The concept of executive functions has a rich history and remains current despite increased use of other terms, including working memory and cognitive control. Executive functions have sometimes been equated with functions subserved by the frontal cortex, but this adds little clarity, given that we so far lack a comprehensive theory of frontal function. Pending a more complete mechanistic understanding, clinically useful generalizations can help characterize both healthy cognition and multiple varieties of cognitive impairment. This article surveys several hierarchical and autoregulatory control theories, and suggests that the evolutionary cytoarchitectonic trends theory provides a valuable neuroanatomical framework to help organize research on frontal structure-function relations. The theory suggests that paleocortical/ventrolateral and archicortical/dorsomedial trends are associated with neural network flexibility and stability respectively, which comports well with multiple other conceptual distinctions that have been proposed to characterize ventral and dorsal frontal functions, including the "initiation/inhibition," "what/where," and "classification/expectation" hypotheses.

Objective

This article reviews current approaches to neuropsychological assessment, identifies opportunities for development of new methods using modern psychometric theory and advances in technology, and suggests a transition path that promotes application of novel methods without sacrificing validity.

Methods

Theoretical/state-of-the-art review.

Conclusions

Clinical neuropsychological assessment today does not reflect advances in neuroscience, modern psychometrics, or technology. Major opportunities for improving practice include both psychometric and technological strategies. Modern psychometric approaches including item response theory (IRT) enable linking procedures that can place different measures on common scales; adaptive testing algorithms that can dramatically increase efficiency of assessment; examination of differential item functioning (DIF) to detect measures that behave differently in different groups; and person fit statistics to detect aberrant patterns of responding of high value for performance validity testing. Opportunities to introduce novel technologies include computerized adaptive testing, Web-based assessment, healthcare- and bio-informatics strategies, mobile platforms, wearables, and the 'internet-of-things'. To overcome inertia in current practices, new methods must satisfy requirements for back-compatibility with legacy instrumentation, enabling us to leverage the wealth of validity data already accrued for classic procedures. A path to achieve these goals involves creation of a global network to aggregate item-level data into a shared repository that will enable modern psychometric analyses to refine existing methods, and serve as a platform to evolve novel assessment strategies, which over time can revolutionize neuropsychological assessment practices world-wide.

Background

The Consortium for Neuropsychiatric Phenomics (CNP) at UCLA was an investigation into the biological bases of traits such as memory and response inhibition phenotypes-to explore whether they are linked to syndromes including ADHD, Bipolar disorder, and Schizophrenia. An aim of the consortium was in moving from traditional categorical approaches for psychiatric syndromes towards more quantitative approaches based on large-scale analysis of the space of human variation. It represented an application of phenomics-wide-scale, systematic study of phenotypes-to neuropsychiatry research.

Results

This paper reports on a system for exploration of hypotheses in data obtained from the LA2K, LA3C, and LA5C studies in CNP. ViVA is a system for exploratory data analysis using novel mathematical models and methods for visualization of variance. An example of these methods is called VISOVA, a combination of visualization and analysis of variance, with the flavor of exploration associated with ANOVA in biomedical hypothesis generation. It permits visual identification of phenotype profiles-patterns of values across phenotypes-that characterize groups. Visualization enables screening and refinement of hypotheses about variance structure of sets of phenotypes.

Conclusions

The ViVA system was designed for exploration of neuropsychiatric hypotheses by interdisciplinary teams. Automated visualization in ViVA supports 'natural selection' on a pool of hypotheses, and permits deeper understanding of the statistical architecture of the data. Large-scale perspective of this kind could lead to better neuropsychiatric diagnostics.

Controversy has arisen over interpretation of performance validity tests (PVTs) when multiple PVTs are given. Some papers state that more stringent criteria are needed to judge overall performance as invalid, while others argue that concerns about the number of PVTs are overstated and that widely used criteria are appropriate. We examine theoretical models and assumptions, and analyze published data to determine the magnitude of effects implied by theory and observed in practice. Assertions advanced in the primary papers are examined for consistency with the empirical data. Existing theoretical models do not account well for the diverse empirical data, substantial empirical effects remain poorly understood, and the primary papers include assertions that are not empirically supported. The results indicate that: (a) neuropsychology lacks solid theoretical bases for estimating PVT failure rates given various combinations of PVTs, and thus needs to rely on empirical data; (b) existing empirical data fail to support the application of any uniform criteria across the broad range of scenarios involving multiple PVTs; and (c) practice should rely on empirical studies involving combinations of PVTs that have been studied together, in samples clearly appropriate to the individual case, using experimental designs germane to the questions under consideration.

Objective: This paper presents a theory-based brief resilience scale, the Resilience Resources Scale (RRS), and evidence for its factor structure, reliability, and validity in two studies of undergraduate students. Participants: Study 1 sampled 295 students and Study 2 sampled 244 students. Methods: Study 1 participants completed the RRS and other measures online at one of two time points eight weeks apart (n = 193), or at both time points (n = 102). Study 2 participants completed the RRS and other measures online on a single occasion. Results: Factor analyses provided evidence for a one-factor model. Results indicated high internal consistency and strong test-retest reliability. Evidence of concurrent and predictive validity is presented. Conclusions: The RRS measures resilience resources known to be protective of physical and mental health. This brief scale has sound psychometric properties in these initial studies of undergraduate students. We offer possible directions for use of the RRS in this and other populations.

Manchiraju et al. (International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 1-15, 2016) published the Compulsive Online Shopping Scale (COSS) in the International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction (IJMHA). To develop their measure of compulsive online shopping, Manchiraju and colleagues adapted items from the seven-item Bergen Shopping Addiction Scale (BSAS) and its' original 28-item item pool. Manchiraju et al. did not add or remove any of the original seven items, and did not substantially change the content of any of the 28 items on which the BSAS was based. They simply added the word "online" to each existing item. Given that the BSAS was specifically developed to take into account the different ways in which people now shop and to include both online and offline shopping, there does not seem to be a good rationale for developing an online version of the BSAS. It is argued that the COSS is not really an adaptation of the BSAS but an almost identical instrument based on the original 28-item pool.

Although excessive and compulsive shopping has been increasingly placed within the behavioral addiction paradigm in recent years, items in existing screens arguably do not assess the core criteria and components of addiction. To date, assessment screens for shopping disorders have primarily been rooted within the impulse-control or obsessive-compulsive disorder paradigms. Furthermore, existing screens use the terms 'shopping,' 'buying,' and 'spending' interchangeably, and do not necessarily reflect contemporary shopping habits. Consequently, a new screening tool for assessing shopping addiction was developed. Initially, 28 items, four for each of seven addiction criteria (salience, mood modification, conflict, tolerance, withdrawal, relapse, and problems), were constructed. These items and validated scales (i.e., Compulsive Buying Measurement Scale, Mini-International Personality Item Pool, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale) were then administered to 23,537 participants (M age = 35.8 years, SD age = 13.3). The highest loading item from each set of four pooled items reflecting the seven addiction criteria were retained in the final scale, The Bergen Shopping Addiction Scale (BSAS). The factor structure of the BSAS was good (RMSEA = 0.064, CFI = 0.983, TLI = 0.973) and coefficient alpha was 0.87. The scores on the BSAS converged with scores on the Compulsive Buying Measurement Scale (CBMS; 0.80), and were positively correlated with extroversion and neuroticism, and negatively with conscientiousness, agreeableness, and intellect/imagination. The scores of the BSAS were positively associated with anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem and inversely related to age. Females scored higher than males on the BSAS. The BSAS is the first scale to fully embed shopping addiction within an addiction paradigm. A recommended cutoff score for the new scale and future research directions are discussed.

Objective: Total scale scores derived by summing ratings from the 30-item PANSS are commonly used in clinical trial research to measure overall symptom severity, and percentage reductions in the total scores are sometimes used to document the efficacy of treatment. Acknowledging that some patients may have substantial changes in PANSS total scores but still be sufficiently symptomatic to warrant diagnosis, ratings on a subset of 8 items, referred to here as the "Remission set," are sometimes used to determine if patients' symptoms no longer satisfy diagnostic criteria. An unanswered question remains: is the goal of treatment better conceptualized as reduction in overall symptom severity, or reduction in symptoms below the threshold for diagnosis? We evaluated the psychometric properties of PANSS total scores, to assess whether having low symptom severity post-treatment is equivalent to attaining Remission. Design: We applied a bifactor item response theory (IRT) model to post-treatment PANSS ratings of 3,647 subjects diagnosed with schizophrenia assessed at the termination of 11 clinical trials. The bifactor model specified one general dimension to reflect overall symptom severity, and five domain-specific dimensions. We assessed how PANSS item discrimination and information parameters varied across the range of overall symptom severity (θ), with a special focus on low levels of symptoms (i.e., θ<-1), which we refer to as "Relief" from symptoms. A score of θ=-1 corresponds to an expected PANSS item score of 1.83, a rating between "Absent" and "Minimal" for a PANSS symptom. Results: The application of the bifactor IRT model revealed: (1) 88% of total score variation was attributable to variation in general symptom severity, and only 8% reflected secondary domain factors. This implies that a general factor may provide a good indicator of symptom severity, and that interpretation is not overly complicated by multidimensionality; (2) Post-treatment, 534 individuals (about 15% of the whole sample) scored in the "Relief" range of general symptom severity, but more than twice that number (n = 1351) satisfied Remission criteria (37%). 2 in 3 Remitted patients had scores that were not in a low symptom range (corresponding to Absent or Minimal item scores); (3) PANSS items vary greatly in their ability to measure the general symptom severity dimension; while many items are highly discriminating and relatively "pure" indicators of general symptom severity (delusions, conceptual disorganization), others are better indicators of specific dimensions (blunted affect, depression). The utility of a given PANSS item for assessing a patient depended on the illness level of the patient. Conclusion: Satisfying conventional Remission criteria was not strongly associated with low levels of symptoms. The items providing the most information for patients in the symptom Relief range were Delusions, Preoccupation, Suspiciousness Persecution, Unusual Thought Content, Conceptual Disorganization, Stereotyped Thinking, Active Social Avoidance, and Lack of Judgment and Insight. Lower scores on these items (item scores ≤2) were strongly associated with having a low latent trait θ or experiencing overall symptom relief. The inter-rater agreement between Remission and Relief subjects suggested that these criteria identified different subsets of patients. Alternative subsets of items may offer better indicators of general symptom severity and provide better discrimination (and lower standard errors) for scaling individuals and judging symptom relief, where the "best" subset of items ultimately depends on the illness range and treatment phase being evaluated.