Abstract
This study was designed to investigate the potential of extreme scores on the Behavioral Rating Inventory of Executive Function-Adult Self-Report Version (BRIEF-A-SR) to serve as validity indicators. The BRIEF-A-SR was administered to 73 university students and 50 clinically referred adults. In the student sample, symptom validity was operationalized as the outcome on the Inventory of Problems (IOP-29). In the patient sample, performance validity was operationalized as the outcome on a combination of free-standing and embedded indicators. The BRIEF-A-SR had better classification accuracy in the student sample (.13–.56 sensitivity at .88–.95 specificity) compared with the patient sample (.22–.44 sensitivity at .85–.97 specificity). Combining individual cutoffs into a multivariate model improved specificity (.93) and stabilized sensitivity (.33) in the clinical sample. Failing the newly introduced cutoffs (T ≥ 65/T ≥ 80 in the student sample and T ≥ 80/T ≥ 90 in the clinical sample) was associated with failure on performance validity tests and elevations on other symptom inventories. Results provide preliminary support for an alternative method for establishing the credibility of symptom reports both within the BRIEF-A-SR and other inventories. Pending replication by future research, the newly proposed cutoffs could provide a much needed psychometric safeguard against over-diagnosing neuropsychiatric disorders due to undetected symptom exaggeration.