Performance of compensation seeking and non-compensation seeking samples on the Victoria Symptom Validity Test: Cross-validation and extension of a standardization study

Previous research suggests that the Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT) is effective in confirming or disconfirming the validity of a patient's reported cognitive impairments. We sought to cross-validate the Findings of the VSVT standardization study, and to determine cut-off scores that are most efficient in discriminating our samples of compensation-seeking patients, primarily with mild traumatic brain injury (CS; n = 53), and non-compensation seeking patients with intractable seizures (NCS; n = 30). All patients in the NCS sample scored in the "valid" range on the VSVT difficult memory items, compared to only 58.5% of the CS sample. We also identified VSVT measures and cut-off scores maximally efficient in discriminating these samples. This study confirms previous research that non-compensation seeking patients do well on the VSVT, but that many compensation seeking patients perform poorly on this measure.