Test of memory malingering and word memory test: a new comparison of failure concordance rates.
Two commonly used symptom validity tests are the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) and Word Memory Test (WMT). After examining TOMM-WMT failure concordance rates, Green [Green, P. (2007). Making comparisons between forced-choice effort tests. In K. B. Boone (Ed.), Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment (pp. 50-77). New York: Guilford] urged widespread adoption of the WMT, arguing the TOMM is insensitive to feigned impairment. But Green (2007) used a skewed concordance method that favored WMT (one TOMM subtest vs. three WMT subtests). In the present study we compare pass/fail agreement rates with different combinations of TOMM and WMT subtests in 473 persons seeking compensation for predominately mild neurological trauma. We replicated Green (2007) using his asymmetrical method, but otherwise we found the WMT and TOMM produce comparable failure rates in samples at-risk for exaggeration with balanced comparison (three TOMM subtests vs. three WMT). Further work is necessary to compare WMT and TOMM specificities, as failure concordance designs establish reliability but are insufficient for proving validity.
Greiffenstein
Manfred F
MF
Psychological Systems, Inc., Royal Oak, MI 48073, United States. mfgreiff@comcast.net
Greve
Kevin W
KW
Bianchini
Kevin J
KJ
Baker
W John
WJ
D000328:Adult; D001930:Brain Injuries / Q000523:psychology; D004185:Disability Evaluation; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008306:Malingering / Q000175:diagnosis*; D008569:Memory Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis* / Q000503:physiopathology; D008570:Memory, Short-Term / Q000502:physiology*; D008875:Middle Aged; D009483:Neuropsychological Tests; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012680:Sensitivity and Specificity; D055815:Young Adult