Objective: Performance validity testing in the context of neuropsychological assessment is well established. While such measures are also available with balance testing; little research has investigated these two domains in concert. The purpose of this study was to compare scores on two measures of performance validity across cognitive and balance modalities. Method: A retrospective chart review was conducted on 79 subjects (92% male; average age = 44.6 years; [SD = 12.6]) seen by both a neuropsychologist and an otolaryngologist in the context of disability evaluations. Each patient was administered the Word Memory Test (WMT) and completed standard protocols for Computerized Dynamic Posturography (CDP). Failure on the WMT was determined by cut scores outlined in the manual. Invalid CDP performance was determined using the Sataloff and Cevette criteria, suggesting an aphysiologic (non-organic) response. Results: Thirty-nine subjects passed each measure and 17 failed each. Eleven subjects failed the WMT, but passed the CDP, while 12 failed the WMT and passed the CDP. There was a 70.8% agreement between these two measures, which were significantly correlated (r = 0.37, p = .001). Chi-squared was statistically significant (X2 = 10.8, p = .001). Conclusion: These results are among the first to demonstrate that symptom exaggeration crosses modalities within a compensation seeking sample. The data suggest that if symptom exaggeration occurs within one modality other modalities may also be exaggerated and should be independently evaluated.
A Comparison of Neuropsychological and Balance Performance Validity Testing
Arch Clin Neuropsychol (2015) 30 (6): 589.
25 August 2015
P Armistead-Jehle, B Lange, P Green; C-70
A Comparison of Neuropsychological and Balance Performance Validity Testing. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2015; 30 (6): 589. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acv047.272
Download citation file:
© 2017 Oxford University Press×