强迫选择测试得分p≤0.20,且≥6项性能效度测试失败,导致类似的Overall test Battery Means。

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Clinical Neuropsychologist Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1080/13854046.2023.2284975
Martin L Rohling, Laurence M Binder, Glenn J Larrabee, Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling
{"title":"强迫选择测试得分p≤0.20,且≥6项性能效度测试失败,导致类似的Overall test Battery Means。","authors":"Martin L Rohling, Laurence M Binder, Glenn J Larrabee, Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2023.2284975","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> To determine if similar levels of performance on the Overall Test Battery Mean (OTBM) occur at different forced choice test (FCT) <i>p-</i>value score failures. Second, to determine the OTBM levels that are associated with failures at above chance on various performance validity (PVT) tests. <b>Method:</b> OTBMs were computed from archival data obtained from four practices. We calculated each examinee's Estimated Premorbid Global Ability (EPGA) and OTBM. The sample size was 5,103 examinees with 282 (5.5%) of these scoring below chance at <i>p</i> ≤ .20 on at least one FCT. <b>Results:</b> The OTBM associated with a failure at <i>p</i> ≤ .20 was equivalent to the OTBM that was associated with failing 6 or more PVTs at above-chance cutoffs. The mean OTBMs relative to increasingly strict FCT <i>p</i> cutoffs were similar (T scores in the 30s). As expected, there was an inverse relationship between the number of PVTs failed and examinees' OTBMs. <b>Conclusions:</b> The data support the use of <i>p</i> ≤ .20 as the probability level for testing the significance of below chance performance on FCTs. The OTBM can be used to index the influence of invalid performance on outcomes, especially when an examinee scores below chance.</p>","PeriodicalId":55250,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Forced choice test score of <i>p</i> ≤ .20 and failures on ≥ six performance validity tests results in similar Overall Test Battery Means.\",\"authors\":\"Martin L Rohling, Laurence M Binder, Glenn J Larrabee, Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13854046.2023.2284975\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objective:</b> To determine if similar levels of performance on the Overall Test Battery Mean (OTBM) occur at different forced choice test (FCT) <i>p-</i>value score failures. Second, to determine the OTBM levels that are associated with failures at above chance on various performance validity (PVT) tests. <b>Method:</b> OTBMs were computed from archival data obtained from four practices. We calculated each examinee's Estimated Premorbid Global Ability (EPGA) and OTBM. The sample size was 5,103 examinees with 282 (5.5%) of these scoring below chance at <i>p</i> ≤ .20 on at least one FCT. <b>Results:</b> The OTBM associated with a failure at <i>p</i> ≤ .20 was equivalent to the OTBM that was associated with failing 6 or more PVTs at above-chance cutoffs. The mean OTBMs relative to increasingly strict FCT <i>p</i> cutoffs were similar (T scores in the 30s). As expected, there was an inverse relationship between the number of PVTs failed and examinees' OTBMs. <b>Conclusions:</b> The data support the use of <i>p</i> ≤ .20 as the probability level for testing the significance of below chance performance on FCTs. The OTBM can be used to index the influence of invalid performance on outcomes, especially when an examinee scores below chance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2023.2284975\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2023.2284975","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:确定在不同的强迫选择测试(FCT) p值评分失败时,是否会出现类似的总体测试电池平均值(OTBM)表现水平。其次,确定在各种性能有效性(PVT)测试中与高于概率的失败相关的OTBM级别。方法:根据四个实践的档案数据计算otbm。我们计算了每位考生的预估病前整体能力(EPGA)和OTBM。样本量为5103名考生,其中282人(5.5%)在至少一项FCT上得分低于机会,p≤0.20。结果:与p≤0.20失败相关的OTBM与在高于机会截止点失败6个或更多pvt相关的OTBM相当。相对于越来越严格的FCT p截止值,平均otbm相似(T分数在30分左右)。正如预期的那样,pvt不及格的人数与考生的otbm之间呈反比关系。结论:数据支持使用p≤0.20作为检验fct上机会以下表现显著性的概率水平。OTBM可以用来衡量无效表现对结果的影响,特别是当考生得分低于机会时。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Forced choice test score of p ≤ .20 and failures on ≥ six performance validity tests results in similar Overall Test Battery Means.

Objective: To determine if similar levels of performance on the Overall Test Battery Mean (OTBM) occur at different forced choice test (FCT) p-value score failures. Second, to determine the OTBM levels that are associated with failures at above chance on various performance validity (PVT) tests. Method: OTBMs were computed from archival data obtained from four practices. We calculated each examinee's Estimated Premorbid Global Ability (EPGA) and OTBM. The sample size was 5,103 examinees with 282 (5.5%) of these scoring below chance at p ≤ .20 on at least one FCT. Results: The OTBM associated with a failure at p ≤ .20 was equivalent to the OTBM that was associated with failing 6 or more PVTs at above-chance cutoffs. The mean OTBMs relative to increasingly strict FCT p cutoffs were similar (T scores in the 30s). As expected, there was an inverse relationship between the number of PVTs failed and examinees' OTBMs. Conclusions: The data support the use of p ≤ .20 as the probability level for testing the significance of below chance performance on FCTs. The OTBM can be used to index the influence of invalid performance on outcomes, especially when an examinee scores below chance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Neuropsychologist
Clinical Neuropsychologist 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
12.80%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) serves as the premier forum for (1) state-of-the-art clinically-relevant scientific research, (2) in-depth professional discussions of matters germane to evidence-based practice, and (3) clinical case studies in neuropsychology. Of particular interest are papers that can make definitive statements about a given topic (thereby having implications for the standards of clinical practice) and those with the potential to expand today’s clinical frontiers. Research on all age groups, and on both clinical and normal populations, is considered.
期刊最新文献
Interpreting the direct- and derived-Trail Making Test scores in Argentinian children: regression-based norms, convergent validity, test-retest reliability, and practice effects. Enhanced detection of suboptimal effort in psychoeducational assessments for dyslexia. Neuropsychological normative standards for late career physicians. Naturalistic assessment of everyday multitasking in Parkinson's disease with and without mild cognitive impairment. Utility of learning ratio scores from the Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease (CERAD) Word List Memory Test in distinguishing patterns of cognitive decline in veterans referred for neuropsychological evaluation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1