Trial 1 versus Trial 2 of the Test of Memory Malingering: Evaluating accuracy without a "gold standard".

This study examines the accuracy of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM), a frequently administered measure for evaluating effort during neurocognitive testing. In the last few years, several authors have suggested that the initial recognition trial of the TOMM (Trial 1) might be a more useful index for detecting feigned or exaggerated impairment than Trial 2, which is the source for inference recommended by the original instruction manual (Tombaugh, 1996). We used latent class modeling (LCM) implemented in a Bayesian framework to evaluate archival Trial 1 and Trial 2 data collected from 1,198 adults who had undergone outpatient forensic evaluations.

Preliminary evaluation of child self-rating using the Child Tourette Syndrome Impairment Scale.

Aim: To evaluate and compare how children with Tourette syndrome and parents rate tic and non-tic behavioral related impairment in home, school, and social domains; to compare these with clinician tic ratings; and to identify factors that may predict greater impairment.

Method: In a sample of 85 Tourette syndrome and 92 healthy control families, the Child Tourette Syndrome Impairment Scale, designed for parent-report and which includes 37 items rated for tic and non-tic impairment, was administered to parents and, with the referent modified, to children ages 9 to 17 years. Tic severity was rated using the Yale Global Tic Severity Scale (YGTSS).

A Bayesian approach to mixed group validation of performance validity tests.

Mental health professionals often use structured assessment tools to help detect individuals who are feigning or exaggerating symptoms. Yet estimating the accuracy of these tools is problematic because no "gold standard" establishes whether someone is malingering or not. Several investigators have recommended using mixed group validation (MGV) to estimate the accuracy of malingering measures, but simulation studies show that typical implementations of MGV may yield vague, biased, or logically impossible results.

Criterion validity of the financial skills subscale of the direct assessment of functional status scale.

Among the severely mentally ill, some individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder can manage their finances independently, while others depend upon a court-appointed guardian or a representative payee. The present study examined the criterion validity of the financial skills subscale of the Direct Assessment of Functional Status (DAFS) scale in classifying those who manage their finances independently from those who do not. Scores on the financial skills subscale of the DAFS scale of 25 severely mentally ill outpatients without a guardian/payee were compared to scores of 24 severely mentally ill outpatients with a guardian/payee; 25 non-mentally ill participants served as controls.

The performance of incarcerated juveniles on the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (MacCAT-CA).

The MacArthur Competency Assessment Tool-Criminal Adjudication (MacCAT-CA) is a structured interview that assesses abilities related to an individual's competency to stand trial (CST). In the present study, we examined the performance of 247 juvenile offenders on the scales of the MacCAT-CA (Understanding, Reasoning, and Appreciation), along with several other variables (age, IQ, achievement level, experience with the juvenile justice system, and a screen for psychopathology) that may be related to CST. In general, results suggest that performance on the MacCAT-CA varied with age, with younger participants performing significantly worse than older juveniles.