Does noncredible reporting moderate the relationship of executive functioning ratings to executive functioning tests,...

Studies show poor agreement between executive functioning (EF) rating scales and objective EF tests. However, few studies have considered how this relationship may be impacted by noncredible reporting on symptom validity tests. This may be especially relevant in the context of assessment of adults for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), where there is heavy reliance on EF rating scales, high rates of noncredible presentation, and notable external incentives (e.g., stimulant medication and academic accommodations). We examined the impact of overreporting on EF rating scales, as well as the relation of scores on EF rating scales to scores on EF tests and self-reported impairment in an archival sample of adults who presented for ADHD evaluation (N = 99). Noncredible reporters demonstrated higher EF rating scale scores than credible reporters. In the full sample, EF rating scale scores were largely unrelated to EF test scores, with no moderating effect of symptom validity test group. However, higher EF rating scale scores were related to more psychological distress, with larger effect sizes in the credible reporting group for depression scores. EF ratings were related to self-reported functional impairment, regardless of group status. While results do not suggest noncredible report is a major contributor to divergence between EF ratings and EF test scores, they do suggest that a commonly used EF rating measure is vulnerable to noncredible reporting. This raises concern about use of EF rating scales in ADHD assessments without consideration of other factors, such as noncredible report and psychological distress. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).