当前位置: X-MOL 学术Psychological Assessment › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Validity of informant report interpretations: Role of examinee performance and symptom invalidity.
Psychological Assessment ( IF 6.083 ) Pub Date : 2021-10-14 , DOI: 10.1037/pas0001074
Troy A Webber 1 , Erin Sullivan-Baca 1 , Yosefa A Modiano 1 , Zinat Taiwo 1 , Jonathan M Grabyan 1
Affiliation  

Performance validity tests (PVTs) and symptom validity tests (SVTs) detect inaccuracies in examinee-completed measures, though methods for assessing the accuracy of informant reports—which may be inaccurate due to examinee deception, motivation for external incentives (e.g., disability payments), or attempts to validate examinee experiences—remain underexplored. We used a sample of 72 veteran-informant dyads undergoing evaluation of possible epilepsy-related neurocognitive disorder to assess the association between examinee response invalidity (i.e., performance and/or symptom invalidity) and informant report measures. Examinees completed PVTs, SVTs, cognitive, and self-report measures. Informants completed measures on examinee functioning and their own caregiver burden. Performance invalidity was defined as failure on two or more PVTs. Symptom invalidity for psychopathology symptom reports (SVT-P) and cognitive/somatic symptom reports (SVT-CS) were separately defined via above-threshold scores on two or more SVT criterion. Independent samples t tests demonstrated the associations of the PVT, SVT-CS, and SVT-P groups with informant-report measures. Informants for examinees with performance invalidity reported worse functioning in the examinee than informants for examinees in the valid performance group (medium-large effect sizes). Symptom validity status (for both SVT-CS and SVT-P) was meaningfully but less strongly related to informant-reported examinee functioning (small–medium effect sizes). Neither performance nor symptom invalidity was meaningfully related to informant-reported caregiver burden (negligible effect sizes). Informant reports for examinees with response invalidity should be interpreted with caution.

中文翻译:

线人报告解释的有效性:考生表现和症状无效的作用。

绩效效度测试 (PVTs) 和症状效度测试 (SVTs) 通过评估线人报告准确性的方法来检测考生完成的测量中的不准确之处——由于考生欺骗、外部激励的动机(例如残疾支付),这可能是不准确的,或尝试验证应试者的经历——仍未得到充分探索。我们使用 72 名接受可能癫痫相关神经认知障碍评估的退伍军人线人样本来评估受试者反应无效(即表现和/或症状无效)与线人报告测量之间的关联。考生完成了 PVT、SVT、认知和自我报告测量。线人完成了关于考生功能和他们自己的照顾者负担的措施。性能无效被定义为两个或多个 PVT 的失败。精神病理学症状报告 (SVT-P) 和认知/躯体症状报告 (SVT-CS) 的症状无效通过两个或多个 SVT 标准的阈值以上分数分别定义。独立样本 t 检验证明了 PVT、SVT-CS 和 SVT-P 组与线人报告测量值的关联。表现无效的考生的线人报告说考生的功能比有效表现组中的考生更差(中-大效应量)。症状有效性状态(对于 SVT-CS 和 SVT-P)与线人报告的受试者功能(中小效应量)有意义但不太密切相关。表现和症状无效都与线人报告的照顾者负担(可忽略不计的影响大小)有意义地相关。
更新日期:2021-10-14
down
wechat
bug