Cross-Validating the Atypical Response Scale of the TSI-2 in a Sample of Motor Vehicle Collision Survivors
-
Published:2023-10-25
Issue:4
Volume:16
Page:351-370
-
ISSN:1938-971X
-
Container-title:Psychological Injury and Law
-
language:en
-
Short-container-title:Psychol. Inj. and Law
Author:
Nussbaum Shayna H., Ales FrancescaORCID, Giromini Luciano, Watson Mark, Erdodi Laszlo
Abstract
AbstractThis study was designed to evaluate the utility of the Atypical Responses (ATR) scale of the Trauma Symptom Inventory – Second Edition (TSI-2) as a symptom validity test (SVT) in a medicolegal sample. Archival data were collected from a consecutive case sequence of 99 patients referred for neuropsychological evaluation following a motor vehicle collision. The ATR’s classification accuracy was computed against criterion measures consisting of composite indices based on SVTs and performance validity tests (PVTs). An ATR cutoff of ≥ 9 emerged as the optimal cutoff, producing a good combination of sensitivity (.35-.53) and specificity (.92-.95) to the criterion SVT, correctly classifying 71–79% of the sample. Predictably, classification accuracy was lower against PVTs as criterion measures (.26-.37 sensitivity at .90-.93 specificity, correctly classifying 66–69% of the sample). The originally proposed ATR cutoff (≥ 15) was prohibitively conservative, resulting in a 90–95% false negative rate. In contrast, although the more liberal alternative (≥ 8) fell short of the specificity standard (.89), it was associated with notably higher sensitivity (.43-.68) and the highest overall classification accuracy (71–82% of the sample). Non-credible symptom report was a stronger confound on the posttraumatic stress scale of the TSI-2 than that of the Personality Assessment Inventory. The ATR demonstrated its clinical utility in identifying non-credible symptom report (and to a lesser extent, invalid performance) in a medicolegal setting, with ≥ 9 emerging as the optimal cutoff. The ATR demonstrated its potential to serve as a quick (potentially stand-alone) screener for the overall credibility of neuropsychological deficits. More research is needed in patients with different clinical characteristics assessed in different settings to establish the generalizability of the findings.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Law,Psychiatry and Mental health
Reference176 articles.
1. Abeare, C., Messa, I., Whitfield, C., Zuccato, B., Casey, J., & Erdodi, L. (2019a). Performance validity in collegiate football athletes at baseline neurocognitive testing. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 34(4), 20–31. https://doi.org/10.1097/HTR.0000000000000451 2. Abeare, C., Sabelli, A., Taylor, B., Holcomb, M., Dumitrescu, C., Kirsch, N., & Erdodi, L. (2019b). The importance of demographically adjusted cutoffs: Age and education bias in raw score cutoffs within the Trail Making Test. Psychological Injury and Law, 12(2), 170–182. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-019-09353-x 3. Abeare, C. A., Hurtubise, J., Cutler, L., Sirianni, C., Brantuo, M., Makhzoun, N., & Erdodi, L. (2021a). Introducing a forced choice recognition trial to the Hopkins Verbal Learning Test – Revised. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 35(8), 1442–1470. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2020.1779348 4. Abeare, C. A., An, K., Tyson, B., Holcomb, M., Cutler, L., May, N., & Erdodi, L. A. (2022a). The emotion word fluency test as an embedded performance validity indicator-alone and in a multivariate validity composite. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, 11(4), 713–724. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622965.2021.1939027 5. Abeare, K., Razvi, P., Sirianni, C. D., Giromini, L., Holcomb, M., Cutler, L., Kuzmenka, P., & Erdodi, L. A. (2021b). Introducing alternative validity cutoffs to improve the detection of non-credible symptom report on the BRIEF. Psychological Injury and Law, 14(1), 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-021-09402-4
|
|