Schatz Philip, Glatts Colette
Department of Psychology, Saint Joseph's University, Philadelphia, PA 19131, USA.
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2013 May;28(3):236-44. doi: 10.1093/arclin/act009. Epub 2013 Feb 11.
Participants coached to display poor effort on neuropsychological tests have successfully evaded detection. Recent research has documented that 89% college athletes instructed to perform poorly on a follow-up baseline ImPACT (Immediate Post-concussion Assessment and Cognitive Testing) test were unable to bypass detection, but otherwise, sandbagging on baseline testing has not been directly studied. In an analog study intended to measure participants' ability to successfully sandbag, we compared baseline test performance in three groups of individuals, instructed: (a) to perform their best, (b) to malinger without guidance (e.g., naïve), and (c) how to malinger (e.g., coached), using ImPACT, the Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT), and the Balance Error Scoring System. The MSVT identified more participants in the naïve (80%) and coached (90%) groups than those automatically "flagged" by ImPACT (60% and 75%, respectively). Inclusion of additional indicators within ImPACT increased identification to 95% of naïve and 100% of coached malingerers. These results suggest that intentional "sandbagging" on baseline neurocognitive testing can be readily detected.
那些在神经心理学测试中被指导故意表现不佳的参与者成功躲过了检测。最近的研究表明,在后续的基线ImPACT(即时脑震荡评估和认知测试)测试中被指示表现不佳的大学运动员中,有89%未能逃过检测,但除此之外,在基线测试中故意表现不佳的情况尚未得到直接研究。在一项旨在衡量参与者成功故意表现不佳能力的模拟研究中,我们比较了三组个体在基线测试中的表现,这三组个体分别被指示:(a)尽力而为,(b)在没有指导的情况下装病(例如,天真的),以及(c)如何装病(例如,接受指导的),使用ImPACT、医学症状效度测试(MSVT)和平衡误差评分系统。MSVT识别出天真组(80%)和接受指导组(90%)中的参与者比ImPACT自动“标记”的参与者更多(分别为60%和75%)。在ImPACT中纳入额外指标后,天真装病者的识别率提高到95%,接受指导的装病者的识别率提高到100%。这些结果表明,在基线神经认知测试中故意“故意表现不佳”很容易被检测到。