the mean: Intraindividual variability of cognitive performance in prodromal and early neurodegenerative disorders. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 33(2), 369–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2018.1533587CrossRefPubMed

Dandachi-FitzGerald, B., Merckelbach, H., & Ponds, R. W. H. M. (2017). Neuropsychologists’ ability to predict distorted symptom presentation. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 39(3), 257–264. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2016.1223278CrossRefPubMed

Diaz-Orueta, U., Blanco-Campal, A., Lamar, M., Libon, D. J., & Burke, T. (2020). Marrying past and present neuropsychology: is the future of the process-based approach technology-based? Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 361. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00361.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

*Dunn, T. M., Shear, P. K., Howe, S., & Ris, M. D. (2003). Detecting neuropsychological malingering: effects of coaching and information. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 18(2), 121–134. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14591464

Dymowski, A. R., Owens, J. A., Ponsford, J. L., & Willmott, C. (2015, Nov 26). Speed of processing and strategic control of attention after traumatic brain injury. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 37(10), 1024–1035. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2015.1074663

*Elbaum, T., Golan, L., Lupu, T., Wagner, M., & Braw, Y. (2019). Feb 6). Establishing supplementary response time validity indicators in the Word Memory Test (WMT) and directions for future research. Applied Neuropsychology. Adult, 6, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2018.1555161CrossRef

*Erdodi, L. A., Tyson, B. T., Shahein, A. G., Lichtenstein, J. D., Abeare, C. A., Pelletier, C. L., Zuccato, B. G., Kucharski, B., & Roth, R. M. (2017, May). The power of timing: Adding a time-to-completion cutoff to the Word Choice Test and Recognition Memory Test improves classification accuracy. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 39(4), 369–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2016.1230181

Friedman, N. P., & Miyake, A. (2017, Jan). Unity and diversity of executive functions: Individual differences as a window on cognitive structure. Cortex, 86, 186–204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2016.04.023.CrossRefPubMed

Green, P. (2005). Green's Word Memory Test for Windows: User's manual (revised June 2005). Green's Publications.

Green, P., Allen, L., & Astner, K. (1996). The Word Memory Test: A user’s guide to the oral and computer-administered forms, US Version 1.1. CogniSyst.

Green, P., & Astner, K. (1994). Manual for the Oral Word Memory Test. Cognisyst.

*Green, P., & Iverson, G. L. (2001). Validation of the computerized assessment of response bias in litigating patients with head injuries. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 15(4), 492–497. https://doi.org/10.1076/clin.15.4.492.1887CrossRefPubMed

Grote, C. L., & Hook, J. N. (2007). Forced-Choice Recognition Tests of Malingering (ch. 4). In G. J. Larrabee (Ed.), Assessment of Malingered Neuropsychological Deficits (pp. 44–79). Oxford University Press.

*Grote, C. L., Kooker, E. K., Garron, D. C., Nyenhuis, D. L., Smith, C. A., & Mattingly, M. L. (2000). Performance of compensation seeking and non-compensation seeking samples on the Victoria symptom validity test: cross-validation and extension of a standardization study. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 22(6), 709–719. https://doi.org/10.1076/jcen.22.6.709.958CrossRefPubMed

Gutiérrez, J. M., & Gur, R. C. (2012). Detection of malingering using forced-choice techniques (ch. 4). In C. R. Reynolds & A. M. J. Horton (Eds.), Detection of Malingering during Head Injury Litigation (2 ed., pp. 151–167). Springer.

*Haggerty, K. A., Frazier, T. W., Busch, R. M., & Naugle, R. I. (2007). Relationships among victoria symptom validity test indices and personality assessment inventory validity scales in a large clinical sample. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 21(6), 917–928. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854040600899724CrossRefPubMed

Heilbronner, R. L., Sweet, J. J., Morgan, J. E., Larrabee, G. J., & Millis, S. R. (2009). American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology Consensus Conference Statement on the neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23(7), 1093–1129. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854040903155063CrossRefPubMed

Heitz, R. P. (2014). The speed-accuracy tradeoff: history, physiology, methodology, and behavior. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 8, 150. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2014.00150CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Hill, B. D., Rohling, M. L., Boettcher, A. C., & Meyers, J. E. (2013). Cognitive intra-individual variability has a positive association with traumatic brain injury severity and suboptimal effort. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 28(7), 640–648. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/act045CrossRefPubMed

Hosmer, D. W., Lemeshow, S., & Sturdivant, R. X. (2013). Applied logisitic regression (3 ed.). John Wiley & Sons.

*Jones, A. (2013). Victoria Symptom Validity Test: cutoff scores for psychometrically defined malingering groups in a military sample. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 27(8), 1373–1394. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2013.851740CrossRefPubMed

*Kanser, R. J., Rapport, L. J., Bashem, J. R., & Hanks, R. A. (2019). Detecting malingering in traumatic brain injury: combining response time with performance validity test accuracy. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 33(1), 90–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2018.1440006CrossRefPubMed

*Kim, M. S., Boone, K. B., Victor, T., Marion, S. D., Amano, S., Cottingham, M. E., Ziegler, E. A., & Zeller, M. A. (2010). The Warrington Recognition Memory Test for words as a measure of response bias: total score and response time cutoffs developed on “real world” credible and noncredible subjects. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 25(1), 60–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acp088CrossRefPubMed

Larrabee, G. J. (2012). Performance validity and symptom validity in neuropsychological assessment. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 18(4), 625–631. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23057079

Lippa, S. M. (2018). Performance validity testing in neuropsychology: A clinical guide, critical review, and update on a rapidly evolving literature. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 32(3), 391–421. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2017.1406146CrossRefPubMed

*Lupu, T., Elbaum, T., Wagner, M., & Braw, Y. (2018). Enhanced detection of feigned cognitive impairment using per item response time measurements in the Word Memory Test. Applied Neuropsychology. Adult, 5(6), 532–542.CrossRef

Martin, P. K., Schroeder, R. W., & Odland, A. P. (2015). Neuropsychologists’ Validity Testing Beliefs and Practices: A Survey of North American Professionals. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 29(6), 741–776. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2015.1087597CrossRefPubMed

McGuire, C., Crawford, S., & Evans, J. J. (2019). Mar 22). Effort Testing in Dementia Assessment: A Systematic Review. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 34, 114–131. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acy012CrossRefPubMed

Miller, J. B. (2019). Big data and biomedical informatics: Preparing for the modernization of clinical neuropsychology. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 33(2), 287–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2018.1523466CrossRefPubMed

Millis, S. R., & Kaufmann, P. M. (2018). Assessment of Incomplete Effort and Malingering in the Neuropsychological Examination (ch. 38). In J. E. Morgan & J. H. Ricker (Eds.), Textbook of Clinical Neuropsychology (2 ed., pp. 927–941). Routledge.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & Group, P. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: Ahe PRISMA statement. Annals of Internal Medicine, 151(4), 264–269, W264. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135

O’Bryant, S. E., & Lucas, J. A. (2006). Estimating the predictive value of the Test of Memory Malingering: an illustrative example for clinicians. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 20(3), 533–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854040590967568CrossRefPubMed

*Patrick, S. D., Rapport, L. J., Kanser, R. J., Hanks, R. A., & Bashem, J. R. (2020). Performance validity assessment using response time on the Warrington Recognition Memory Test. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 1–20. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32068486

Pearson. (2009). Advanced Clinical Solutions for WAIS®-IV and WMS®-IV: Clinical and interpretive manual. Pearson.

Rickards, T. A., Cranston, C. C., Touradji, P., & Bechtold, K. T. (2018). Embedded performance validity testing in neuropsychological assessment: Potential clinical tools. Applied Neuropsychology. Adult, 25(3), 219–230.CrossRef

Rogers, R. (2018a). Detection Strategies for Malingering and Defensiveness (Ch. 2). In R. Rogers & S. D. Bender (Eds.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (4 ed., pp. 18–41). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Rogers, R. (2018b). An Introduction to Response Styles (Ch. 1). In R. Rogers & S. D. Bender (Eds.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (4 ed., pp. 3–17). Guilford Press.

Rogers, R. (2018c). Researching Response Styles (Ch. 30). In R. Rogers & S. D. Bender (Eds.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (4 ed., pp. 592–614). Guilford Press.

*Rose, F. E., Hall, S., & Szalda-petree, A. D. (1995). Portland digit recognition test-computerized: Measuring response latency improves the detection of malingering. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 9(2), 124–134.CrossRef

*Rose, F. E., Hall, S., Szalda-Petree, A. D., & Bach, P. J. (1998). A comparison of four tests of malingering and the effects of coaching. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 13(4), 349–363. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14590614

Rosenfeld, B., Sands, S. A., & Van Gorp, W. G. (2000). Have we forgotten the base rate problem? Methodological issues in the detection of distortion. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 15(4), 349–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0887-6177(99)00025-6CrossRefPubMed

Rothlind, J., Dukarm, P., & Kraybill, M. (2017). Assessment of self-awareness of cognitive function: correlations of self-ratings with actual performance ranks for tests of processing speed, memory and executive function in non-clinical samples. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 32(3), 316–327. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acw109.CrossRefPubMed

Ruocco, A. C. (2016). Compliance on neuropsychological performance validity testing in patients with borderline personality disorder. Psychological Assessment, 28(3), 345–350. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039481.CrossRefPubMed

Schagen, S., Schmand, B., de Sterke, S., & Lindeboom, J. (1997). Amsterdam Short-Term Memory test: a new procedure for the detection of feigned memory deficits. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 19(1), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/01688639708403835CrossRefPubMed

Schmand, B., de Sterke, S., & Lindeboom, J. (1999). Amsterdamse Korte termijn Geheugen Test. Handleiding. (Amsterdam Short Term Memory Test Manual). Swets and Zeitlinger.

Sherman, E. M. S., Slick, D. J., & Iverson, G. L. (2020). Multidimensional Malingering Criteria for Neuropsychological Assessment: A 20-Year Update of the Malingered Neuropsychological Dysfunction Criteria. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acaa019CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Silk-Eglit, G. M., Lynch, J. K., & McCaffrey, R. J. (2016). Validation of victoria symptom validity test cutoff scores among mild traumatic brain injury litigants using a known-groups design. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 31(3), 231–245. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acv108.CrossRefPubMed

*Slick, D. J., Hopp, G., Strauss, E., & Spellacy, F. J. (1996). Victoria Symptom Validity Test: Efficiency for detecting feigned memory impairment and relationship to neuropsychological tests and MMPI-2 validity scales. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 18(6), 911–922. https://doi.org/10.1080/01688639608408313CrossRefPubMed

Slick, D. J., Hopp, G., Strauss, E., & Thompson, G. B. (1997). Victoria symptom validity test: Version 1.0. Professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.

*Strauss, E., Hultsch, D. F., Hunter, M., Slick, D. J., Patry, B., & Levy-Bencheton, J. (2000). Using intraindividual variability to detect malingering in cognitive performance. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 14(4), 420–432. https://doi.org/10.1076/1385-4046(199911)13:04;1-Y;FT420CrossRef

*Strauss, E., Slick, D. J., Levy-Bencheton, J., Hunter, M., MacDonald, S. W., & Hultsch, D. F. (2002). Intraindividual variability as an indicator of malingering in head injury. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 17(5), 423–444. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14591998

Stuss, D. T. (2011). Functions of the frontal lobes: Relation to executive functions. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 17(5), 759–765. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617711000695CrossRefPubMed

Suchotzki, K., Verschuere, B., Van Bockstaele, B., Ben-Shakhar, G., & Crombez, G. (2017). Lying Takes Time: A Meta-Analysis on Reaction Time Measures of Deception. Psychological Bulletin, 143(4), 428–453. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000087CrossRefPubMed

Suhr, J. A., & Gunstad, J. (2007). Coaching and malingering: a review. In G. J. Larrabee (Ed.), Assessment of Malingered Neuropsychological Deficits (pp. 287–311). Oxford University press.

*Tan, J. E., Slick, D. J., Strauss, E., & Hultsch, D. F. (2002). How’d they do it? Malingering strategies on symptom validity tests. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 16(4), 495–505. https://doi.org/10.1076/clin.16.4.495.13909CrossRefPubMed

*Tardif, H. P., Barry, R. J., & Johnstone, S. J. (2002). Event-related potentials reveal processing differences in honest vs malingered memory performance. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 46(2), 147–158. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12433390

Tombaugh, T. N. (1996). Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM). Multi-Health Systems.

Tombaugh, T. N., Rees, L., Stormer, P., Harrison, A. G., & Smith, A. (2007). The effects of mild and severe traumatic brain injury on speed of information processing as measured by the computerized tests of information processing (CTIP). Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 22(1), 25–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acn.2006.06.013CrossRefPubMed

*Vagnini, V. L., Berry, D. T., Clark, J. A., & Jiang, Y. (2008). New measures to detect malingered neurocognitive deficit: applying reaction time and event-related potentials. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 30(7), 766–776. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390701754746CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

*van Hooff, J. C., Sargeant, E., Foster, J. K., & Schmand, B. A. (2009). Identifying deliberate attempts to fake memory impairment through the combined use of reaction time and event-related potential measures. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 73(3), 246–256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2009.04.002CrossRefPubMed

*Vilar-Lopez, R., Gomez-Rio, M., Caracuel-Romero, A., Llamas-Elvira, J., & Perez-Garcia, M. (2008). Use of specific malingering measures in a Spanish sample. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 30(6), 710–722. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390701684562CrossRefPubMed

Warrington, E. K. (1984). Recognition Memory Test: Manual. NFER-Nelson.

Woods, D. L., Wyma, J. M., Herron, T. J., & Yund, E. W. (2015). The Effects of Aging, Malingering, and Traumatic Brain Injury on Computerized Trail-Making Test Performance. PLoS ONE, 10(6), e0124345. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0124345CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Young, J. C., Roper, B. L., & Arentsen, T. J. (2016). Validity testing and neuropsychology practice in the VA healthcare system: Results from recent practitioner survey. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 30(4), 497–514. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2016.1159730CrossRefPubMed

Title: Response Time Measures as Supplementary Validity Indicators in Forced-Choice Recognition Memory Performance Validity Tests: A Systematic Review
Author: Yoram Braw
Publication date: 01-03-2022
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Neuropsychology Review / Issue 1/2022
Print ISSN: 1040-7308
Electronic ISSN: 1573-6660
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-021-09499-z

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Response Time Measures as Supplementary Validity Indicators in Forced-Choice Recognition Memory Performance Validity Tests: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

Psychological Tests in Arabic: A Review of Methodological Practices and Recommendations for Future Use

Cognitive Remediation as an Adjunct Treatment for Substance Use Disorders: A Systematic Review

The Use of Standardized Intraoperative Language Tests in Awake Craniotomies: A Scoping Review

Apathy and Depression as Predictors of Activities of Daily Living Following Stroke and Traumatic Brain Injuries in Adults: A Meta-Analysis

Correction to: Apathy and Depression as Predictors of Activities of Daily Living Following Stroke and Traumatic Brain Injuries in Adults: a Meta‑Analysis

Impact of Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy on Cognitive Functions: a Systematic Review