English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This study examined the efficacy of CVLT-3 response bias (i.e., parametric and nonparametric response bias) indices in differentiating between a clinical sample with traumatic brain injury and a litigating sample with poor performance validity. Participants included 106 individuals, divided into two groups: clinical group with TBI ( n  = 56) and a litigating group who demonstrated inadequate performance validity ( n  = 50), as measured by failure on at least two performance validity tests. Archival CVLT-II data was rescored utilizing the CVLT-3 scoring and normative data. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was used to evaluate the diagnostic discriminability of the two response bias indices. Both parametric and nonparametric bias indices showed acceptable levels of diagnostic discrimination: AUC = .791 for parametric response bias and AUC = .753 for nonparametric response bias. Parametric response bias’ discrimination was statistically superior to the nonparametric responses bias’ discrimination. The CVLT-3 response bias score demonstrated good sensitivity and specificity when differentiating between individuals in a clinical sample with TBI and individuals in litigation who demonstrated inadequate performance validity.

CVLT-3 response bias as an indicator of performance validity in a litigating population