| Autor: |
Cutler L; Department of Psychology, Neuropsychology Track, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada., Greenacre M; Schulich School of Medicine, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada., Abeare CA; Department of Psychology, Neuropsychology Track, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada., Sirianni CD; School of Social Work, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada., Roth R; Department of Psychiatry, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire, USA., Erdodi LA; Department of Psychology, Neuropsychology Track, University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario, Canada. |
| Abstrakt: |
Objective The study was designed to expand on the results of previous investigations on the D-KEFS Stroop as a performance validity test (PVT), which produced diverging conclusions. Method The classification accuracy of previously proposed validity cutoffs on the D-KEFS Stroop was computed against four different criterion PVTs in two independent samples: patients with uncomplicated mild TBI ( n = 68) and disability benefit applicants ( n = 49). Results Age-corrected scaled scores (ACSSs) ≤6 on individual subtests often fell short of specificity standards. Making the cutoffs more conservative improved specificity, but at a significant cost to sensitivity. In contrast, multivariate models (≥3 failures at ACSS ≤6 or ≥2 failures at ACSS ≤5 on the four subtests) produced good combinations of sensitivity (.39-.79) and specificity (.85-1.00), correctly classifying 74.6-90.6% of the sample. A novel validity scale, the D-KEFS Stroop Index correctly classified between 78.7% and 93.3% of the sample. Conclusions A multivariate approach to performance validity assessment provides a methodological safeguard against sample- and instrument-specific fluctuations in classification accuracy, strikes a reasonable balance between sensitivity and specificity, and mitigates the invalid before impaired paradox. |
