Detecting noncredible performance with the neuropsychological assessment battery, screening module: A simulation study

Identifying Novel Embedded Performance Validity Test Formulas Within the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status: a Simulation Study

“…The results yield several noteworthy findings. First, as was reported in a previous paper utilizing this dataset (Lace et al, 2019), the experimental manipulation appeared successful, with examinees efficaciously demonstrating neurocognitive impairment as evidenced by generally moderate-to-large effect sizes among subtests between groups (apart from PN). Moreover, in line with the manipulation instructions that, in part, coached S-mTBI group participants to demonstrate attention/executive functioning difficulties related to mTBIs, subtests with a component of attention and speeded responding (DS, CD, and SF) demonstrated the largest effect sizes between groups, while those demanding relatively less executively mediated cognition (i.e., LO and PN) showed lower effect sizes.…”

“…Both groups received general warning about the presence of performance validity indicators such that, if they were detected as exaggerating their impairment, they would risk losing all fictional compensation. In-depth procedures for the present study, including specific details of the manipulation instructions, are described elsewhere (see online supplemental material of Lace et al, 2019).…”

“…When they were finished, participants retrieved the researcher from the adjacent room and were administered the neuropsychological tests. Standalone PVTs were administered in the same order (DCT, WCT, and b Test) for each participant, with the RBANS and another neurocognitive screening measure (not described in the present paper; see Lace et al, 2019) randomly counterbalanced to be at either the beginning or end of the battery. All measures were administered by doctoral level clinical psychology students proficient in neuropsychological test administration.…”

“…Eighty-four participants were recruited from undergraduate social science courses at a private university in the Midwestern United States and participated as part of a larger study (see Lace et al, 2019). One-half of participants were randomly assigned to an asymptomatic, optimal performance group (AS), and one-half were assigned to a simulated mTBI group (S-mTBI).…”

Relationship of Corpus Callosum Integrity with Working Memory, Planning, and Speed of Processing in Patients with First-Episode and Chronic Schizophrenia

“…Each maze was distributed on a single sheet of paper and had to be completed using a pencil. Based on data collected and reviewed by Lace et al [ 75 ], we measured planning independently of speed of processing using the sum of the mazes completed (NABMS), and planning dependent on speed of processing using the sum of points awarded based on the time taken to solve the mazes (NABMSP).…”