Abstract：
Objective: The present study evaluated the function of four cognitive, symptom validity scales on the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), the Cognitive Bias Scale (CBS) and the Cognitive Bias Scale of Scales (CB-SOS) 1, 2, and 3 in a sample of Veterans who volunteered for a study of neurocognitive functioning. Method: 371 Veterans (88.1% male, 66.1% White) completed a battery including the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST), the Word Memory Test (WMT), and the PAI. Independent samples t-tests compared mean differences on cognitive bias scales between valid and invalid groups on the M-FAST and WMT. Area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and hit rate across various scale point-estimates were used to evaluate classification accuracy of the CBS and CB-SOS scales. Results: Group differences were significant with moderate effect sizes for all cognitive bias scales between the WMT-classified groups (d = .52-.55), and large effect sizes between the M-FAST-classified groups (d = 1.27-1.45). AUC effect sizes were moderate across the WMT-classified groups (.650-.676) and large across M-FAST-classified groups (.816-.854). When specificity was set to .90, sensitivity was higher for M-FAST and the CBS performed the best (sensitivity = .42). Conclusion: The CBS and CB-SOS scales seem to better detect symptom invalidity than performance invalidity in Veterans using cutoff scores similar to those found in prior studies with non-Veterans.
摘要：
目的:本研究评估四种认知功能,人格评估量表(PAI)上的症状效度量表，认知偏差量表（CBS）和认知偏差量表（CB-SOS）1、2和3在自愿参加神经认知功能研究的退伍军人样本中。方法：371名退伍军人（88.1%男性，66.1%白色)完成了包括米勒法医症状评估(M-FAST)在内的电池，单词内存测试(WMT)，和PAI。独立样本t检验比较了M-FAST和WMT上有效组和无效组之间认知偏差量表的平均差异。曲线下面积（AUC），灵敏度,特异性，使用各种量表点估计的命中率来评估CBS和CB-SOS量表的分类准确性。结果：WMT分类组之间所有认知偏差量表的中等效应大小的组差异显著（d=.52-.55），M-FAST分类组之间的效应大小较大(d=1.27-1.45)。在WMT分类的组中，AUC效应大小适中（.650-.676），在M-FAST分类的组中，AUC效应大小较大（.816-.854）。当特异性设定为.90时,M-FAST的灵敏度更高,CBS表现最好(灵敏度=.42)。结论：CBS和CB-SOS量表似乎可以更好地检测退伍军人的症状无效性，而不是表现无效性。
