Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology

Living Edition
| Editors: Jeffrey Kreutzer, John DeLuca, Bruce Caplan

Computerized Assessment of Response Bias

Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-56782-2_2228-3

Synonyms

Description

The Computerized Assessment of Response Bias (CARB) is a computer-based assessment tool for evaluating effort. The test is one of many tests characterized as symptom validity tests (SVT), measures of response bias, tests used to assess possible malingering or poor effort, and tests of exaggeration of deficit. The test is a computerized version of the digit recognition paradigm using a forced choice format, akin to the procedure described by Hiscock and Hiscock (1989) and Binder (1990). Frequently, statistical determination of below chance performance (based on the binomial theorem) has been used with tests such as these. However, CARB has been described as an easy test to perform, resulting in the ability to detect inadequate effort using above chance cut-off scores (Millis 2008, p. 896). The test has been studied with a wide variety of populations, including head injury, chronic fatigue syndrome, musculoskeletal injuries, pain disorders, and psychiatric or...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access

References and Readings

  1. Allen, L. M., Conder, R. L., Green, P., & Cox, D. R. (1997). CARB' 97 manual for the Computerized Assessment of Response Bias. Durham: CogniSyst, Inc.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, L. M., Richards, P. M., Green, W. P., Iverson, G. L., & Conder, R. L. (1998). Performance patterns on the Computerized Assessment of Response Bias in 1752 compensation cases (Abstract). Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 13, 15–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allen, L. M., Iverson, G. L., & Green, P. (2003). Computerized Assessment of Response Bias in forensic neuropsychology. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 3(2), 205–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. de Armas, A. (1996, July–August). Detection of malingering in forensic psychological evaluations. The Forensic Examiner, 5, 26–28.Google Scholar
  5. Binder, L. M. (1990). Malingering following minor head trauma. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 4, 25–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Conder, R., Allen, L., & Cox, D. (1992). Manual for the Computerized Assessment of Response Bias. Durham: CogniSyst, Inc.Google Scholar
  7. Flaro, L., Green, P., & Allen, L. M., III. (2000). Symptom validity test results with children: CARB and WMT. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 15(8), 840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gervais, R., Green, P., Allen, L., & Iverson, G. (2001). Effects of coaching on symptom validity testing in chronic pain patients presenting for disability assessments. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 2(2), 1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Green, P., & Iverson, G. L. (2001). Validation of the Computerized Assessment of Response Bias in litigating patients with head injuries. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 15, 492–497.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Harrison, A. G., Flaro, L., & Armstrong, I. (2015). Rates of effort test failure in children with ADHD: An exploratory study. Applied Neuropsychology, 4, 197–210.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Hiscock, M., & Hiscock, C. K. (1989). Refining the forced-choice method for the detection of malingering. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 11, 967–974.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Larrabee, G. J. (2007). Assessment of malingered neuropsychological deficits. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Millis, S. R. (2008). Assessment of incomplete effort and malingering in the neuropsychological examination. In J. E. Morgan & J. H. Ricker (Eds.), Textbook of clinical neuropsychology. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  14. Mossman, D., Wygant, D. B., & Gervais, R. O. (2012). Estimating the accuracy of neurocognitive measures in the absence of a “gold standard”. Psychological Assessment, 24, 815822.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Neuropsychology & Rehabilitation Consultants, P.C.Chapel HillUSA