Objective: The Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT) is one of the most accurate performance validity tests (PVTs). Previous research has recommended a variety of cutoffs for performance invalidity classification on the VSVT. To date, only one of these studies has used a known groups design and no study has investigated these cutoffs in an exclusively mild traumatic brain injury medico-legal sample. The current study used a known groups design to validate VSVT cutoffs among mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) litigants and to explore the best approach for using the multiple recommended cutoffs for this test. Method: Archival analysis of 92 mTBI litigants was conducted. Examinees were classified as performance invalid if they failed at least 2 out of 5 criterion PVTs; all other examinees were classified as performance valid. Analyses explored the classification accuracy of both items correct- and response latency-based cutoffs, and the impact of using multiple VSVT cutoffs in conjunction. Results: Analyses documented several cutoffs with adequate classification accuracy. Cutoffs of <18 Hard items correct, <41 Total items correct, an Easy – Hard items correct difference >6, and <5 items correct on any block yielded the strongest classification accuracy. Using multiple cutoffs in conjunction reduced classification accuracy, indicating that only a single, strong cutoff from the VSVT should be used. Conclusion: Given the convergence of results across studies, a cutoff of <18 Hard items correct is the most appropriate for clinical implementation with mild traumatic brain injury litigants.
Validation of Victoria Symptom Validity Test Cutoff Scores Among Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Litigants Using a Known Groups Design
G Silk-Eglit, J Lynch, R McCaffrey; C-85
Validation of Victoria Symptom Validity Test Cutoff Scores Among Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Litigants Using a Known Groups Design. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2015; 30 (6): 594. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acv047.287
Download citation file:
© 2017 Oxford University Press×