One hundred and ten fundamentals of performance validity tests in neuropsychological forensic disability and related assessment I: Introduction.

Résumé

This is the first of five articles on state-of-the-art conceptualization and research on the use of performance validity tests (PVTs) in forensic neuropsychological assessment. PVTs are standardized psychometric tests especially aimed at determining the extent of examinee underperformance, to the point that their cognitive test performance can be deemed invalid, and not representative of their genuine abilities. The article reviews key terms in the field, which include: PVTs; symptom validity tests (SVTs); cut scores; neuropsychological assessment; malingering/feigning and related terms; (especially invalid response set and negative response bias (NRB); the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders' (DSM-5) approach to defining malingering; test standardization; classification accuracy statistics (specificity and sensitivity); the multidimensional Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction (MND) framework, and the Erdodi Index (EI) multivariate framework. We conclude that PVT data might indicate invalid response set but malingering is attributed only after careful analysis of the full examinee profile, and not just on the basis of examinee PVT scores. This present five-article series stands in contrast to criticisms of the use of PVTs in FDRA by the Leonhards, as reviewed in the fifth article in the series.