This study utilized logistic regression to determine whether performance patterns on Concussion Vital Signs (CVS) could differentiate known groups with either genuine or feigned performance. For the embedded measure development group (n = 174), clinical patients and undergraduate students categorized as feigning obtained significantly lower scores on the overall test battery mean for the CVS, Shipley-2 composite score, and California Verbal Learning Test-Second Edition subtests than did genuinely performing individuals. The final full model of 3 predictor variables (Verbal Memory immediate hits, Verbal Memory immediate correct passes, and Stroop Test complex reaction time correct) was significant and correctly classified individuals in their known group 83% of the time (sensitivity = .65; specificity = .97) in a mixed sample of young-adult clinical cases and simulators. The CVS logistic regression function was applied to a separate undergraduate college group (n = 378) that was asked to perform genuinely and identified 5% as having possibly feigned performance indicating a low false-positive rate. The failure rate was 11% and 16% at baseline cognitive testing in samples of high school and college athletes, respectively. These findings have particular relevance given the increasing use of computerized test batteries for baseline cognitive testing and return-to-play decisions after concussion.
Keywords: baseline testing; computerized assessment; performance validity; sports concussion.