Performance Invalidity Base Rates Among Healthy Undergraduate Research Participants

• Published in: Archives of clinical neuropsychology Vol. 31; no. 1; pp. 97 - 104
• Main Authors: Ross, Thomas P, Poston, Ashley M, Rein, Patricia A, Salvatore, Andrew N, Wills, Nathan L, York, Taylor M
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.02.2016
• Subjects: Female; Healthy Volunteers - psychology; Healthy Volunteers - statistics & numerical data; Humans; Male; Malingering - epidemiology; Neuropsychological Tests; Reproducibility of Results; Research Subjects - psychology; Research Subjects - statistics & numerical data; Southeastern United States - epidemiology; Students - psychology; Universities; Young Adult; Undergraduate students; Base rates; Effort; Performance Validity Tests
• ISSN: 0887-6177; 1873-5843
• DOI: 10.1093/arclin/acv062

Few studies have examined base rates of suboptimal effort among healthy, undergraduate students recruited for neuropsychological research. An and colleagues (2012, Conducting research with non-clinical healthy undergraduates: Does effort play a role in neuropsychological test performance? Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 27, 849-857) reported high rates of performance invalidity (30.8%-55.6%), calling into question the validity of findings generated from samples of college students. In contrast, subsequent studies have reported much lower base rates ranging from 2.6% to 12%. The present study replicated and extended previous work by examining the performance of 108 healthy undergraduates on the Dot Counting Test, Victoria Symptom Validity Test, Word Memory Test, and a brief battery of neuropsychological measures. During initial testing, 8.3% of the sample scored below cutoffs on at least one Performance Validity Test, while 3.7% were classified as invalid at Time 2 (M interval = 34.4 days). The present findings add to a growing number of studies that suggest performance invalidity base rates in samples of non-clinical, healthy college students are much lower than An and colleagues initial findings. Although suboptimal effort is much less problematic than suggested by An and colleagues, recent reports as high as 12% indicate including measures of effort may be of value when using college students as participants. Methodological issues and recommendations for future research are presented.