A known groups design involving 54 personal injury litigants, and disability claimants was employed to investigate group differences on the Continuous Visual Memory Test (CVMT). Group status was determined by performance on symptom validity testing and application of the Slick et al., 1999 diagnostic criteria for probable Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction (MND). Twenty-seven subjects who met the Slick et al., 1999 criteria formed the Probable Malingering (PM) group, while 27 subjects who did not comprised the Not Malingering (NM) group. Subjects in the PM group performed significantly worse on all CVMT variables (Hits, False Alarm Errors, Total Score, and Delayed Recall) relative to subjects in the NM group. Cutscores for the CVMT variables were empirically derived via logistic regression analyses. False Alarm Errors ≥ 21 Total Score ≤ 72 and Delayed Recall ≤ 3 were associated with good classification accuracy (70-74%), and specificity (85-93%). A CVMT Total Score ≤ 69, False Alarm Errors ≥ 22, and Delayed Recall ≤ 2 were all associated with 100% positive predictive power. The CVMT may be a valuable adjunct to the neuropsychological test battery for evaluating effort of personal injury litigants and disability claimants undergoing forensic neuropsychological evaluations.
- Probable malingering
- Symptom validity
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
- Developmental and Educational Psychology
- Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)