ArticleJournal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology2018
A signal detection-item response theory model for evaluating neuropsychological measures.
Article in Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent Advances in Neuropsychological Test Interpretation for Clinical Practice.Neuropsychology review · 2024Review
- Face identification proficiency test designed using item response theory.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Construction of a computerized adaptive test (CAT-CCNB) for efficient neurocognitive and clinical psychopathology assessment.Journal of neuroscience methods · 2023Article
- Problematic Shopping Behavior: An Item Response Theory Examination of the Seven-Item Bergen Shopping Addiction Scale.International journal of mental health and addiction · 2022Article
- Detecting the Inverted-U in fMRI Studies of Schizophrenia: A Comparison of Three Analysis Methods.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society : JINS · 2022Article
- Bayesian modeling of item heterogeneity in dichotomous recognition memory data and prospects for computerized adaptive testing.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- An efficient and adaptive test of auditory mental imagery.Psychological research · 2021Article
- Neurocognitive Assessment Tools for Military Personnel With Mild Traumatic Brain Injury: Scoping Literature Review.JMIR mental health · 2021Article
- Latent Variable Modeling and Adaptive Testing for Experimental Cognitive Psychopathology Research.Educational and psychological measurement · 2021Article
- When CAT is not an option: complementary methods of test abbreviation for neurocognitive batteries.Cognitive neuropsychiatry · 2021Article
- Paradigm Shift Toward Digital Neuropsychology and High-Dimensional Neuropsychological Assessments: Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2020Review
- Studying Individual Differences in Spatial Cognition Through Differential Item Functioning Analysis.Brain sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionModels from signal detection theory are commonly used to score neuropsychological test data, especially tests of recognition memory. Here we show that certain item response theory models can be formulated as signal detection theory models, thus linking two complementary but distinct methodologies. We then use the approach to evaluate the validity (construct representation) of commonly used research measures, demonstrate the impact of conditional error on neuropsychological outcomes, and evaluate measurement bias.
methodSignal detection-item response theory (SD-IRT) models were fitted to recognition memory data for words, faces, and objects. The sample consisted of U.S. Infantry Marines and Navy Corpsmen participating in the Marine Resiliency Study. Data comprised item responses to the Penn Face Memory Test (PFMT; N = 1,338), Penn Word Memory Test (PWMT; N = 1,331), and Visual Object Learning Test (VOLT; N = 1,249), and self-report of past head injury with loss of consciousness.
resultsSD-IRT models adequately fitted recognition memory item data across all modalities. Error varied systematically with ability estimates, and distributions of residuals from the regression of memory discrimination onto self-report of past head injury were positively skewed towards regions of larger measurement error. Analyses of differential item functioning revealed little evidence of systematic bias by level of education.
conclusionsSD-IRT models benefit from the measurement rigor of item response theory-which permits the modeling of item difficulty and examinee ability-and from signal detection theory-which provides an interpretive framework encompassing the experimentally validated constructs of memory discrimination and response bias. We used this approach to validate the construct representation of commonly used research measures and to demonstrate how nonoptimized item parameters can lead to erroneous conclusions when interpreting neuropsychological test data. Future work might include the development of computerized adaptive tests and integration with mixture and random-effects models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.