Detecting feigned ADHD in college students using the Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory-2-restructured form (MMPI-2-RF)

Examining the utility of the BAARS-IV scales as embedded symptom validity indicators for adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder evaluations

Objective: This study investigated whether extreme cut-scores on the Barkley Adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) Rating Scale-Fourth Edition (BAARS-IV) self-report scales could serve as symptom overreporting indicators in adult ADHD evaluations. Method: The sample consisted of 162 adults who underwent a neuropsychological evaluation for ADHD. Patients were classified into valid (n = 115) and invalid (n = 47) groups based on multiple criterion symptom validity tests. Results: Overreporting cut-scores identified for each of the BAARS-IV scales demonstrated acceptable classification accuracy or better. The Current Total scale yielded the highest classification accuracy (area under the curve of .83). An optimal raw cut-score of ≥56 for this scale yielded 47% sensitivity when upholding ≥90% specificity. A cut-score of ≥31 for the Current Inattention scale (90% specificity; 47% sensitivity) and ≥29 for the Current Sluggish Cognitive Tempo scale (88% specificity; 46% sensitivity) were also relatively strong indicators of overreporting. The Current Total and Current Sluggish Cognitive Tempo scales captured nonredundant aspects of symptom validity, and using them together increased sensitivity to 57% while maintaining ≥90% specificity. Conclusions: Findings provide preliminary support for the criterion and construct validity of extreme cut-scores on the BAARS-IV Current Sluggish Cognitive Tempo, Current Inattention, and Current Total scales as indicators of ADHD symptom overreporting. However, employing the cut-scores from the Current Sluggish Cognitive Tempo (≥29) and Current Total (≥56) together may be the most promising way to detect overreporting. Scores above both of these cut-points should, at a minimum, prompt further investigation into the validity of a patient's reported symptoms.

Internalizing and somatic symptoms influence the discrepancy between subjective and objective cognitive difficulties in adults with ADHD who have valid and invalid test scores

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the relationship between various intrapersonal factors and the discrepancy between subjective and objective cognitive difficulties in adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The first aim was to examine these associations in patients with valid cognitive symptom reporting. The next aim was to investigate the same associations in patients with invalid scores on tests of cognitive symptom overreporting.

METHOD

The sample comprised 154 adults who underwent a neuropsychological evaluation for ADHD. Patients were divided into groups based on whether they had valid cognitive symptom reporting and valid test performance (n = 117) or invalid cognitive symptom overreporting but valid test performance (n = 37). Scores from multiple symptom and performance validity tests were used to group patients. Using patients' scores from a cognitive concerns self-report measure and composite index of objective performance tests, we created a subjective-objective discrepancy index to quantify the extent of cognitive concerns that exceeded difficulties on objective testing. Various measures were used to assess intrapersonal factors thought to influence the subjective-objective cognitive discrepancy, including demographics, estimated premorbid intellectual ability, internalizing symptoms, somatic symptoms, and perceived social support.

RESULTS

Patients reported greater cognitive difficulties on subjective measures than observed on objective testing. The discrepancy between subjective and objective scores was most strongly associated with internalizing and somatic symptoms. These associations were observed in both validity groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Subjective cognitive concerns may be more indicative of the extent of internalizing and somatic symptoms than actual cognitive impairment in adults with ADHD, regardless if they have valid scores on cognitive symptom overreporting tests.

Development and initial validation of the Scale of Scales (SOS) overreporting scores for the MMPI family of instruments

Overreporting is a common problem that complicates psychological evaluations. A challenge facing the effective detection of overreporting is that many of the identified strategies (e.g., symptom severity approaches; see Rogers & Bender, 2020) are not incorporated into broadband measures of personality and psychopathology (e.g., Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory family of instruments). While recent efforts have worked to incorporate some of these newer strategies, no such work has been conducted on the MMPI-3. For instance, recent symptom severity approaches have been used to identify patterns of multivariate base rate "skyline" elevations on the BASC, and similar strategies have been adopted into the PAI to measure psychopathology (Multi-Feigning Index; Gaines et al., 2013) and cognitive symptoms (Cognitive Bias Scale of Scales; Boress et al., 2022b). This study used data from a simulation study (n = 318) and an Active-Duty (AD) clinical sample (n = 290) to develop and cross-validate such a scale on the MMPI-2-RF and MMPI-3. Results suggest that the MMPI SOS (Scale of Scales) scores perform equitably to existing measures of overreporting on the MMPI-2-RF and MMPI-3 and incrementally predict a PVT-classified "known-group" of Active Duty service members. Effects were generally large in magnitude. Classification accuracy achieved desired specificity (.90) and approximated expected sensitivity (.30). Implications of these findings are discussed, which emphasize how alternative overreporting detection strategies may be useful to consider for the MMPI. These alternative strategies have room for expansion and refinement.

Evaluation of telehealth administration of MMPI symptom validity scales

INTRODUCTION

Telehealth assessment (TA) is a quickly emerging practice, offered with increasing frequency across many different clinical contexts. TA is also well-received by most patients, and there are numerous guidelines and training opportunities which can support effective telehealth practice. Although there are extensive recommended practices, these guidelines have rarely been evaluated empirically, particularly on personality measures. While existing research is limited, it does generally support the idea that TA and in-person assessment (IA) produce fairly equitable test scores. The MMPI-3, a recently released and highly popular personality and psychopathology measure has been the subject of several of those experimental or student (non-client) based studies; however, no study to date has evaluated these trends within a clinical sample. This study empirically tests for differences in TA and IA test scores on the MMPI-3 validity scores when following recommended administration procedures.

METHOD

Data were from a retrospective chart review. Veterans (n = 550) who underwent psychological assessment in a Veterans Affairs Medical Center ADHD evaluation clinic were contrasted between in person and telehealth assessment modalities on the MMPI-2-RF and MMPI-3. Groups were compared using t tests, chi square, and base rates.

RESULTS

Results suggest that there were minimal differences in elevation rates or mean scores across modality, supporting the use of TA.

CONCLUSIONS

This study's findings support the use of the MMPI via TA with ADHD evaluations, Veterans, and in neuro/psychological evaluation settings more generally. Observed elevation rates and mean scores of this study were notably different from those seen in other VA service clinics sampled nationally, which is an area of future investigation.

Cross-validating the Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Adult symptom validity scales for assessment of attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder in adults

INTRODUCTION

The Clinical Assessment of Attention Deficit-Adult is among the few questionnaires that offer validity indicators (i.e., Negative Impression [NI], Infrequency [IF], and Positive Impression [PI]) for classifying underreporting and overreporting of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms. This is the first study to cross-validate the NI, IF, and PI scales in a sample of adults with suspected or known ADHD.

METHOD

Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to examine the independent and combined value of the NI, IF, and PI scores in predicting invalid symptom reporting and neurocognitive performance in a sample of 543 adults undergoing ADHD evaluation.

RESULTS

The NI scale demonstrated better classification accuracy than the IF scale in discriminating patients with and without valid scores on measures of overreporting. Only NI scores significantly predicted validity status when used in combination with IF scores. Optimal cut-scores for the NI (≤51; 30% sensitivity / 90% specificity) and IF (≥4; 18% sensitivity / 90% specificity) scales were consistent with those reported in the original manual; however, these indicators poorly discriminated patients with invalid and valid neurocognitive performance. The PI scale demonstrated acceptable classification accuracy in discriminating patients with invalid and valid scores on measures of underreporting, albeit with an optimal cut-score (≥27; 36% sensitivity / 90% specificity) lower than that described in the manual.

CONCLUSION

Findings provide preliminary evidence of construct validity for these scales as embedded validity indicators of symptom overreporting and underreporting. However, these scales should not be used to guide clinical judgment regarding the validity of neurocognitive test performance.

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form Profiles Among Adults With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Examining the Effect of Comorbid Psychopathology and ADHD Presentation

OBJECTIVE

Despite widespread use of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF), it is surprisingly understudied among adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This is significant as ADHD is a frequent referral for neuropsychological evaluation; however, the core symptom of attention difficulty is a nonspecific sequela of many psychological disorders. This study aimed to characterize MMPI-2-RF profiles among adults with ADHD and examine the effect of comorbid psychopathology.

METHOD

A large, demographically diverse sample of 413 consecutive adults referred for neuropsychological evaluation to assist with differential diagnosis of ADHD who completed the MMPI-2-RF was examined. Profiles of the 145 patients diagnosed with ADHD-only were compared to 192 with ADHD and a comorbid psychological disorder and a 55-patient non-ADHD psychiatric comparison group. Among the ADHD-only group, profiles also were compared based on ADHD-presentation type (Predominantly Inattentive vs. Combined presentation).

RESULTS

The ADHD/psychopathology and psychiatric comparison groups scored higher than the ADHD-only group across nearly all scales with widespread clinical elevations. Conversely, the ADHD-only group displayed an isolated elevation on the Cognitive Complaints scale. Comparison between ADHD presentations revealed several small-moderate significant differences, the largest of which occurred on the Externalizing and Interpersonal scales.

CONCLUSIONS

Adults with ADHD alone, and no other psychopathology have a unique MMPI-2-RF profile characterized by isolated elevation on the Cognitive Complaints scale. These results support use of the MMPI-2-RF in assessment of adults with ADHD as it can help distinguish ADHD alone from ADHD/comorbid psychopathology and identify relevant psychiatric comorbidities that may be contributing to patients' inattention complaints.