Cross-validation of the Utility of Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Cut-offs in a Large Colombian Sample

被引:10
|
作者
Bailey, K. Chase [1 ]
Goatte, William [1 ]
Ramos-Usuga, Daniela [2 ,3 ]
Rivera, Diego [4 ]
Arango-Lasprilla, Juan Carlos [3 ,5 ,6 ]
机构
[1] UT Southwestern Med Ctr, Div Psychiat, Dallas, TX USA
[2] Univ Basque Country UPV EHU, Biomed Res Doctorate Program, Leioa, Spain
[3] Biocruces Bizkaia Hlth Res Inst, Baracaldo, Spain
[4] Univ Publ Navarra, Dept Ciencias Salud, Pamplona, Spain
[5] IKERBASQUE Basque Fdn Sci, Bilbao, Spain
[6] Univ Basque Country UPV EHU, Dept Cell Biol & Histol, Leioa, Spain
来源
PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURY & LAW | 2021年 / 14卷 / 02期
关键词
Performance validity; Neuropsychological evaluation; Multicultural; Psychometrics; Spanish; VERBAL-LEARNING TEST; AMERICAN IMMIGRATION; SPANISH POPULATION; NORMATIVE DATA; TRIAL; PERFORMANCE; VALIDITY; NEUROPSYCHOLOGY; ACCURACY; ERRORS;
D O I
10.1007/s12207-021-09407-z
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
This study sought to cross-validate the utility of Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) cut-offs derived in a large Colombian sample with further exploration of the impact of age, education, and Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) scores on TOMM trials. To address these aims, the study examines concordance rates of the TOMM scores by demographics and Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised (HVLT-R) test performance. Additionally, item response theory analysis (IRT) focused on the interaction between demographic variables and the psychometric properties of the TOMM items. Data were collected from 1416 healthy controls (58.6% female; M age = 58.19; M education = 9 years) who completed the TOMM, MMSE, and HVLT-R as part of a comprehensive battery conducted in Spanish. Frequency analysis was used to assess for concordance rates of passing TOMMe10, Trial 1, and Trial 2 scores, further broken down by median split for MMSE, education, and age. Additionally, IRT is used to examine, in detail, the psychometric properties of the TOMM items and relationships to demographic variables. Validity classification differed across the TOMM trials, with 82.8% passing e10, 88.6% Trial 1, and 92.5% Trial 2. When dichotomized by a median split, passing rates across all TOMM trials were significantly different (p <= .001) for MMSE scores, education, and age with the largest discrepancy (similar to 21%) observed on TOMMe10. IRT confirmed that all TOMM items are easy to answer correctly with Trial 2 items being appreciably easier (difficulty range = - 4.90 to - 1.52) than Trial 1 items (difficulty range = - 6.22 to - 3.50). Age, education, MMSE, and HVLT-R scores all were significantly related to latent trait scores on the TOMM (p < .001). Utilization of the TOMM in Spanish-speaking individuals is warranted, but with caution. The TOMMe10 yielded higher rates of invalid classification when compared to Trial 1 or Trial 2. IRT methods allow examination of whether traditional TOMM trial cut-offs may be appropriate when individuals present with advanced age or low educational attainment.
引用
收藏
页码:114 / 126
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Correction to: Further Validation of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 Performance Validity Index: Examination of False Positives and Convergent Validity
    Troy A. Webber
    K. Chase Bailey
    W. Alexander Alverson
    Edan A. Critchfield
    Kathleen M. Bain
    Johanna M. Messerly
    Justin J. F. O’Rourke
    Joshua W. Kirton
    Chrystal Fullen
    Janice C. Marceaux
    Jason R. Soble
    Psychological Injury and Law, 2019, 12 : 88 - 89
  • [33] Sensitivity and Specificity of the Test of Memory Malingering 10 Item in a Large Medically Complex Pediatric Sample
    Larson, S. W.
    Bledsoe, J.
    Breiger, D.
    CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGIST, 2019, 33 (04) : 718 - 718
  • [34] Cross-validation of the Dot Counting Test in a large sample of credible and non-credible patients referred for neuropsychological testing
    McCaul, Courtney
    Boone, Kyle B.
    Ermshar, Annette
    Cottingham, Maria
    Victor, Tara L.
    Ziegler, Elizabeth
    Zeller, Michelle A.
    Wright, Matthew
    CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGIST, 2018, 32 (06) : 1054 - 1067
  • [35] Cross Validation of the b Test in a Large Known Groups Sample
    Roberson, Cedria J.
    Boone, Kyle Brauer
    Goldberg, Hope
    Miora, Deborah
    Cottingham, Maria
    Victor, Tara
    Ziegler, Elizabeth
    Zeller, Michelle
    Wright, Matthew
    CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGIST, 2013, 27 (03) : 495 - 508
  • [36] Validity assessment in Eastern Europe: cross-validation of the Dot Counting Test and MODEMM against the TOMM-1 and Rey-15 in a Romanian mixed clinical sample
    Crisan, Iulia
    Sava, Florin Alin
    ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY, 2023,
  • [37] LARGE SAMPLE OPTIMALITY OF LEAST-SQUARES CROSS-VALIDATION IN DENSITY-ESTIMATION
    HALL, P
    ANNALS OF STATISTICS, 1983, 11 (04): : 1156 - 1174
  • [38] A Large-Scale Empirical Evaluation of Cross-Validation and External Test Set Validation in (Q)SAR
    Guetlein, Martin
    Helma, Christoph
    Karwath, Andreas
    Kramer, Stefan
    MOLECULAR INFORMATICS, 2013, 32 (5-6) : 516 - 528
  • [39] Cross-validation of a manual form of the letter memory test using a known-groups methodology
    Schipper, Lindsey J.
    Berry, David T. R.
    Coen, Eileen
    Clark, Jessica A.
    CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGIST, 2008, 22 (02) : 345 - 349
  • [40] Using the inventory of problems-29 (IOP-29) with the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) in symptom validity assessment: A study with a Portuguese sample of experimental feigners
    Giromini, Luciano
    Barbosa, Fernando
    Coga, Giulia
    Azeredo, Andreia
    Viglione, Donald J.
    Zennaro, Alessandro
    APPLIED NEUROPSYCHOLOGY-ADULT, 2020, 27 (06) : 504 - 516