On the validity of self-report assessment of cognitive abilities: Attentional control scale associations with cognitive performance, emotional adjustment, and personality.

Individual differences in attentional control involve the ability to voluntarily direct, shift, and sustain attention. In studies of the role of attentional control in emotional adjustment, social relationships, and vulnerability to the effects of stress, self-report questionnaires are commonly used to measure this construct. Yet, convincing evidence of the association between self-report scales and actual cognitive performance has not been demonstrated. Across 2 independent samples, we examined associations between self-reported attentional control (Attentional Control Scale; ACS), self-reported emotional adjustment, Five-Factor Model personality traits (NEO Personality Inventory-Revised) and performance measures of attentional control. Study 1 examined behavioral performance on the Attention Network Test (ANT; Fan, McCandliss, Sommer, Raz, & Posner, 2002) and the Modified Switching Task (MST; Suchy & Kosson, 2006) in a large sample (n = 315) of healthy young adults. Study 2 (n = 78) examined behavioral performance on standardized neuropsychological tests of attention, including Conner's Continuous Performance Test-II and subtests from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scales, Third Edition (WAIS-III; Psychological Corporation, 1997) and Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System (D-KEFS; Delis, Kaplan, & Kramer, 2001). Results indicated that the ACS was largely unrelated to behavioral performance measures of attentional control but was significantly associated with emotional adjustment, neuroticism, and conscientiousness. These findings suggest that although self-reported attentional control may be a useful construct, researchers using the ACS should exercise caution in interpreting it as a proxy for actual cognitive ability or performance. (PsycINFO Database Record

Neuropsychological Practice Effects in the Context of Cognitive Decline: Contributions from Learning and Task Novelty.

Although cognitive decline is typically associated with decreasing practice effects (PEs) (presumably due to declining memory), some studies show increased PEs with declines in cognition. One explanation for these inconsistencies is that PEs reflect not only memory, but also rebounds from adapting to task novelty (i.e., novelty effect), leading to increased PEs. We examined a theoretical model of relationships among novelty effects, memory, cognitive decline, and within-session PEs. Sixty-six older adults ranging from normal to severely impaired completed measures of memory, novelty effects, and two trials each of Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale, 4 th Edition Symbol Search and Coding. Interrelationships among variables were examined using regression analyses. PEs for Symbol Search and Coding (a) were related to different proposed PE components (i.e., memory and novelty effects), such that novelty effect predicted Symbol Search PE (R2 =.239, p<.001) and memory predicted Coding PE (R2 =.089, p=.015), and (b) showed different patterns across stages of cognitive decline, such that the greatest cognitive decline was associated with smallest Coding PE (R2 =.125, p=.004), whereas intermediate cognitive decline was associated with the greatest Symbol Search PE (R2 =.097, p=.040). The relationship between cognitive decline and PE for Symbol Search was partially mediated by novelty effect among older adults with abnormal cognitive decline (model R2 =.286, p<.001). These findings (a) suggest that PE is not a unitary construct, (b) offer an explanation for contradictory findings in the literature, and (c) highlight the need for a better understanding of component processes of PE across different neuropsychological measures.

The Push-Turn-Taptap task outperforms measures of executive functioning in predicting declines in functionality: evidence-based approach to test validation.

Performance on the Push-Turn-Taptap (PTT) task has been shown to be a strong predictor of concurrent everyday functioning. This study utilized a prospective, longitudinal design to evaluate the PTT task for predicting future performance on a behavioral assessment of everyday functioning. The PTT task was compared to other measures of executive functioning as well as general cognition in terms of administration time and ability to identify participants who evidenced functional decline. A total of 50 community-dwelling older adults (ages 58-87) completed the PTT task, Mattis Dementia Rating Scale, Geriatric Depression Scale, Behavioral Dyscontrol Scale, Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System, and Timed Instrumental Activities of Daily Living. Baseline PTT performance (a) was highly correlated with an objective measure of everyday functioning after approximately one year (r = -.497, p < .001), (b) was associated with changes in follow-up functioning, F(3, 46) = 3.15, p = .03, (c) was a better predictor of future functional status than a longer battery of EF, and (d) reliably identified individuals with the greatest magnitude of functional decline. The PTT tasks may provide a particularly advantageous method of predicting future changes in everyday functioning in older adults.

Confronting patients about insufficient effort: the impact on subsequent symptom validity and memory performance.

Symptom validity tests (SVTs) are commonly used to assess effort in neuropsychological evaluations. However, no empirical research or official guidelines exist about how clinicians should proceed if a patient produces a non-valid SVT result. The purpose of this study was to examine whether confronting patients immediately after scoring in a non-valid range on a SVT would have an impact on subsequent symptom validity and memory tests performance. Archival patient data for 507 adults with clinically definite multiple sclerosis (MS) (ages 18-76) were examined. All patients completed the Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT), the Wechsler Memory Scale, 3rd edition (WMS III), and the Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition (BDI II). Although the majority (89%) of patients produced valid VSVT scores (the Valid group), 56 patients produced non-valid VSVT scores. Due to a change in clinical procedure, 28 of the 56 were confronted regarding their non-valid VSVT performances and were asked to complete the test a second time (the CONF group), while the remaining 28 proceeded with testing as usual following a non-valid score (the N-CONF group). Results showed that 68% of the CONF group produced valid VSVT scores on re-administration, as well as memory performances that were comparable to those of the Valid group. In contrast the N-CONF group produced memory scores that were significantly below the Valid group. This is the first study to provide empirical support for the effectiveness of intervention when patients exhibit inadequate effort on SVTs in clinical, non-forensic settings.