This study was designed to examine the classification accuracy of the Erdodi Index (EI-5), a novel method for aggregating validity indicators that takes into account both the number and extent of performance validity test (PVT) failures. Archival data were collected from a mixed clinical/forensic sample of 452 adults referred for neuropsychological assessment. The classification accuracy of the EI-5 was evaluated against established free-standing PVTs. The EI-5 achieved a good combination of sensitivity (.65) and specificity (.97), correctly classifying 92% of the sample. Its classification accuracy was comparable with that of another free-standing PVT. An indeterminate range between Pass and Fail emerged as a legitimate third outcome of performance validity assessment, indicating that the underlying construct is an inherently continuous variable. Results support the use of the EI model as a practical and psychometrically sound method of aggregating multiple embedded PVTs into a single-number summary of performance validity. Combining free-standing PVTs with the EI-5 resulted in a better separation between credible and non-credible profiles, demonstrating incremental validity. Findings are consistent with recent endorsements of a three-way outcome for PVTs (Pass, Borderline, and Fail).

本研究旨在检查 Erdodi 指数 (EI-5) 的分类准确性，这是一种聚合有效性指标的新方法，该方法同时考虑了性能有效性测试 (PVT) 失败的数量和程度。档案数据是从 452 名接受神经心理学评估的成年人的混合临床/法医样本中收集的。EI-5 的分类准确性根据已建立的独立 PVT 进行评估。EI-5 实现了灵敏度 (0.65) 和特异性 (0.97) 的良好结合，正确分类了 92% 的样本。它的分类精度与另一个独立的 PVT 相当。通过和失败之间的不确定范围作为绩效有效性评估的第三个合法结果出现，表明基础结构本质上是一个连续变量。结果支持使用 EI 模型作为一种实用且心理测量学上合理的方法，将多个嵌入式 PVT 聚合为性能有效性的单个数字摘要。将独立式 PVT 与 EI-5 相结合，可以更好地区分可信和不可信的配置文件，证明增加的有效性。调查结果与最近对 PVT 的三向结果（通过、边界线和失败）的认可一致。