Every second counts: A comparison of four dot counting test scoring procedures for detecting invalid neuropsychological test performance. - PsycNET
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-79118-001
Citation
Rhoads, T., Resch, Z. J., Ovsiew, G. P., White, D. J., Abramson, D. A., & Soble, J. R. (2020). Every second counts: A comparison of four dot counting test scoring procedures for detecting invalid neuropsychological test performance. Psychological Assessment. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000970
Abstract
Although performance validity tests (PVTs) are an integral element of neuropsychological assessment, most PVTs have historically been restricted to the memory domain. The Dot Counting Test (DCT) is a nonmemory PVT shown to reliably identify invalid performance. Although several traditional and abbreviated scoring methods have been derived, no study to date has directly compared the available scoring approaches within a single sample. This cross-sectional study cross-validated 4 different DCT scoring approaches, including the traditional rounded E-score proposed within the manual, an unrounded E-score, and 2 abbreviated scoring procedures based on 4- and 6-card versions (DCT-4 and DCT-6, respectively) in a diverse mixed clinical neuropsychiatric sample (N = 132). Validity groups were established by 5 independent criterion PVTs (102 valid and 30 invalid). Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses yielded significant areas under the curve (AUCs = .84−.86) for the overall sample, with sensitivities of 50%–67% at ≥ 89% specificity. The DCT scores had outstanding classification accuracy (AUCs ≥ .92; sensitivities = 80%−83%) in the unimpaired group and excellent classification accuracy in the impaired group (AUCs = .79−.81; sensitivities = 43%−60%). Whereas negligible differences emerged between the 4 scoring methods for the cognitively intact group, the DCT-4 showed notably stronger psychometric properties among the overall sample in general and the mild cognitive impairment group in particular. Results corroborate previous findings suggesting that the DCT is a robust PVT, regardless of the employed scoring procedure, and replicate support for the abbreviated DCT-4 as the recommended validity indicator. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)
https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-79118-001
Citation
Rhoads, T., Resch, Z. J., Ovsiew, G. P., White, D. J., Abramson, D. A., & Soble, J. R. (2020). Every second counts: A comparison of four dot counting test scoring procedures for detecting invalid neuropsychological test performance. Psychological Assessment. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000970
Abstract
Although performance validity tests (PVTs) are an integral element of neuropsychological assessment, most PVTs have historically been restricted to the memory domain. The Dot Counting Test (DCT) is a nonmemory PVT shown to reliably identify invalid performance. Although several traditional and abbreviated scoring methods have been derived, no study to date has directly compared the available scoring approaches within a single sample. This cross-sectional study cross-validated 4 different DCT scoring approaches, including the traditional rounded E-score proposed within the manual, an unrounded E-score, and 2 abbreviated scoring procedures based on 4- and 6-card versions (DCT-4 and DCT-6, respectively) in a diverse mixed clinical neuropsychiatric sample (N = 132). Validity groups were established by 5 independent criterion PVTs (102 valid and 30 invalid). Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses yielded significant areas under the curve (AUCs = .84−.86) for the overall sample, with sensitivities of 50%–67% at ≥ 89% specificity. The DCT scores had outstanding classification accuracy (AUCs ≥ .92; sensitivities = 80%−83%) in the unimpaired group and excellent classification accuracy in the impaired group (AUCs = .79−.81; sensitivities = 43%−60%). Whereas negligible differences emerged between the 4 scoring methods for the cognitively intact group, the DCT-4 showed notably stronger psychometric properties among the overall sample in general and the mild cognitive impairment group in particular. Results corroborate previous findings suggesting that the DCT is a robust PVT, regardless of the employed scoring procedure, and replicate support for the abbreviated DCT-4 as the recommended validity indicator. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved)
******************************************
Kevin S. McGrew, PhD
Educational & School Psychologist
Director
Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP)
https://www.themindhub.com
******************************************
Kevin S. McGrew, PhD
Educational & School Psychologist
Director
Institute for Applied Psychometrics (IAP)
https://www.themindhub.com
******************************************
