Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists · 2025
Just the Tip of the Iceberg: a Brief Report of the Tip-of-the-Tongue Score as an Embedded Validity Indicator for the Children's Auditory and Visual Naming Tests.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hammond Jared B, Lichtenstein Jonathan D
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Explore the tip-of-the-tongue (TOT) scores from the Children's Auditory and Visual Naming Tests (cANT, cVNT) as embedded validity indicators (EVIs).
METHOD: A retrospective design of 98 consecutively referred youth aged 6-15 years (M = 11.28, SD = 2.80) that completed neuropsychological evaluation at a tertiary-care academic medical center.
RESULTS: Invalid performance (i.e., ≥2 failed PVTs) occurred in 12.2% of the sample, with base rates of failure on individual PVTs ranging from 1.0% to 30.6%. Area under the curve (AUC) showed statistical significance for the auditory (AUC = 0.811, p = .004) but not the visual TOT. Logistic regression indicated the combination of both TOT scores with other PVTs increased correct identification of invalid performance to 85.7% versus 75% without TOT scores.
CONCLUSION: The utility of the TOT as a language-based EVI is one of many potential advantages of the cANT and cVNT compared to other confrontation naming tests. To confirm this, future studies with more diverse populations are warranted.
METHOD: A retrospective design of 98 consecutively referred youth aged 6-15 years (M = 11.28, SD = 2.80) that completed neuropsychological evaluation at a tertiary-care academic medical center.
RESULTS: Invalid performance (i.e., ≥2 failed PVTs) occurred in 12.2% of the sample, with base rates of failure on individual PVTs ranging from 1.0% to 30.6%. Area under the curve (AUC) showed statistical significance for the auditory (AUC = 0.811, p = .004) but not the visual TOT. Logistic regression indicated the combination of both TOT scores with other PVTs increased correct identification of invalid performance to 85.7% versus 75% without TOT scores.
CONCLUSION: The utility of the TOT as a language-based EVI is one of many potential advantages of the cANT and cVNT compared to other confrontation naming tests. To confirm this, future studies with more diverse populations are warranted.