Performance validity tests (PVTs) based on the forced-choice recognition memory (FCRM) paradigm are commonly used for the detection of noncredible performance. Examinees' response times (RTs) are affected by cognitive processes associated with deception and can also be gathered without lengthening the duration of the assessment. Consequently, interest in the utility of these measures as supplementary validity indicators in FCRM-PVTs has grown over the years. The current systematic review summarizes both clinical and simulation (i.e., healthy participants simulating cognitive impairment) studies of RTs in FCRM-PVTs. The findings of 25 peer-reviewed articles (n = 26 empirical studies) indicate that noncredible performance in FCRM-PVTs is associated with longer RTs. Additionally, there are indications that noncredible performance is associated with larger variability in RTs. RT measures, however, have lower discrimination capacity than conventional accuracy measures. Their utility may therefore lie in reaching decisions regarding cases with border zone accuracy scores, as well as aiding in the detection of more sophisticated examinees who are aware of the use of accuracy-based validity indicators in FCRM-PVTs. More research, however, is required before these measures are incorporated in daily practice and clinical decision-making processes.

基于强制选择识别记忆 (FCRM) 范式的绩效有效性测试 (PVT) 通常用于检测不可信的绩效。考生的反应时间 (RTs) 受与欺骗相关的认知过程的影响，也可以在不延长评估持续时间的情况下收集。因此，多年来，人们对将这些措施用作 FCRM-PVT 中的补充有效性指标的兴趣越来越大。目前的系统评价总结了 FCRM-PVT 中 RT 的临床和模拟（即模拟认知障碍的健康参与者）研究。25 篇同行评议文章的结果（n = 26 项实证研究）表明 FCRM-PVT 的不可信性能与较长的 RT 相关。此外，有迹象表明，不可信的表现与 RT 的较大可变性有关。然而，RT 测量的辨别能力低于传统的准确度测量。因此，它们的效用可能在于就边界区域准确度分数的案例做出决定，以及帮助检测更复杂的考生，这些考生知道在 FCRM-PVT 中使用基于准确性的有效性指标。然而，在将这些措施纳入日常实践和临床决策过程之前，还需要进行更多的研究。