Cited by 34Schizophrenia research and treatmentPsychological Testing and AssessmentHistorical and Modern Theater Studies

A Meta-Analysis of Neuropsychological Effort Test Performance in Psychotic Disorders

Open access
Ruiz, Ivan, Raugh, Ian M., Bartolomeo, Lisa A., Strauss, Gregory P.·2020·Neuropsychology Review

Abstract

Psychotic disorders are characterized by a generalized neurocognitive deficit (i.e., performance 1.5 SD below controls across neuropsychological domains with no specific profile of differential deficits). A motivational account of the generalized neurocognitive deficit has been proposed, which attributes poor neuropsychological testing performance to low effort. However, findings are inconsistent regarding effort test failure rate in individuals with psychotic disorders across studies (0-72%), and moderators are unclear, making it difficult to know whether the motivational explanation is viable. To address these issues, a meta-analysis was performed on data from 2205 individuals with psychotic disorders across 19 studies with 24 independent effects. Effort failure rate was examined along with moderators of effort test type, forensic status, IQ, positive symptoms, negative symptoms, diagnosis, age, gender, education, and antipsychotic use. The pooled weighted effort test failure rate was 18% across studies and there was a moderate pooled association between effort failure rate and global neurocognitive performance (r = .57). IQ and education significantly moderated failure rate. Collectively, these findings suggest that a nontrivial proportion of individuals with a psychotic disorder fail effort testing, and failure rate is associated with global neuropsychological impairment. However, given that effort tests are not immune to the effects of IQ in psychotic disorders, these results cannot attest to the viability of the motivational account of the generalized neurocognitive deficit. Furthermore, the significant moderating effect of IQ and education on effort test performance suggests that effort tests have questionable validity in this population and should be interpreted with caution.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11065-020-09448-2

Cites

119 of 119 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 122 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Stevens A, Schneider K, Liske B, Hermle L, Huber H, & Hetzel G (2014). Is subnormal cognitive performance in schizophrenia due to lack of effort or to cognitive impairment? German Journal of Psychiatry, 17(1), 1– 9. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Is-Subnormal-Cognitive-Performance-in-Schizophrenia-Stevens-Schneider/0d4c8f0ab3c3dc88aa52d7e8718f9fa4e29d8d68
  2. Victor TL, & Boone KB (2007). Identification of feigned mental retardation. Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment: A neuropsychological perspective, 310– 345. 10.1076/jcen.25.7.979.16481 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ruiz, I., Raugh, I. M., Bartolomeo, L. A., & Strauss, G. P.
Affiliations
University of Georgia (US)
Corresponding author
Strauss, Gregory P.
Venue
Neuropsychology Review
Published
2020-08-07
Volume
30
Issue
3
Pages
407-424
ISSN
  • 1040-7308 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-6660
OpenAlex
W3048317744
Cited by
34
References
122
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5
FWCI
0.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuropsychology Review (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R21MH122863)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
Keywords
psychosis, neuropsychological performance, IQ, antipsychotic use, positive and negative symptoms, test validity
MeSH terms
Adult, Cognition Disorders, Female, Humans, Male, Motivation, Neuropsychological Tests, Psychotic Disorders, Schizophrenia, Schizophrenic Psychology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review