The Use of the Rey 15-Item Test and Recognition Trial to Evaluate Suboptimal Effort in Neuropsychological Assessment with a Pediatric Mild TBI Sample

The utilization of symptom validity tests (SVTs) in pediatric assessment is receiving increasing empirical support. The Rey 15-Item Test (FIT) is an SVT commonly used in adult assessment, with limited research in pediatric populations. Given that FIT classification statistics across studies to date have been quite variable, Boone, Salazar, Lu, Warner-Chacon, and Razani (2002) developed a recognition trial to use with the original measure to enhance accuracy. The current study aims to assess the utility of the FIT and recognition trial in a pediatric mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) sample (N = 112; M = 14.6 years), in which a suboptimal effort base rate of 17% has been previously established (Kirkwood & Kirk, 2010). All participants were administered the FIT as part of an abbreviated neuropsychological evaluation; failure on the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT) was used as the criterion for suspect effort. The traditional adult cut-off score of(99%), but poor sensitivity (6%). When the recognition trial was also utilized, a combination score of(sensitivity = 64%, specificity = 93%). Results indicate that the FIT with recognition trial may be useful in the assessment of pediatric suboptimal effort, at least among relatively high functioning children following mild TBI.

The Utility of the CVLT-C as an Embedded Validity Indicator After Pediatric Mild Traumatic Brain Injury.

Results of neuropsychological examinations depend on valid data. Whereas clinicians previously believed that clinical skill was sufficient to identify non-credible performance by examinees on standard tests, research demonstrates otherwise. Consequently, studies on measures to detect suspect effort in adults have received tremendous attention in the previous twenty years, and incorporation of validity indicators into neuropsychological examinations is now seen as integral. Few studies exist that validate methods appropriate for the measurement of effort in pediatric populations. Of extant studies, most evaluate standalone measures originally developed for use with adults. The present study examined the utility of indices from the California Verbal Learning Test – Children's Version (CVLT-C) as embedded validity indicators in a pediatric sample. Participants were 225 outpatients aged 8 to 16 years old referred for clinical assessment after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Non-credible performance (n = 39) was defined as failure of the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT). Logistic regression demonstrated that only the Recognition Discriminability index was predictive of MSVT failure (OR = 2.88, p < .001). A cutoff of z ≤ -1.0 was associated with sensitivity of 51% and specificity of 91%. In the current study, CVLT-C Recognition Discriminability was useful in the identification of non-credible performance in a sample of relatively high-functioning pediatric outpatients with mTBI. Thus, this index can be added to the short list of embedded validity indicators appropriate for pediatric neuropsychological assessment.

What We Don't Know Can Hurt Us: Clinical Inference Bias and Constructed Memories of Sexual Abuse.

The false memory/recovered memory debate, research regarding the malleability of memory, and the current lack of methods for validating recovered memories all support the view that heightened care is required of therapists dealing with clients whom they suspect have been sexually abused. The judgmental heuristics that underlie the major clinical inference biases of confirmatory bias, biased covariation, base rate fallacies, and schematic processing errors are all relevant to the processes leading to therapist-client constructions of memories of sexual abuse. Suggestions for minimizing each of these biases are offered. Personal motivations of the client and client suggestibility are factors that may contribute to the construction of memories of sexual abuse, and suggestions for minimizing the impact of these motivations are offered. In conclusion, general suggestions for minimizing the impact of clinical inference biases within the sexual abuse treatment context are summarized.