scholarly journals Detection of inadequate effort on the California Verbal Learning Test-Second edition: Forced choice recognition and critical item analysis

2006 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 688-696 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAMES C. ROOT ◽  
REUBEN N. ROBBINS ◽  
LUKE CHANG ◽  
WILFRED G. VAN GORP
Keyword(s):  
Predictive Value ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Item Analysis ◽  
Verbal Learning ◽  
Critical Item ◽  
Forced Choice ◽  
Incremental Validity ◽  
California Verbal Learning Test ◽  
Lower Sensitivity ◽  
Learning Test

The Forced Choice Recognition (FCR) and the Critical Item Analysis (CIA) indices of the California Verbal Learning Test-II (CVLT-II) have been identified by the CVLT-II test developers as potentially useful, brief screening indicators of effort in neuropsychological assessment. This retrospective study analyzes performance on these measures in three groups: (1) clinically referred individuals; (2) forensically referred individuals not suspected of inadequate effort; and (3) forensically referred individuals whose performance on freestanding tests of effort suggested inadequate effort. Performances on FCR were analyzed for their relation to actual memory impairment and with regard to concrete and abstract distractor endorsement. FCR and CIA performances were analyzed for agreement with formal tests of inadequate effort and their test characteristics. Incremental validity was assessed by hierarchical logistic regression with previously identified indices for detection of inadequate effort on the CVLT. Results indicate that (1) FCR and CIA performances are not related to decreased memory performance; (2) FCR and CIA indices exhibit higher specificity and lower sensitivity, with higher positive predictive value than negative predictive value; and (3) FCR and CIA indices exhibit modest incremental validity with previously identified indices. Implications for use of FCR and CIA indices in inadequate effort detection are discussed (JINS, 2006, 12, 688–696.)

Quantitative and qualitative differences in the verbal learning performance of elderly depressives and healthy controls

1998 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 115-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Deborah A. King ◽  
Christopher Cox ◽  
Jeffrey M. Lyness ◽  
Yeates Conwell ◽  
and Eric D. Caine
Keyword(s):  
Learning And Memory ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Verbal Learning ◽  
Learning Performance ◽  
California Verbal Learning Test ◽  
Late Life Depression ◽  
Learning Functions ◽  
Delayed Recognition ◽  
Learning Test ◽  
Unipolar Major Depression

We compared the verbal learning and memory performance of 57 inpatients with unipolar major depression and 30 nondepressed control participants using the California Verbal Learning Test. The effect of age within this elderly sample was also examined, controlling for sex, educational attainment, and estimated level of intelligence. Except for verbal retention, the depressives had deficits in most aspects of performance, including cued and uncued recall and delayed recognition memory. As well, there were interactions between depression effects and age effects on some measures such that depressives' performance declined more rapidly with age than did the performance of controls. The results are discussed in the context of recent contradictory reports about the integrity of learning and memory functions in late-life depression. We conclude that there is consistent evidence, from this and other studies, that elderly depressed inpatients have significant deficits in a range of explicit verbal learning functions. (JINS, 1998, 4, 115–126.)

Assessment of Alcohol-related Memory Deficits: A Comparison between the Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test and the California Verbal Learning Test

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-27 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arie J. Wester ◽  
Renée L. Roelofs ◽  
Jos I.M. Egger ◽  
Roy P.C. Kessels
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Impairment ◽  
Memory Performance ◽  
Verbal Learning ◽  
Cognitive Disorders ◽  
Memory Test ◽  
Cued Recall ◽  
California Verbal Learning Test ◽  
Everyday Memory ◽  
Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test ◽  
Learning Test

Objectives: Neuropsychological assessment of memory disorders is an important prerequisite in the treatment of patients with alcohol-related cognitive disorders. Although many memory tests are available in clinical practice, a question remains regarding which test is most appropriate for this purpose. Our study's goal was to evaluate the discriminative power of indices of a standard memory test (the California Verbal Learning Test; CVLT) versus the subtests of an ecologically valid everyday memory test (the Rivermead Behavioural Memory Test; RBMT) in patients with alcohol-use disorder.Method: The patients included 136 with Korsakoff's syndrome (KS), 73 alcoholics with cognitive impairment (CI) not fulfilling the criteria for KS, and 24 cognitively unimpaired alcoholics (ALC).Results: KS patients performed significantly lower on all RBMT and CVLT variables than CI patients. ALC patients performed significantly better than CI patients on only one RBMT subtest, and had a significantly lower rate of forgetting and higher scores on free recall on CVLT. A combination of RBMT subtests and CVLT indices was able to discriminate KS patients from CI and ALC patients. The RBMT subtests could not significantly distinguish ALC from CI patients. Both rate of forgetting and a comparison between free and cued recall testing on the CVLT showed the largest between-group differences.Conclusion: Although the RBMT provides information about everyday memory performance, the CVLT indices are better able to distinguish between uncomplicated alcoholics and those with cognitive impairment or KS.

CVLT-II Forced Choice Recognition Trial as an Embedded Validity Indicator: A Systematic Review of the Evidence

2016 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 851-858 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eben S. Schwartz ◽  
Laszlo Erdodi ◽  
Nicholas Rodriguez ◽  
Jyotsna J. Ghosh ◽  
Joshua R. Curtain ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Classification Accuracy ◽  
Verbal Learning ◽  
Forced Choice ◽  
California Verbal Learning Test ◽  
Failure Rates ◽  
Performance Validity ◽  
Learning Test ◽  
External Incentives

AbstractObjectives: The Forced Choice Recognition (FCR) trial of the California Verbal Learning Test, 2nd edition, was designed as an embedded performance validity test (PVT). To our knowledge, this is the first systematic review of classification accuracy against reference PVTs. Methods: Results from peer-reviewed studies with FCR data published since 2002 encompassing a variety of clinical, research, and forensic samples were summarized, including 37 studies with FCR failure rates (N=7575) and 17 with concordance rates with established PVTs (N=4432). Results: All healthy controls scored >14 on FCR. On average, 16.9% of the entire sample scored ≤14, while 25.9% failed reference PVTs. Presence or absence of external incentives to appear impaired (as identified by researchers) resulted in different failure rates (13.6% vs. 3.5%), as did failing or passing reference PVTs (49.0% vs. 6.4%). FCR ≤14 produced an overall classification accuracy of 72%, demonstrating higher specificity (.93) than sensitivity (.50) to invalid performance. Failure rates increased with the severity of cognitive impairment. Conclusions: In the absence of serious neurocognitive disorder, FCR ≤14 is highly specific, but only moderately sensitive to invalid responding. Passing FCR does not rule out a non-credible presentation, but failing FCR rules it in with high accuracy. The heterogeneity in sample characteristics and reference PVTs, as well as the quality of the criterion measure across studies, is a major limitation of this review and the basic methodology of PVT research in general. (JINS, 2016, 22, 851–858)

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document