Citation

Bender SD, Rogers R. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol. 2004; 19(1): 49-60.

Affiliation

Department of Neurology, University of Virginia Health Sciences Center, 500 Ray C. Hunt Drive, P.O. Box 801018, Charlottesville, VA 22908-1018, USA. sb4qk@virginia.edu

Copyright

(Copyright © 2004, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

14670379

Abstract

Neuropsychological assessments can be completely invalidated by persons successfully feigning neurocognitive impairment. The current investigation examines via a research measure, the Test of Cognitive Abilities (TOCA), the usefulness of multiple detection strategies for the classification of neurocognitive feigning. Using a simulation design with a manipulation check and both positive and negative incentives, two groups of simulators (Cautioned and NonCautioned) were compared with brain-injured patients and nonimpaired controls. Among detection strategies, Magnitude of Error (hit rate=.94) was highly effective, while Floor Effect (hit rate=.80) and Reaction Time (hit rate=.85) were moderately effective. When presented with complex strategies, the cautioning of simulators did not improve their performances.

Language: en