The Experts below are selected from a list of 14424 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Jason R Soble - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
convergent discriminant and concurrent validity of nonMemory based performance validity Tests
Assessment, 2020Co-Authors: Troy A Webber, Edan A Critchfield, Jason R SobleAbstract:To supplement Memory-based Performance Validity Tests (PVTs) in identifying noncredible performance, we examined the validity of the two most commonly used nonMemory-based PVTs-Dot Counting Test (DCT) and Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Fourth edition (WAIS-IV) Reliable Digit Span (RDS)-as well as two alternative WAIS-IV Digit Span (DS) subTest PVTs. Examinees completed DCT, WAIS-IV DS, and the following criterion PVTs: Test of Memory Malingering, Word Memory Test, and Word Choice Test. Validity groups were determined by passing 3 (valid; n = 69) or failing ⩾2 (noncredible; n = 30) criterion PVTs. DCT, RDS, RDS-Revised (RDS-R), and WAIS-IV DS Age-Corrected Scaled Score (ACSS) were significantly correlated (but uncorrelated with Memory-based PVTs). Combining RDS, RDS-R, and ACSS with DCT improved classification accuracy (particularly for DCT/ACSS) for detecting noncredible performance among valid-unimpaired, but largely not valid-impaired examinees. Combining DCT with ACSS may uniquely assess and best supplement Memory-based PVTs to identify noncredible neuropsychological Test performance in cognitively unimpaired examinees.
-
the Word Memory Test genuine Memory impairment profile discriminates genuine Memory impairment from invalid performance in a mixed clinical sample with cognitive impairment
Clinical Neuropsychologist, 2019Co-Authors: Alexander W Alverson, Justin J F Orourke, Jason R SobleAbstract:Objective: The Word Memory Test (WMT) is a Memory-based performance validity Test (PVT) with adjusted interpretive criteria (Genuine Memory Impairment Profile; GMIP) proposed for those with cogniti...
-
the dot counting Test adds up validation and response pattern analysis in a mixed clinical veteran sample
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 2018Co-Authors: Jason R Soble, Octavio A Santos, Justin J F Orourke, Chase K Bailey, Kathleen M Bain, Joshua W Kirton, Edan A Critchfield, Jonathan M Highsmith, David Andres GonzalezAbstract:ABSTRACTObjective: This study cross-validated the Dot Counting Test (DCT) as a performance validity Test (PVT) among a mixed clinical veteran sample. Completion time and error patterns also were examined by validity group and cognitive impairment status.Method: This cross-sectional study included 77 veterans who completed the DCT during clinical evaluation. Seventy-four percent (N = 57) were classified as valid and 26% as noncredible (N = 20) via the Word Memory Test (WMT) and Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM). Among valid participants, 47% (N = 27) were cognitively impaired, and 53% (N = 30) were unimpaired.Results: DCT performance was not significantly associated with age, education, or bilingualism. Seventy-five percent of the overall sample committed at least one error across the 12 stimulus cards; however, valid participants had a 27% higher rate of 0 errors, while noncredible participants had a 35% higher rate of ≥4 errors. Overall, noncredible individuals had significantly longer completion times, ...
-
clinical utility of the rey 15 item Test recognition trial and error scores for detecting noncredible neuropsychological performance in a mixed clinical sample of veterans
Clinical Neuropsychologist, 2018Co-Authors: Chase K Bailey, Jason R Soble, Justin J F OrourkeAbstract:AbstractObjective: This cross-sectional study examined the Rey 15-Item Test (RFIT), Recognition Trial, and Error Scores for identifying noncredible performance in a mixed clinical veteran sample compared to another widely used validity measure, the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM). Method: Sixty-two veterans who completed the RFIT (Recall/Recognition Trials), TOMM, and Word Memory Test (WMT) during clinical evaluation were included. Using the WMT as the criterion, 71% (N = 44) were classified as valid and 29% (N = 18) as invalid. Results: Among valid participants, 25% failed the RFIT Recall, whereas 78% of invalid participants passed (sensitivity: 22%; specificity: 75%; diagnostic odds ratio [DOR]: .86). The Recognition Trial increased sensitivity to 39% for identifying invalid performance, but 25% of valid participants still scored below cut-off (specificity: 75%; DOR: 1.91). RFIT Recall and Recognition Trial logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were nonsignificant, w...
-
utility of green s Word Memory Test free recall subTest as a measure of verbal Memory initial evidence from a temporal lobe epilepsy clinical sample
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 2016Co-Authors: Jason R Soble, Katie E Osborn, Michelle Mattingly, Fernando L Vale, Selim R Benbadis, Nancy T Rodgersneame, Mike R SchoenbergAbstract:This study investigated the Word Memory Test (WMT) Free Recall (FR) subTest as a conventional Memory measure. Nineteen participants with pharmacoresistant left temporal lobe epilepsy (LTLE) and 16 with right temporal lobe epilepsy (RTLE) completed the WMT, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT), and Wechsler Memory Scale-Fourth Edition Logical Memory (LM) subTest during presurgical evaluation. LTLE participants performed significantly worse on FR subTest (p < .05, [Formula: see text]) and RAVLT Trial 7 (p < .01, [Formula: see text]), but not on LM subTest. Age was a significant covariate for FR (p < .01, [Formula: see text]). Logistic regression revealed FR plus age and RAVLT age-adjusted T-scores both yielded 77.1% classification accuracy and respective diagnostic odds ratios of 11.36 and 11.84. Receiver operating characteristic curves to classify seizure laterality found that RAVLT and FR were significant (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.82 and 0.74), whereas LM was nonsignificant (AUC = 0.67). Cut scores and positive/negative predictive values were established for improved clinical classification.
Paul Green - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
comparison of the Word Memory Test and the Test of Memory malingering in detecting invalid performance in neuropsychological Testing
Applied Neuropsychology, 2021Co-Authors: Chloe Bhowmick, Rayna B Hirst, Paul GreenAbstract:Given the prevalence of compensation seeking patients who exaggerate or fabricate their symptoms, the assessment of performance and symptom validity throughout Testing is vital in neuropsychologica...
-
misleading conclusions about Word Memory Test results in multiple sclerosis ms by loring and goldstein 2019
Applied Neuropsychology, 2020Co-Authors: Christopher J Graver, Paul GreenAbstract:Loring and Goldstein presented a case of a woman with Multiple Sclerosis (MS) who failed the traditional performance validity criteria of the WMT. Scoring lower than the mean from patients with Alz...
-
The Myth of High False-Positive Rates on the Word Memory Test in Mild TBI
Psychological Injury and Law, 2019Co-Authors: Laszlo A Erdodi, Paul Green, Christina D. Sirianni, Christopher A AbeareAbstract:This study was designed to replicate previous reports of elevated false-positive rates (FPR) on the Word Memory Test (WMT) in patients with mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) and to evaluate previous claims that genuine Memory deficits and non-credible responding are conflated on the WMT. Data from a consecutive case sequence of 170 patients with mild TBI referred for neuropsychological assessment were collected. Failure rate on the WMT was compared to that on other performance validity Tests (PVTs). The clinical characteristics and neuropsychological profiles of patients who passed and those who failed the WMT and other PVTs were compared. Base rate of failure was the highest on the WMT (44.7%), but comparable to that on other established PVTs (39.4–41.8%). The vast majority of patients (94.7%) who failed the WMT had independent evidence of invalid performance, refuting previous estimates of 20–30% FPR. Failing the WMT was associated with globally lower scores on Tests measuring various cognitive domains. The neurocognitive profile of individuals with invalid performance was remarkably consistent across various PVTs. Previously reported FPR of the WMT were not replicated. Failing the WMT typically occurred in the context of failing other PVTs too. Results suggest a common factor behind non-credible responding that is invariant of the psychometric definition of invalid performance. Failure on the WMT should not be discounted based on rational arguments unsubstantiated by objective data. Inferring elevated FPR from high failure rate alone is a fundamental epistemological error.
-
an examination of the Word Memory Test as a measure of Memory
Applied Neuropsychology, 2015Co-Authors: Patrick Armisteadjehle, Paul Green, Roger O. Gervais, Lars D HungerfordAbstract:This study examined the utility of the Word Memory Test (WMT) as a measure of verbal episodic Memory by comparing select WMT subTests to the California Verbal Learning Test (CVLT) First and Second Editions (CVLT-II) across two samples. Correlations between the WMT and CVLT/CVLT-II subTests were statistically significant in the expected direction. Effect sizes were examined to assess the degree to which the WMT Memory subTests and the CVLT First Edition subTests discriminated between groups of people who would be expected to differ from each other in verbal Memory abilities. Comparison groups included cases of mild, moderate, and severe traumatic brain injury, mixed neurological patients, healthy adult controls, and patients with possible early dementia. Once invalid data were removed by studying only those who passed performance validity Testing, it was found that the effect sizes between these groups were comparable. The WMT, CVLT, and CVLT-II were found to discriminate to about the same degree between people differing from each other in age, intelligence levels, and gender. Based on these data from a total sample of more than 3,000 cases, it is concluded that select WMT subTests are commensurate with the CVLT subTests as measures of Memory within primarily disability-seeking samples.
-
Word Memory Test profiles in two cases with surgical removal of the left anterior hippocampus and parahippocampal gyrus
Applied Neuropsychology, 2014Co-Authors: Dominic A Carone, Paul Green, Daniel L DraneAbstract:One principle underlying the use of the Word Memory Test (WMT) as an effort Test is that with good effort, recognition scores above the cutoffs will be observed. However, to understand the limits of effort Testing, it is necessary to study people known to have severe impairment and significant neuropathology involving Memory structures. Goodrich-Hunsaker and Hopkins (2009) reported that three amnesic patients with bilateral hippocampal damage had severely impaired free recall of the WMT Word list but passed the recognition subTests of the WMT, which are often called effort subTests. We Tested two patients with surgical resections in the left anterior temporal region to treat chronic intractable epilepsy; both patients had suffered postoperative strokes. Patient A was a 15-year-old boy and Patient B was a 58-year-old woman. Despite destruction of the left anterior hippocampus and the parahippocampal gyrus and despite impairment of free recall, both cases passed the easy WMT effort subTests. These data rein...
Mike R Schoenberg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
utility of green s Word Memory Test free recall subTest as a measure of verbal Memory initial evidence from a temporal lobe epilepsy clinical sample
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 2016Co-Authors: Jason R Soble, Katie E Osborn, Michelle Mattingly, Fernando L Vale, Selim R Benbadis, Nancy T Rodgersneame, Mike R SchoenbergAbstract:This study investigated the Word Memory Test (WMT) Free Recall (FR) subTest as a conventional Memory measure. Nineteen participants with pharmacoresistant left temporal lobe epilepsy (LTLE) and 16 with right temporal lobe epilepsy (RTLE) completed the WMT, Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT), and Wechsler Memory Scale-Fourth Edition Logical Memory (LM) subTest during presurgical evaluation. LTLE participants performed significantly worse on FR subTest (p < .05, [Formula: see text]) and RAVLT Trial 7 (p < .01, [Formula: see text]), but not on LM subTest. Age was a significant covariate for FR (p < .01, [Formula: see text]). Logistic regression revealed FR plus age and RAVLT age-adjusted T-scores both yielded 77.1% classification accuracy and respective diagnostic odds ratios of 11.36 and 11.84. Receiver operating characteristic curves to classify seizure laterality found that RAVLT and FR were significant (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.82 and 0.74), whereas LM was nonsignificant (AUC = 0.67). Cut scores and positive/negative predictive values were established for improved clinical classification.
-
sensitivity of green s Word Memory Test genuine Memory impairment profile to temporal pathology a study in patients with temporal lobe epilepsy
Clinical Neuropsychologist, 2014Co-Authors: Katie E Eichstaedt, Fernando L Vale, Selim R Benbadis, Nancy T Rodgersneame, William Clifton, Ali Bozorg, Mike R SchoenbergAbstract:Performance validity Tests (PVTs) such as Green's Word Memory Test (WMT) are designed to have face validity as Memory Tests while individuals with neurologically based Memory deficits can score adequately provided there is sufficient task engagement. Some patients with severe Memory loss have performed poorly on the WMT, raising questions about false positive errors. This study compared performances of 43 patients with left, right, or bilateral temporal lobe epilepsy on the WMT to a Test known to be sensitive to temporal lobe pathology, the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT). The right TLE group outperformed the left on the WMT free recall (FR) scores and RAVLT short-delay and long-delay trials (Trials 6 and 7) (p < .05); no other between-group differences occurred (p ≥ .10). Ten participants (20.4%) performed below the cut-off score on at least one WMT effort subTest, but eight (80%) exhibited the genuine Memory impairment profile (GMIP). Logistic regression found no WMT subTest contributed to predicting side of seizure with RAVLT scores in the model. Data suggest WMT primary effort subTests are generally insensitive to known temporal lobe pathology, and using the GMIP is valuable to identify individuals with severe Memory loss who score below criterion on WMT primary effort subTests.
Robert D Shura - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
use of the Word Memory Test wmt medical symptom validity Test msvt and nonverbal medical symptom validity Test nv msvt in assessment following head injury
2021Co-Authors: Patrick Armisteadjehle, Robert L Denney, Robert D ShuraAbstract:The current chapter reviews, in detail, the Word Memory Test (WMT), with a focus on its forensic applications, especially as related to litigation involving traumatic brain injury. Chapter subsections include an overview of the measure’s history, development, structure, reviews of the related head injury and forensic literatures, and commentary on concerns of WMT false positives. Although far less research exists for the Medical Symptom Validity Test and Non-Verbal Medical Symptom Validity Test, they maintain a very similar structure to the WMT and are also reviewed.
-
Word Memory Test performance across cognitive domains psychiatric presentations and mild traumatic brain injury
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 2016Co-Authors: Robert D Shura, Jared A Rowland, Holly M Miskey, Timothy W Brearly, Sarah L MartindaleAbstract:Objective The current study addressed two aims: (i) determine how Word Memory Test (WMT) performance relates to Test performance across numerous cognitive domains and (ii) evaluate how current psychiatric disorders or mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) history affects performance on the WMT after excluding participants with poor symptom validity. Method Participants were 235 Iraq and Afghanistan-era veterans (Mage = 35.5) who completed a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Participants were divided into two groups based on WMT performance (Pass = 193, Fail = 42). Tests were grouped into cognitive domains and an average z-score was calculated for each domain. Results Significant differences were found between those who passed and those who failed the WMT on the Memory, attention, executive function, and motor output domain z-scores. WMT failure was associated with a larger performance decrement in the Memory domain than the sensation or visuospatial-construction domains. Participants with a current psychiatric diagnosis or mTBI history were significantly more likely to fail the WMT, even after removing participants with poor symptom validity. Conclusions Results suggest that the WMT is most appropriate for assessing validity in the domains of attention, executive function, motor output and Memory, with little relationship to performance in domains of sensation or visuospatial-construction. Comprehensive cognitive batteries would benefit from inclusion of additional performance validity Tests in these domains. Additionally, symptom validity did not explain higher rates of WMT failure in individuals with a current psychiatric diagnosis or mTBI history. Further research is needed to better understand how these conditions may affect WMT performance.
Andreas Stevens - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the Word Memory Test in medicolegal assessment a measure of effort and malingering
Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 2019Co-Authors: Andreas Stevens, Christina LichaAbstract:The Word Memory Test (WMT) is claimed to measure effort and to detect cognitive response bias. Archival data from n = 2526 cases referred in 2009–2016 for medicolegal assessment were analyzed. Each...
-
symptom validity Testing in claimants with alleged posttraumatic stress disorder comparing the morel emotional numbing Test the structured inventory of malingered symptomatology and the Word Memory Test
Psychological Injury and Law, 2009Co-Authors: Thomas Merten, Elisabeth Thies, Katrin Schneider, Andreas StevensAbstract:In independent medical examinations, unjustified claims of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are to be expected at an increased rate. In a prospective study, consecutive cases of patients claiming PTSD who underwent independent neuropsychiatric evaluation were analyzed. For 61 adult patients, results of three symptom validity Tests (Morel Emotional Numbing Test, Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology, and Word Memory Test) were available. Seventy percent of all claimants showed probable negative response bias in at least one of the three Tests, 25% in all three Tests. High probability of negative response bias was associated with symptom overreporting and demonstration of cognitive deficits in performance Tests. The results indicate that high rates of uncooperativeness must be expected in civil forensic patients with claimed PTSD. A multi-method approach to the assessment of response distortion in PTSD claimants is indicated.
-
malingering and uncooperativeness in psychiatric and psychological assessment prevalence and effects in a german sample of claimants
Psychiatry Research-neuroimaging, 2008Co-Authors: Andreas Stevens, Eva Friedel, Gisela Mehren, Thomas MertenAbstract:Effort has repeatedly been shown to have a pervasive effect on performance in psychological Tests. The current study evaluates to what degree performance on various psychological Tests is affected by lack of effort as compared with brain injury. Psychological and medical data from a sample of 233 patients referred from Workers' Compensation Boards or from claimants in personal injury litigation were retrospectively analyzed. Each patient underwent a battery of psychological Tests and a medical examination. Measures of effort were derived from the Word Memory Test (WMT) and the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT). Insufficient effort was shown by 44.6% of the patients. The frequency of patients failing the effort Tests was independent of age, sex, referral source, and leading complaint. Effort accounted for up to 35% of the variance of performance in the domains of cognitive speed, Memory and intelligence. After controlling for effort, there was no significant effect that could be attributed to substantial brain injury. The findings confirm that there is a general and strong effect of effort on psychological Test results, which dwarfs the impact of substantial brain injury. Effort Testing should become a standard procedure in psychological Testing.
