The impact of visual memory impairment on Victoria Symptom Validity Test performance: A known-groups analysis

Do demographic factors influence detection of invalid neuropsychological test performance using common performance validity tests? A multisite investigation.

“…The past decade has resulted in significant expansion of PVT research beyond traditional forensic/medicolegal contexts and now involves a multitude of freestanding and embedded PVTs being cross-validated in diverse clinical populations, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (e.g., Marshall et al, 2010; Scimeca et al, 2021), epilepsy (e.g., Grabyan et al, 2018; Loring et al, 2005), mood disorders (e.g., Ashendorf et al, 2004; Green, 2009), traumatic brain injury (TBI; e.g., Kanser et al, 2019; Macciocchi et al, 2006; Soble et al, 2017), schizophrenia spectrum disorders (e.g., Hunt et al, 2014; Schroeder & Marshall, 2011), other mixed neurological/neurocognitive disorders (e.g., Galioto et al, 2020; Resch et al, 2021; Rudman et al, 2011), neuropsychiatric populations (e.g., Cerny, Rhoads, et al, 2022; Pliskin et al, 2021; Resch, Pham, et al, 2022; Stocks et al, 2022), and veterans/active duty military personnel (e.g., Armistead-Jehle et al, 2021; Soble et al, 2018). The current state of evidence suggests that most PVTs are appropriate for detecting invalid performance even in the context of bona fide neurocognitive dysfunction of various etiologies, although more targeted measure selection and alternate empirically supported cut scores may be required for certain clinical populations (e.g., amnestic syndromes, dementia, intellectual disorders; Bailey et al, 2018; Cohen et al, 2022; Dean et al, 2008; Martin et al, 2022).…”