Further Validation of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 Performance Validity Index: Examination of False Positives and Convergent Validity

Troy A. Webber, K. Chase Bailey, W. Alexander Alverson, Edan A. Critchfield, Kathleen M. Bain, Johanna M. Messerly, Justin J.F. O’Rourke, Joshua W. Kirton, Chrystal Fullen, Janice C. Marceaux, Jason R. Soble

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Assessment of performance validity is an essential part of a neuropsychological evaluation, with the inclusion of two or more performance validity tests (PVTs) becoming routine practice. Considering the time to administer multiple tests, there has been some support for use of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 (T1) as an independent, “one and done” PVT. Notably, cutoffs for TOMM T1 need further validation, with an emphasis on minimizing false-positive classifications among those with bona fide cognitive impairment. In a clinically referred sample of 127 veterans, this study examined the role of cognitive impairment in TOMM performance and the utility of a TOMM T1 as an independent PVT. Examinees were administered the TOMM and three additional PVTs as part of a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Sixty-eight percent of examinees were classified valid (35% of valid examinees were cognitively impaired). TOMM T1 ≤ 40 had excellent observed sensitivity (83%) and specificity (93%) overall, with minimal false-positive classification. TOMM T1 was also significantly correlated and concordant with other memory-based PVTs. Given score ranges and failure rates for TOMM T1 ≤ 40 among those with neurological/neurocognitive conditions, scores in the 37–40 range may merit administration of additional TOMM trials to maximize accuracy in identifying valid-cognitively impaired versus noncredible performance. Otherwise, an abbreviated TOMM administration (i.e., only T1) using a cutoff of ≤ 40—in conjunction with one or more additional PVTs—may be sufficient for detecting noncredible/invalid test performance in the absence of known or suspected neurological/neurocognitive disorders.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalPsychological Injury and Law
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

Malingering
examination
performance
Veterans
Nervous System Diseases

Keywords

  • Assessment
  • Cognitive impairment
  • Malingering
  • Neuropsychology
  • Performance validity

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Law

Cite this

Further Validation of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 Performance Validity Index : Examination of False Positives and Convergent Validity. / Webber, Troy A.; Bailey, K. Chase; Alverson, W. Alexander; Critchfield, Edan A.; Bain, Kathleen M.; Messerly, Johanna M.; O’Rourke, Justin J.F.; Kirton, Joshua W.; Fullen, Chrystal; Marceaux, Janice C.; Soble, Jason R.

In: Psychological Injury and Law, 01.01.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Webber, Troy A. ; Bailey, K. Chase ; Alverson, W. Alexander ; Critchfield, Edan A. ; Bain, Kathleen M. ; Messerly, Johanna M. ; O’Rourke, Justin J.F. ; Kirton, Joshua W. ; Fullen, Chrystal ; Marceaux, Janice C. ; Soble, Jason R. / Further Validation of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 Performance Validity Index : Examination of False Positives and Convergent Validity. In: Psychological Injury and Law. 2018.
@article{3c8491751c454ad0b66e2ce73283142a,
title = "Further Validation of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 Performance Validity Index: Examination of False Positives and Convergent Validity",
abstract = "Assessment of performance validity is an essential part of a neuropsychological evaluation, with the inclusion of two or more performance validity tests (PVTs) becoming routine practice. Considering the time to administer multiple tests, there has been some support for use of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 (T1) as an independent, “one and done” PVT. Notably, cutoffs for TOMM T1 need further validation, with an emphasis on minimizing false-positive classifications among those with bona fide cognitive impairment. In a clinically referred sample of 127 veterans, this study examined the role of cognitive impairment in TOMM performance and the utility of a TOMM T1 as an independent PVT. Examinees were administered the TOMM and three additional PVTs as part of a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Sixty-eight percent of examinees were classified valid (35{\%} of valid examinees were cognitively impaired). TOMM T1 ≤ 40 had excellent observed sensitivity (83{\%}) and specificity (93{\%}) overall, with minimal false-positive classification. TOMM T1 was also significantly correlated and concordant with other memory-based PVTs. Given score ranges and failure rates for TOMM T1 ≤ 40 among those with neurological/neurocognitive conditions, scores in the 37–40 range may merit administration of additional TOMM trials to maximize accuracy in identifying valid-cognitively impaired versus noncredible performance. Otherwise, an abbreviated TOMM administration (i.e., only T1) using a cutoff of ≤ 40—in conjunction with one or more additional PVTs—may be sufficient for detecting noncredible/invalid test performance in the absence of known or suspected neurological/neurocognitive disorders.",
keywords = "Assessment, Cognitive impairment, Malingering, Neuropsychology, Performance validity",
author = "Webber, {Troy A.} and Bailey, {K. Chase} and Alverson, {W. Alexander} and Critchfield, {Edan A.} and Bain, {Kathleen M.} and Messerly, {Johanna M.} and O’Rourke, {Justin J.F.} and Kirton, {Joshua W.} and Chrystal Fullen and Marceaux, {Janice C.} and Soble, {Jason R.}",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s12207-018-9335-9",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Psychological Injury and Law",
issn = "1938-971X",
publisher = "Springer New York",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Further Validation of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 Performance Validity Index

T2 - Examination of False Positives and Convergent Validity

AU - Webber, Troy A.

AU - Bailey, K. Chase

AU - Alverson, W. Alexander

AU - Critchfield, Edan A.

AU - Bain, Kathleen M.

AU - Messerly, Johanna M.

AU - O’Rourke, Justin J.F.

AU - Kirton, Joshua W.

AU - Fullen, Chrystal

AU - Marceaux, Janice C.

AU - Soble, Jason R.

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - Assessment of performance validity is an essential part of a neuropsychological evaluation, with the inclusion of two or more performance validity tests (PVTs) becoming routine practice. Considering the time to administer multiple tests, there has been some support for use of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 (T1) as an independent, “one and done” PVT. Notably, cutoffs for TOMM T1 need further validation, with an emphasis on minimizing false-positive classifications among those with bona fide cognitive impairment. In a clinically referred sample of 127 veterans, this study examined the role of cognitive impairment in TOMM performance and the utility of a TOMM T1 as an independent PVT. Examinees were administered the TOMM and three additional PVTs as part of a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Sixty-eight percent of examinees were classified valid (35% of valid examinees were cognitively impaired). TOMM T1 ≤ 40 had excellent observed sensitivity (83%) and specificity (93%) overall, with minimal false-positive classification. TOMM T1 was also significantly correlated and concordant with other memory-based PVTs. Given score ranges and failure rates for TOMM T1 ≤ 40 among those with neurological/neurocognitive conditions, scores in the 37–40 range may merit administration of additional TOMM trials to maximize accuracy in identifying valid-cognitively impaired versus noncredible performance. Otherwise, an abbreviated TOMM administration (i.e., only T1) using a cutoff of ≤ 40—in conjunction with one or more additional PVTs—may be sufficient for detecting noncredible/invalid test performance in the absence of known or suspected neurological/neurocognitive disorders.

AB - Assessment of performance validity is an essential part of a neuropsychological evaluation, with the inclusion of two or more performance validity tests (PVTs) becoming routine practice. Considering the time to administer multiple tests, there has been some support for use of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 (T1) as an independent, “one and done” PVT. Notably, cutoffs for TOMM T1 need further validation, with an emphasis on minimizing false-positive classifications among those with bona fide cognitive impairment. In a clinically referred sample of 127 veterans, this study examined the role of cognitive impairment in TOMM performance and the utility of a TOMM T1 as an independent PVT. Examinees were administered the TOMM and three additional PVTs as part of a comprehensive neuropsychological battery. Sixty-eight percent of examinees were classified valid (35% of valid examinees were cognitively impaired). TOMM T1 ≤ 40 had excellent observed sensitivity (83%) and specificity (93%) overall, with minimal false-positive classification. TOMM T1 was also significantly correlated and concordant with other memory-based PVTs. Given score ranges and failure rates for TOMM T1 ≤ 40 among those with neurological/neurocognitive conditions, scores in the 37–40 range may merit administration of additional TOMM trials to maximize accuracy in identifying valid-cognitively impaired versus noncredible performance. Otherwise, an abbreviated TOMM administration (i.e., only T1) using a cutoff of ≤ 40—in conjunction with one or more additional PVTs—may be sufficient for detecting noncredible/invalid test performance in the absence of known or suspected neurological/neurocognitive disorders.

KW - Assessment

KW - Cognitive impairment

KW - Malingering

KW - Neuropsychology

KW - Performance validity

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055975211&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85055975211&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s12207-018-9335-9

DO - 10.1007/s12207-018-9335-9

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85055975211

JO - Psychological Injury and Law

JF - Psychological Injury and Law

SN - 1938-971X

ER -