Correction to: Psychological Injury and Law (2018) 11(4):325–335

https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-018-9335-9

Correction of mistake in the original version of this paper, “Further Validation of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) Trial 1 Performance Validity Index: Examination of False Positives and Convergent Validity”, the sentence “As indicated in Table 7, TOMM T1 ≤ 40 exhibited sensitivity of .86 and specificity of .85, though TOMM T1 ≤ 43 exhibited the best combination of sensitivity (.81) and specificity (.91) in our sample.” in the Results section should read “As indicated in Table 7, TOMM T1 ≤ 40 exhibited sensitivity of .85 and specificity of .86, though TOMM T1 ≤ 36 exhibited the best combination of sensitivity (.79) and specificity (.90) in our sample.”.

Table 7 Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve Analysis for TOMM T1
Full size table

In the Discussion section, the sentence “Based on standards in neuropsychology performance validity testing suggesting that sensitivity ≥.40 and specificity ≥.90 represent adequate classification accuracy (Boone, 2012), ROC curve analyses suggested TOMM T1 ≤42 had the best combination of sensitivity (.81) and specificity (.91) in our sample, while TOMM T1 ≤40 exhibited sensitivity of .86 and specificity of .85.” should read “Based on standards in neuropsychology performance validity testing suggesting that sensitivity ≥.40 and specificity ≥.90 represent adequate classification accuracy (Boone, 2012), ROC curve analyses suggested TOMM T1 ≤36 had the best combination of sensitivity (.79) and specificity (.90) in our sample, while TOMM T1 ≤40 exhibited sensitivity of .85 and specificity of .86”.

The corrected Table 7 is given below.