Sensitivity and specificity of the Rey Dot Counting Test in patients with suspect effort and various clinical samples

被引:95
作者
Boone, KB
Lu, P
Back, C
King, C
Lee, A
Philpott, L
Shamieh, E
Warner-Chacon, K
机构
[1] Harbor UCLA Med Ctr, Dept Psychiat, Torrance, CA 90509 USA
[2] Calif Sch Profess Psychol, Los Angeles, CA USA
关键词
Dot Counting Test; malingering; suspect effort; noncredible symptoms; sensitivity; specificity;
D O I
10.1016/S0887-6177(01)00166-4
中图分类号
B849 [应用心理学];
学科分类号
040203 ;
摘要
The Rey Dot Counting Test was administered to 100 patients with suspect effort drawn from two separate settings (personal injury/disability. n = 86; prison hospital, n = 14) and to 251 subjects in nine clinical groups (head injury, learning disability, right and left cerebrovascular accident, schizophrenia, older normals, depressed elderly, and mild and moderate dementia). Sensitivity of cut-offs for individual test scores (mean grouped dot counting time. ratio of mean grouped to ungrouped dot counting time, and number of errors) differed markedly across the two suspect effort groups (e.g., 28-100%), indicating that noncredible patients drawn from different settings employ somewhat differing approaches in their fabrication of cognitive symptoms. Use of a cut-off of greater than or equal to17 applied to a combination score (mean ungrouped dot counting time + meangrouped dot counting time + number of errors) resulted in 100% sensitivity in the forensic suspect effort group and 75% sensitivity in the civil litigation/disability suspect effort group. while maintaining specificity of greater than or equal to90% for the clinical groups combined (excluding moderate dementia). (C) 2002 National Academy of Neuropsychology. Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:625 / 642
页数:18
相关论文
共 36 条
  • [1] Arnett PA, 1997, ARCH CLIN NEUROPSYCH, V12, P513
  • [2] QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE PERFORMANCE ON REYS 15-ITEM TEST IN NEUROLOGICAL PATIENTS AND DISSIMULATORS
    ARNETT, PA
    HAMMEKE, TA
    SCHWARTZ, L
    [J]. CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGIST, 1995, 9 (01): : 17 - 26
  • [3] Back C., 1996, ASSESSMENT, V3, P449, DOI DOI 10.1177/107319119600300411
  • [4] MALINGERING RESPONSE STYLES ON THE MEMORY ASSESSMENT SCALES AND SYMPTOM VALIDITY TESTS
    BEETAR, JT
    WILLIAMS, JM
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY, 1995, 10 (01) : 57 - 72
  • [5] Binder L.M., 1991, PSYCHOL ASSESSMENT, V3, P175, DOI DOI 10.1037/1040-3590.3.2.175
  • [6] Malingering detection with the Dot Counting Test
    Binks, PG
    Gouvier, WD
    Waters, WF
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY, 1997, 12 (01) : 41 - 46
  • [7] Validation of a new technique to detect malingering of cognitive symptoms: The b Test
    Boone, KB
    Lu, P
    Sherman, D
    Palmer, B
    Back, C
    Shamieh, E
    Warner-Chacon, K
    Berman, NG
    [J]. ARCHIVES OF CLINICAL NEUROPSYCHOLOGY, 2000, 15 (03) : 227 - 241
  • [8] BOONE ML, 1994, ANN M INT NEUR SOC C
  • [9] VALIDITY OF THE M TEST - SIMULATION-DESIGN AND NATURAL-GROUP APPROACHES
    GILLIS, JR
    ROGERS, R
    BAGBY, RM
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT, 1991, 57 (01) : 130 - 140
  • [10] DAUBERT V MERRELL-DOW - THE SUPREME-COURT TACKLES SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE IN THE COURTROOM
    GOLD, JA
    ZAREMSKI, MJ
    LEV, ER
    SHEFRIN, DH
    [J]. JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1993, 270 (24): : 2964 - 2967