Cited by 75

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The implications of symptom validity test failure for ability-based test performance in a pediatric sample.

Kirkwood, Michael W., Yeates, Keith Owen, Randolph, Christopher, Kirk, John W.·2012·Psychological Assessment

Abstract

If an examinee exerts inadequate effort to perform well during a psychological or neuropsychological exam, the resulting data will represent an inaccurate representation of the individual's true abilities and difficulties. In adult populations, methodologies to identify noncredible effort have grown exponentially in the last 2 decades. Though a comparatively modest amount of work has focused on tools to identify noncredible effort in pediatric populations, recent research has demonstrated that children can consistently pass several stand-alone symptom validity tests (SVTs) using cutoffs established with adults. However, no identified studies have examined the implications of pediatric SVT failure for ability-based test performance. The current sample consisted of 276 children aged 8-16 years referred consecutively for outpatient clinical neuropsychological consultation following mild traumatic brain injury (TBI). An earlier subgroup of this same case series that also included 17-year-olds was presented in Kirkwood and Kirk (2010). Nineteen percent of the current sample performed below the actuarial cutoff on the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT). No background or injury-related variable differentiated those who passed from those who failed the MSVT. Performance on the MSVT was correlated significantly with performance on all ability-based tests and explained 38% of the total ability-based test variance. Participants failing the MSVT performed significantly worse on nearly…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0024628

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 75

Metadata

Authors
Kirkwood, M. W., Yeates, K. O., Randolph, C., & Kirk, J. W.
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Published
2012
Volume
24
Issue
1
Pages
36-45
ISSN
  • 1939-134X
  • 1040-3590
Cited by
75
References
1
Language
en

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