Working Memory, Processing Speed, and Memory Functioning Are Minimally Predictive of Victoria Symptom Validity Test Performance.

A sound performance validity test is accurate for detecting invalid neuropsychological test performance and relatively insensitive to actual cognitive ability or impairment. This study explored the relationship of several cognitive abilities to several performance indices on the Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT), including accuracy and response latency. This cross-sectional study examined data from a mixed clinical sample of 88 adults identified as having valid neurocognitive test profiles via independent validity measures, and who completed the VSVT along with objective measures of working memory, processing speed, and verbal memory during their clinical neuropsychological evaluation. Results of linear regression analyses indicated that cognitive test performance accounted for 5% to 14% of total variance for VSVT performance across indices. Working memory was the only cognitive ability to predict significant, albeit minimal, variance on the VSVT response accuracy indices. Results show that VSVT performance is minimally predicted by working memory, processing speed, or delayed verbal memory recall.

Comparing the Psychometric Properties of Eight Embedded Performance Validity Tests in the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test, Wechsler Memory Scale Logical Memory, and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised Recognition Trials for Detecting Invalid Neuropsychological Test Performance.

This cross-sectional study evaluated eight embedded performance validity tests (PVTs) previously derived from the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT), Wechsler Memory Scale-IV-Logical Memory (LM), and Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised (BVMT-R) recognition trials among a single mixed clinical sample of 108 neuropsychiatric patients (83 valid/25 invalid) with (n = 54) and without (n = 29) mild neurocognitive disorder. Among the overall sample, all eight recognition PVTs significantly differentiated valid from invalid performance (areas under the curve [AUCs] = .64-.81) with 26% to 44% sensitivity (≥89% specificity) at optimal cut-scores depending on the specific PVT. After subdividing the sample by cognitive impairment status, all eight PVTs continued to reliably identify invalid performance (AUC = .68-.91) with markedly increased sensitivities of 56% to 80% (≥89% specificity) in the unimpaired group. In contrast, among those with mild neurocognitive disorder, RAVLT False Positives and LM became nonsignificant, whereas the other six PVTs remained significant (AUC = .64-.77), albeit with reduced sensitivities of 32% to 44% (≥89% specificity) at optimal cut-scores. Taken together, results cross-validated BVMT-R and most RAVLT recognition indices as effective embedded PVTs for identifying invalid neuropsychological test performance with diverse populations including examinees with and without suspected mild neurocognitive disorder, whereas LM had more limited utility as an embedded PVT, particularly when mild neurocognitive disorder was present.