Symptom Exaggeration in Post-Secondary Students: Preliminary Base Rates in a Canadian Sample
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent studies conducted at American post-secondary institutions report that a high proportion of college students seeking evaluations for either attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder or learning disorders fail symptom validity tests (SVTs), calling into question the validity of their performance on standardized assessment measures. The current study undertook to investigate the rate of SVT failure in a Canadian post-secondary sample, drawing on assessment data from a large regional assessment facility. Evaluating the data from 144 consecutively tested students, the present study found that 14.6% of students failed an SVT, and those who failed returned lower scores on many other assessment measures compared with those who passed. These findings indicate that the rate of symptom exaggeration or low test-taking effort may be lower in Canadian samples than in U.S. samples but still represents a substantial number of students. Recommendations and suggestions for future directions are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it