Search

Objective: Performance Validity Tests (PVTs) have been used to identify non-credible performance in clinical, medicolegal, forensic, and, more recently, academic settings. The inclusion of PVTs when administering psychoeducational assessments is essential given that specific accommodation such as flexible deadlines and increased writing time can provide an external incentive for students without disabilities to feign symptoms. Method: The present study used archival data to establish base rates of non-credible performance in a sample of post-secondary students (n = 1045) who underwent a comprehensive psychoeducational evaluation for the purposes of obtaining academic accommodations. In accordance with current guidelines, non-credible performance was determined by failure on two or more freestanding or embedded PVTs. Results: 9.4% of participants failed at least two of the PVTs they were administered, of which 8.5% failed two PVTs, and approximately 1% failed three PVTs. Base rates of failure for specific PVTs ranged from 25% (b Test) to 11.2% (TOVA). Conclusions: The present study found a lower base rate of non-credible performance than previously observed in comparable populations. This likely reflects the utilization of conservative criteria in detecting non-credible performance to avoid false positives. By contrast, inconsistent base rates previously found in the literature may reflect inconsistent methodologies. These results further emphasize the importance of administering multiple PVTs during psychoeducational assessments. The implications of these findings can further inform clinicians administering assessments in academic settings and aid in the appropriate utilization of PVTs in psychoeducational evaluation to determine accessibility accommodations.

Objective: This study evaluated the functional effects of severe mental health symptoms on speed of academic performance to assist clinicians and educators in determining whether extra time accommodations are evidence-based for students with such diagnoses. Method: Using archival data from 1476 post-secondary students, we examined the performance of students with existing mental health diagnoses who were also reporting extremely high levels of symptoms. Their performance on timed academic achievement and cognitive processing measures was compared with performance of students with learning disabilities, Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, and clinical controls. Students failing stand-alone performance validity and/or symptom validity measures were excluded from this investigation. Results: Students diagnosed with anxiety and/or depression did not differ from clinical controls on any timed performance measure, typically performing academic tasks within a normal amount of time. By contrast, those with reading disabilities were typically the slowest on all academic tasks. Conclusion: Across the range of timed tests, students with mental health diagnoses did not show functional impairments in tests with a speed component. As such, they would not typically require increased time to perform speeded academic tasks, but they might require alternative accommodations in their post-secondary programmes in order to participate equally.

Objective: Concerns have been identified regarding the ease with which students and young adults can feign or exaggerate symptoms of ADHD, and no formal measures exist to identify such behavior when it occurs. This article describes the development and initial validation of a new symptom validity measure designed to detect feigned or exaggerated ADHD symptom reporting., Method: Employing items from a commonly used self-report measure of ADHD (Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scale [CAARS]) and select items from a scale measuring symptoms of dissociation, we assessed students diagnosed with ADHD, students with other diagnoses, and student volunteers with no psychopathology., Results: This new measure (Exaggeration Index or EI) demonstrated excellent specificity (.97) and adequate sensitivity (.24) in discriminating between those who are suspected of or instructed to feign or exaggerate symptoms of ADHD and all other clinical groups., Conclusion: The results strongly suggest that the EI may be a useful adjunct to existing validity measures when identifying exaggerated or implausible symptoms of ADHD.