PDF herunterladen
Aktuelle Neurologie 2018; 45(10): 749-762
DOI: 10.1055/a-0747-5537
Übersicht
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Zur Leistungsvalidierung neuropsychologischer Testergebnisse – eine Übersicht

On Performance Validity of Neuropsychological Test Results – an Overview
Esther Spirig
1   Schweizerische Epilepsie-Klinik, Neuropsychologie, Zürich
2   Universität Zürich, Psychologisches Institut, Zürich
,
Hennric Jokeit
1   Schweizerische Epilepsie-Klinik, Neuropsychologie, Zürich
2   Universität Zürich, Psychologisches Institut, Zürich
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
08. Oktober 2018 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Der vorliegende Artikel bietet eine Übersicht zur Forschung und Praxis der Leistungsvalidierung neuropsychologischer Testergebnisse. Im Zentrum stehen dabei der Begriff der Leistungsvalidierung sowie seine Abgrenzung zum bisher verwendeten Begriff der Beschwerdenvalidierung. Zielgruppe sind mit Gutachten befasste Neurologen, Psychiater, Psychologen, Juristen und Rechtsanwender. Konzipiert ist der Artikel als ein Leitfaden zur Interpretation von Minderleistungen insbesondere im neuropsychologischen und verhaltensneurologischen Untersuchungskontext. Die Diskussion zur Leistungsvalidierung von Testergebnissen und ihrer psychologischen, medizinischen, rechtlichen und ökonomischen Bedeutung soll die Leserschaft für mögliche Fehlerquellen bei der Interpretation von Minderleistungen sensibilisieren und dadurch die reflektierte Anwendung von Leistungsvalidierungsverfahren sowie eine gut fundierte Interpretation von Minderleistungen fördern.

Abstract

This article provides an overview of performance validity in neuropsychological assessments with regard to research and practice. The main focus is on the term performance validity and its differentiation from symptom validity. The article primarily addresses physicians, psychologists and lawyers dealing with neurological, psychiatric and neuropsychological assessments in a legal context. The current state of performance validity assessments is critically discussed as well as the implications for medicine, law and, economy. It is aimed at sensitising the reader to possible sources of errors in the interpretation of underperformance and therefore, to support a considered use of performance validity testing as well as a valid interpretation of underperformance.

Schlüsselwörter

Leistungsverhalten - Leistungsvalidierung - Beschwerdenvalidierung - neuropsychologische Untersuchung

Keywords

performance behavior - performance validity - symptom validity - neuropsychological assessment
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Au A, Leung P, Kwok A. Subjective memory and mood of Hong Kong Chinese adults with epilepsy. Epilepsy Behav 2006; 9: 68-72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Rayner G, Wrench JM, Wilson SJ. Differential contributions of objective memory and mood to subjective memory complaints in refractory focal epilepsy. Epilepsy Behav 2010; 19: 359-364
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Eskildsen A, Andersen LP, Pedersen AD. et al. Work-related stress is associated with impaired neuropsychological test performance: a clinical cross-sectional study. Stress 2015; 18: 198-207
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Kompier M. New systems of work organization and workers’ health. Scand J Work Environ Health 2006; 6: 421-430
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kulik CT, Ryan S, Harper S. et al. Aging populations and management. Acad Manag J 2014; 57: 929-935
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Toossi M. Labor force projections to 2020: A more slowly growing workforce. Monthly Labor Review 2012; 135: 43
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Frei A, Balzer C, Gysi F. et al. Kriterien zur Bestimmung des Schweregrades einer neuropsychologischen Störung sowie Zuordnungen zur Funktions-und Arbeitsfähigkeit. Zeitschrift Für Neuropsychologie 2016; 27: 107-119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Hartje W. Neuropsychologische Begutachtung. In: Karnath HO, Hartje W, Ziegler W. , Hrsg. Kognitive Neurologie. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2006: 235-245
    Google Scholar
  • 9 Lezak MD. , ed. Neuropsychological Assessment. New York: Oxford University Press; 2004
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Merten T, Dettenborn H. , Hrsg. Diagnostik der Beschwerdenvalidität. Praxis der Rechtspsychologie. Berlin: Deutscher Psychologen-Verlag; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 11 Keppler C, Plohmann AM, Pflueger M. et al. Beschwerdenvalidierung in der versicherungsmedizinischen Begutachtung. Fortschr Neurol Psyc 2017; 85: 17-33
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Lippa SM. Performance validity testing in neuropsychology: a clinical guide, critical review, and update on a rapidly evolving literature. Clin Neuropsychol 2018; 32: 391-421
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Larrabee GJ. Performance validity and symptom validity in neuropsychological assessment. J Int Neuropsychol Soc 2012; 18: 625-631
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Ekman P, O’Sullivan M, Frank MG. A few can catch a liar. Psychol Sci 1999; 10: 263-268
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Faust D. The detection of deception. Neurol Clin 1995; 13: 255-265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Faust D, Hart KJ, Guilmette TJ. et al. Neuropsychologists’ capacity to detect adolescent malingerers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 1988; 19: 508-515
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Slick DJ, Sherman EMS, Iverson GL. Diagnostic criteria for malingered neurocognitive dysfunction: proposed standards for clinical practice and research. Clin Neuropsychol 1999; 13: 545-561
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Merten T. Beschwerdenvalidierung. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2014
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Iverson GL. Ethical issues associated with the assessment of exaggeration, poor effort, and malingering ethical issues associated with the assessment of exaggeration, poor effort, and malingering. Appl Neuropsyhol 2006; 13: 77-90
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Widder B. Beurteilung der Beschwerdenvalidität. In: Widder B, Gaidzik PW. , Hrsg. Begutachtung in der Neurologie. Stuttgart: Georg Thieme Verlag; 2011: 64-92
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Frederick RI, Bowden SC. Evaluating constructs represented by symptom validity tests in forensic neuropsychological assessment of traumatic brain injury. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2009; 24: 105-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Kool J, Meichtry A, Schaffert R. et al. Der Einsatz von Beschwerdenvalidierungstests in der IV-Abklärung: forschungsprogramm FoP-IV. Forschungsbericht Nr. 4/08. Bundesamt für Sozialversicherungen; 2008
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Merten T, Stevens A, Blaskewitz N. Beschwerdenvalidität und Begutachtung: eine Einführung. In: Merten T, Dettenborn H. , Hrsg. Diagnostik der Beschwerdenvalidität. Berlin: Deutscher Psychologen-Verlag; 2009: 9-35
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Green P, Rohling ML, Lees-Haley PR. et al. Effort has a greater effect on test scores than severe brain injury in compensation claimants. Brain Inj 2001; 15: 1045-1060
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 West LK, Curtis KL, Greve KW. et al. Memory in traumatic brain injury: The effects of injury severity and effort on the Wechsler Memory Scale‐III. J Neuropsychol 2011; 5: 114-125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Ord JS, Greve KW, Bianchini KJ. et al. Executive dysfunction in traumatic brain injury: the effects of injury severity and effort on the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2010; 32: 132-140
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Lange RT, Iverson GL, Brooks BL. et al. Influence of poor effort on self-reported symptoms and neurocognitive test performance following mild traumatic brain injury. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2010; 32: 961-972
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 World Health Organization. International statistical classification of diseases and related health problems. Bern: Hans Huber, Hogrefe AG; 5.. durchgesehene und ergänzte Auflage. 2005
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Demakis GJ, Sweet JJ, Sawyer TP. et al. Discrepancy between predicted and obtained WAIS-R IQ scores discriminates between traumatic brain injury and insufficient effort. Psychol Assess 2001; 13: 240-248
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Larrabee GJ. Cautions in the use of neuropsychological evaluation in legal settings. Neuropsychology 1990; 4: 239-247
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Larrabee GJ. Detection of malingering using atypical performance patterns on standard neuropsychological tests. Clin Neuropsychol 2003; 17: 410-425
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Mittenberg W, Aguila-Puentes G, Patton C. Neuropsychological profiling of symptom exaggeration and malingering. Journal of Forensic Psychology 2003; 3: 227-240
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Cullum C, Heaton R, Grant I. Psychogenic factors influencing neuropsychological performance: Somatoform disorders, factitious disorders, and malingering. In: Doerr HO, Carlin AS. , eds. Forensic neuropsychology: Legal and scientific bases. New York: Guilford Press; 1991: 141-171
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Reitan R, Wolfson D. Consistency of neuropsychological test scores of head-injured subjects involved in litigation compared with head-injured subjects not involved in litigation. Clin Neuropsychol 1997; 11: 69-76
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Mittenberg W, Patton C, Canyock EM. et al. Base rates of malingering and symptom exeggeration. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 2002; 24: 1094-1102
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Stevens A, Friedel E, Mehren G. et al. Malingering and uncooperativeness in psychiatric and psychological assessment: prevalence and effects in a German sample of claimants. Psychiatry Res 2008; 157: 191-200
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Plohmann A, Hurter M. Prevalence of poor effort and malingered neurocognitive dysfunction in litigating patients in Switzerland. Zeitschrift Für Neuropsychologie 2017; 27: 97-116
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Bush SS, Ruff RM, Tröster AI. et al. Symptom validity assessment: Practice issues and medical necessity: NAN Policy & Planning Committee. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2005; 20: 419-426
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Bush SS. Die Praxis der Beschwerdenvalidierung: Ethische und fachwissenschaftliche Gesichtspunkte. In: Merten T, Dettenborn H. , Hrsg. Diagnostik der Beschwerdenvalidität. Berlin: Deutscher Psychologen Verlag; 2009: 79-100
    Google Scholar
  • 40 Slick DJ, Iverson GL. Ethical issues arising in forensic neuropsychological assessment. Psychological Injuries at Trial. Chicago: American Bar Association Press; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 41 Bianchini KJ, Greve KW, Glynn G. On the diagnosis of malingered pain-related disability: lessons from cognitive malingering research. Spine J 2005; 5: 404-417
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Slick DJ, Sherman EMS. Differential diagnosis of malingering. In: Carone D, Bush SS. , eds. Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Symptom Validity Assessment and Malingering. New York: Springer; 2013: 57-72
    Google Scholar
  • 43 Merten T, Dohrenbusch R. Psychologische Methoden der Beschwerdenvalidierung. In: Schneider W, Henningsen P, Dohrenbusch R. et al., Hrsg. Begutachtung bei psychischen und psychosomatischen Erkrankungen. Bern: Huber; 2012: 186-222
    Google Scholar
  • 44 Larrabee GJ. Forensic Neuropsychology: A scientific approach to forensic neuropsychology. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005
    Google Scholar
  • 45 Dohrenbusch R. Begutachtung somatoformer Störungen und chronifizierter Schmerzen: Konzepte-Methoden-Beispiele. Stuttgart: Kohlhammer; 2006
    Google Scholar
  • 46 Berry DTR, Nelson NW. DSM-5 and malingering: A modest proposal. Psychol Inj Law 2010; 3: 295-303
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Larrabee GJ, Greiffenstein MF, Greve KW. et al. Refining diagnostic criteria for malingering. In: Larrabee GJ. , eds. Assessment of Malingered Neuropsychological Deficits. New York: Oxford University Press; 2007: 334-371
    Google Scholar
  • 48 Rogers R, Bender SD, Johnson SF. A critical analysis of the MND criteria for feigned cognitive impairment: Implications for forensic practice and research. Psychol Inj Law 2011; 4: 147-156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Slick DJ, Sherman EMS. Differential diagnosis of malingering and related clinical presentations. In: Sherman EMS, Brooks BL. , eds. Pediatric Forensic Neuropsychology. New York: University Press; 2012: 113-135
    Google Scholar
  • 50 Green P. Green’s word memory test for windows: User’s manual. Edmonton: Green’s Publishing; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 51 Schmand B, Lindeboom J. Amsterdam Short-term Memory Test: Amsterdamer Kurzzeitgedächtnistest. Leiden: PITS; 2005
    Google Scholar
  • 52 Schellig D, Drechsler R, Heinemann D. et al. Handbuch neuropsychologischer Testverfahren. Göttingen: Hogrefe; 2009
    Google Scholar
  • 53 Greve KW, Bianchini KJ. Schmerz und Beschwerdenvalidierung. In: Merten T, Dettenbrong H. , Hrsg. Diagnostik der Beschwerdenvalidität. Berlin: Deutscher Psychologen Verlag; 2009: 193-299
    Google Scholar
  • 54 Wirtz G, Baas U, Hofer H. et al. Psychopathologie des Ganser-Syndroms. Der Nervenarzt 2008; 79: 543-557
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Schweizerische Vereinigung der Neuropsychologinnen und Neuropsychologen/Association Suisse des Neuropsychologues/Associazione Svizzera delle Neuropsicologhe e dei Neuropsicologi (SVNP/ASNP). Leitlinien für die neuropsychologische Begutachtung. 2011 Im Internet: https://www.neuropsy.ch/download/pictures/d5/a1icvvhgda96j3gnrfxg5r1q5wupl9/leitlinien_fuer_die_neuropsychologische_begutachtung.pdf [Stand 23. April 2018]
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Chafetz MD, Williams MA, Ben-Porath YS. et al. Official Position of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology Social Security Administration Policy on Validity Testing: Guidance and Recommendations for Change. Clin Neuropsychol 2015; 29: 723-740
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Boone KB. The need for continuous and comprehensive sampling of effort/response bias during neuropsychological examinations. Clin Neuropsychol 2009; 23: 729-741
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Heilbronner RL, Sweet JJ, Morgan JE. et al. American academy of clinical neuropsychology consensus conference statement on the neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering. Clin Neuropsyhol 2009; 23: 1093-1129
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Bianchini KJ, Mathias CW, Greve KW. Symptom validity testing: a critical review. Clin Neuropsychol 2001; 15: 19-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Boone KB, Victor TL, Wen J. et al. The association between neuropsychological scores and ethnicity, language, and acculturation variables in a large patient population. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2007; 22: 355-365
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Henry GK, Heilbronner RL, Mittenberg W. et al. Comparison of the MMPI-2 restructured demoralization scale, depression scale, and malingered mood disorder scale in identifying non-credible symptom reporting in personal injury litigants and disability claimants. Clin Neuropsychol 2009; 23: 153-166
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Berthelson L, Mulchan SS, Odland AP. et al. False positive diagnosis of malingering due to the use of multiple effort tests. Brain Inj 2013; 27: 909-916
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Dean AC, Victor TL, Boone KB. et al. The relationship of IQ to effort test performance. Clin Neuropsychol 2008; 22: 705-722
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Meyers JE, Volbrecht ME. A validation of multiple malingering detection methods in a large clinical sample. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2003; 18: 261-276
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Larrabee GJ. False-positive rates associated with the use of multiple performance and symptom validity tests. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2014; 29: 364-373
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Odland AP, Lammy AB, Martin PK. et al. Advanced administration and interpretation of multiple validity tests. Psychol Inj Law 2015; 8: 46-63
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Essig SM, Mittenberg W, Petersen RS. et al. Practices in forensic neuropsychology: Perspectives of neuropsychologists and trial attorneys. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2001; 16: 271-291
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Bauer L, McCaffrey R. Coverage of the test of memory malingering, victoria symptom validity test, and word memory test on the internet: Is test security threatened?. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2006; 21: 121-126
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Ruiz MA, Drake EB, Glass A. et al. Trying to beat the system: Misuse of the internet to assist in avoiding the detection of psychological symptom dissimulation. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 2002; 33: 294-299
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Suchy Y, Chelune G, Franchow EI. et al. Confronting patients about insufficient effort: The impact on subsequent symptom validity and memory performance. Clin Neuropsychol 2012; 26: 1296-1311
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Carone DA, Iverson GL, Bush SS. A model to approaching and providing feedback to patients regarding invalid test performance in clinical neuropsychological evaluations. Clin Neuropsychol 2010; 24: 759-778
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Youngjohn JR, Lees-Haley PR, Binder LM. Comment: Warning malingerers produces more sophisticated malingering. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 1999; 14: 511-515
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Suhr JA, Gunstad J. Coaching and malingering: a review. In: Larrabee GJ. , ed. Assessment of malingered neuropsychological deficits. New York: Oxford University Press; 2007: 287-311
    Google Scholar
  • 74 Miller L. Not just malingering: Syndrome diagnosis in traumatic brain injury litigation. Neuro Rehabilitation 2001; 16: 109-122
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Bigler ED. Effort, symptom validity testing, performance validity testing and traumatic brain injury. Brain Inj 2014; 28: 1623-1638
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Bigler ED. Neuroimaging as a biomarker in symptom validity and performance validity testing. Brain Imaging and Behav 2015; 9: 421-444
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Cacioppo JT. Heart rate, cognitive response, and persuasion [Unveröffentlichte Dissertation]. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University; 1977
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Henelius A, Hirvonen K, Holm A. et al. Mental workload classification using heart rate metrics. In IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society 2009; 1836-1839
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Mukherjee S, Yadav R, Yung I. et al. Sensitivity to mental effort and test-retest reliability of heart rate variability measures in healthy seniors. J Clin Neurophysiol 2011; 122: 2059-2066
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Stewart CC, Wright RA, Hui SK. et al. Outcome expectancy as a moderator of mental fatigue influence on cardiovascular response. Psychophysiology 2009; 46: 1141-1149
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Stuiver A, de Waard D, Brookhuis KA. et al. Short-term cardiovascular responses to changing task demands. Int J Psychophysiol 2012; 85: 153-160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Kurzban R, Duckworth A, Kable JW. et al. An opportunity cost model of subjective effort and task performance. Behav. Brain Sci 2013; 36: 661-726
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Brehm JW, Self EA. The intensity of motivation. Ann Rev Psychol 1989; 40: 109-31
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Inzlicht M, Berkman E, Elkins-Brown N. The neuroscience of “ego depletion”: How the brain can help us understand why self-control seems limited. In: Harmon-Jones RInzlicht M, Inzlicht M. , eds. Social Neuroscience: Biological Approaches to Social Psychology. New York: Psychology Press; 2016: 102-123
    Google Scholar
  • 85 Kurzban R. The sense of effort. Curr Opin Psychol 2016; 7: 67-70
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Merten T, Engemann A. Simulation. In: Wirtz MA. , Hrsg. Dorsch – Lexikon der Psychologie. 17.. Auflage. Bern: Huber; 2014: 1531
    Google Scholar