TY - JOUR
T1 - A meta-analysis of malingering detection measures for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.
AU - Wallace, Elizabeth R.
AU - Garcia-Willingham, Natasha E.
AU - Walls, Brittany D.
AU - Bosch, Chelsea M.
AU - Balthrop, Kullen C.
AU - Berry, David T.R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 American Psychological Association.
PY - 2019/2
Y1 - 2019/2
N2 - This meta-analysis compares stand-alone and embedded performance and symptom validity tests (PVTs and SVTs) for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) malingering detection in college students. Simulation design studies utilizing college student samples were included (k = 11). Analyses consisted of measures designed or previously used for malingering detection. Random-effects models were constructed to provide aggregated weighted effect sizes (Hedges' g), indicating the difference between genuine ADHD and simulation groups. Overall PVTs (stand-alone and embedded) produced a large effect size (g = 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI; 0.72, 1.13], p <.001), whereas overall SVTs (stand-alone and embedded) produced a medium-effect size (g = 0.54, 95% CI [0.44, 0.65], p <.001). Stand-alone PVTs (g = 0.98, 95% CI [0.84, 1.12], p <.001) outperformed embedded PVTs (g = 0.66, 95% CI [0.51, 0.80], p <.001). The stand-alone SVT (g = 0.66) and embedded SVTs (g = 0.54, 95% CI [0.43, 0.65], p <.001) produced medium-effect sizes. These findings support stand-alone PVTs and suggest that performance-based measures should be included in ADHD evaluation batteries, which may consist solely of symptom self-report measures.
AB - This meta-analysis compares stand-alone and embedded performance and symptom validity tests (PVTs and SVTs) for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) malingering detection in college students. Simulation design studies utilizing college student samples were included (k = 11). Analyses consisted of measures designed or previously used for malingering detection. Random-effects models were constructed to provide aggregated weighted effect sizes (Hedges' g), indicating the difference between genuine ADHD and simulation groups. Overall PVTs (stand-alone and embedded) produced a large effect size (g = 0.84, 95% confidence interval [CI; 0.72, 1.13], p <.001), whereas overall SVTs (stand-alone and embedded) produced a medium-effect size (g = 0.54, 95% CI [0.44, 0.65], p <.001). Stand-alone PVTs (g = 0.98, 95% CI [0.84, 1.12], p <.001) outperformed embedded PVTs (g = 0.66, 95% CI [0.51, 0.80], p <.001). The stand-alone SVT (g = 0.66) and embedded SVTs (g = 0.54, 95% CI [0.43, 0.65], p <.001) produced medium-effect sizes. These findings support stand-alone PVTs and suggest that performance-based measures should be included in ADHD evaluation batteries, which may consist solely of symptom self-report measures.
KW - attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder
KW - college student
KW - malinger
KW - performance validity
KW - symptom validity
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055551211&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85055551211&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1037/pas0000659
DO - 10.1037/pas0000659
M3 - Article
C2 - 30359048
AN - SCOPUS:85055551211
SN - 1040-3590
VL - 31
SP - 265
EP - 270
JO - Psychological Assessment
JF - Psychological Assessment
IS - 2
ER -