Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T09:45:15.421Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Assessment of Noncredible Reporting and Responding

from Part I - General Issues in Clinical Assessment and Diagnosis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 December 2019

By
Dustin B. Wygant ,
Danielle Burchett  and
Jordan P. Harp
Edited by
Martin Sellbom  and
Julie A. Suhr
Martin Sellbom
Affiliation:
University of Otago, New Zealand
Julie A. Suhr
Affiliation:
Ohio University
Get access

Summary

Invalid responding is an important consideration in mental health assessment. Given that most assessment data are gathered from self-report methods, accurate diagnostic and clinical impressions can be compromised by various forms of response bias. In this chapter, we review the ways in which evaluations of psychopathology, neurocognitive symptoms, and medical/somatic presentations can be compromised due to noncredible responding and invalidating test-taking approaches. We cover a variety of strategies and measures that have been developed to assess invalid responding. Further, we discuss evaluation contexts in which invalid responding is most likely to occur. We conclude with some remarks regarding cultural considerations as well as how technology can be incorporated into the assessment of response bias.

Keywords

malingeringfeigningresponse biasdissimulationvalidity scales
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Clinical Assessment and Diagnosis , pp. 63 - 79
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerman, M. J., & Ackerman, M. C. (1997). Custody evaluation practices: A survey of experienced professionals (revisited). Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 28(2), 137–145.Google Scholar
Alfano, K., & Boone, K. B. (2007). The use of effort tests in the context of actual versus feigned attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and learning disability. In Boone, K. B. (Ed.), Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment: A neuropsychological perspective (pp. 366–383). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M., Wygant, D. B., Edens, J. F. (2013). Examining the necessity for and utility of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory – Revised (PPI-R) validity scales. Law and Human Behavior, 37, 312–320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arbisi, P. A., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (1995). An MMPI-2 infrequent response scale for use with psychopathological populations: The Infrequency-Psychopathology Scale, F(p). Psychological Assessment, 7, 424–431.Google Scholar
Arce, R., Fariña, F., Seijo, D., & Novo, M. (2015). Assessing impression management with the MMPI-2 in child custody litigation. Assessment, 22(6), 769–777.Google Scholar
Archer, R.P., Wheeler, E.M.A., & Vauter, R.A. (2016). Empirically supported forensic assessment. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 23, 348–364.Google Scholar
Baer, R. A., & Miller, J. (2002). Underreporting of psychopathology on the MMPI-2: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Assessment, 14, 84–94.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bagby, R. M., Nicholson, R. A., Bacchiochi, J. R., Ryder, A. G., & Bury, A. S. (2002). The predictive capacity of the MMPI-2 and PAI Validity Scales and Indexes to detect coached and uncoached feigning. Journal of Personality Assessment, 78(1), 69–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bagby, R.M., & Sellbom, M. (2018). The Validity and Clinical Utility of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) Response Inconsistency Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 100, 398–405.Google Scholar
Bathurst, K., Gottfried, A. W., & Gottfried, A. E. (1997). Normative data for the MMPI-2 in child custody litigation. Psychological Assessment, 9(3), 205–211.Google Scholar
Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Beck Depression Inventory-II. San Antonio: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Bender, S. D., & Frederick, R. (2018). Neuropsychological models of feigned cognitive deficits. In Rogers, R & Bender, S. D. (Eds.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (4th ed., pp. 42–60). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Bender, S. D., & Rogers, R. (2004). Detection of neurocognitive feigning: Development of a multi-strategy assessment. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19, 49–60.Google Scholar
Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2012). Interpreting the MMPI-2-RF. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2013). Self-report inventories: Assessing personality and psychopathology. In Goldstein, A. M. (Ed.), Handbook of psychology, Vol. 10: Assessment psychology (pp. 622–644). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
Ben-Porath, Y. S., Graham, J. R., & Tellegen, A. (2009). The MMPI-2 Symptom Validity (FBS) scale development, research findings, and interpretive recommendations. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Tellegen, A. (2008). MMPI-2-RF manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Berry, D. T. R., & Schipper, L. J. (2008). Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment using standard neuropsychological tests. In Rogers, R. (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd. ed., pp. 237–253). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Bianchini, K. J., Aguerrevere, L. E., Curtis, K. L., Roebuck-Spencer, T. M., Greve, K. W., & Calamia, M. (2018). Classification accuracy of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2)-Restructured form validity scales in detecting malingered pain-related disability. Psychological Assessment, 30, 857–869.Google Scholar
Bianchini, K. J., Aguerrevere, L. E., Guise, B. J., Ord, J. S., Etherton, J. L., Meyers, J. E., Soignier, R. D., Greve, K. W., Curtis, K. L., & Bui, J. (2014). Accuracy of the Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire and Pain Disability Index in the detection of malingered pain-related disability in chronic pain. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 28, 1376–1394.Google Scholar
Bianchini, K. J., Curtis, K. L., & Greve, K. W. (2006). Compensation and malingering in traumatic brain injury: A dose-response relationship? Clinical Neuropsychology, 20(4), 831–847.Google Scholar
Bianchini, K. J., Greve, K. W., & Glynn, G. (2005). Review article: On the diagnosis of malingered pain-related disability: Lessons from cognitive malingering research. The Spine Journal, 5, 404–417.Google Scholar
Binder, L. M. (1993). Assessment of malingering after mild head trauma with the Portland Digit Recognition Test. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 15, 170–182.Google Scholar
Boccaccini, M. T., & Hart, J. R. (2018). Response style on the Personality Assessment Inventory and other multiscale inventories. In Rogers, R. & Bender, S. D. (Eds.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (4th ed., pp. 208–300). New York: The Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Boccaccini, M. T., Murrie, D. C., & Duncan, S. A. (2006). Screening for malingering in a criminal-forensic sample with the Personality Assessment Inventory. Psychological Assessment, 18(4), 415–423.Google Scholar
Boone, K., Lu, P., & Herzberg, D. (2002). The Dot Counting Test. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.Google Scholar
Boone, K. B., Lu, P., Sherman, D., Palmer, B., Back, C., Shamieh, E., et al. (2000). Validation of a new technique to detect malingering of cognitive symptoms: The b Test. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 15, 227–241.Google ScholarPubMed
Boone, K. B., Salazar, X., Lu, P., Warner-Chacon, K., & Razani, J. (2002). The Rey 15-item recognition trial: A technique to enhance sensitivity of the Rey 15-item memorization test. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24(5), 561–573.Google Scholar
Bornstein, R. F. (2017). Evidence-based psychological assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 99, 435–445.Google Scholar
Bow, J. N., Flens, J. R., & Gould, J. W. (2010). MMPI-2 and MCMI-III in forensic evaluations: A survey of psychologists. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 10, 37–52.Google Scholar
Briere, J. (2010). Trauma Symptom Inventory (TSI-2) professional manual (2nd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Burchett, D., & Bagby, R. M. (2014). Multimethod assessment of response distortion: Integrating data from interviews, collateral records, and standardized assessment tools. In Hopwood, C. & Bornstein, R. (Eds.), Multimethod clinical assessment (pp. 345–378). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Burchett, D. L., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2010). The impact of overreporting on MMPI-2-RF substantive scale score validity. Assessment, 17, 497–516.Google Scholar
Burchett, D. L., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (in press). Methodological considerations for developing and evaluating response bias indicators. Psychological Assessment.Google Scholar
Burchett, D., Dragon., W. E., Smith Holbert, A. M., Tarescavage, A. M., Mattson, C. A., Handel, R. W., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2016). “False feigners”: Examining the impact of non-content-based invalid responding on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form content-based invalid responding indicators. Psychological Assessment, 28(5), 458–470.Google Scholar
Bury, A. S., & Bagby, R. M. (2002). The detection of feigned uncoached and coached posttraumatic stress disorder with the MMPI-2 in a sample of workplace accident victims. Psychological Assessment, 14(4), 472–484.Google Scholar
Bush, S. S. (2012). Mild traumatic brain injury: Symptom validity assessment and malingering. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Butcher, J. N., Graham, J. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Tellegen, A., Dahlstrom, W. G., & Kaemmer, B. (2001). MMPI-2 manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation (rev. ed.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Butcher, J. N., & Han, K. (1995). Development of an MMPI-2 scale to assess the presentation of self in a superlative manner: The S scale. In Butcher, J. N. & Spielberger, C. D. (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment, Vol. 10 (pp. 25–50). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Camara, W. J., Nathan, J. S., & Puente, A. E. (2000). Psychological test usage: Implications in professional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31, 141–154.Google Scholar
Cashel, M. L., Rogers, R., Sewell, K., & Martin-Cannici, C. (1995). The Personality Assessment Inventory and the detection of defensiveness. Assessment, 2, 333–342.Google Scholar
Chang, J. T., Szczyglinski, J. A., & King, S. A. (2000). A case of malingering: Feigning a painful disorder in the presence of true medical illness. Pain Medicine, 1(3), 280–282.Google Scholar
Clark, J. A. (2006). Validation of the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST) in a civil forensic population. Master’s thesis, University of Kentucky. (Retrieved from University of Kentucky, Paper No. 399.)Google Scholar
Conder, R., Allen, L., & Cox, D. (1992). Computerized assessment of response bias test manual. Durham, NC: CogniSyst.Google Scholar
Corey, D., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2018). Assessing police and other public safety personnel using the MMPI-2-RF: A practical guide. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Correa, A. A. (2018). Beyond borders: Cultural and translational perspectives of feigning and other response styles. In Rogers, R. & Bender, S. D. (Eds.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (4th ed., pp. 61–80). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Correa, A. A., & Rogers, R. (2010). Validation of the Spanish SIRS with monolingual Hispanic outpatients. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 458–464.Google Scholar
Crighton, A. H., Marek, R. J., Dragon, W. R., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2017). Utility of the MMPI-2-RF Validity Scales in detection of simulated underreporting: Implications of incorporating a manipulation check. Assessment, 24(7), 853–864.Google Scholar
Crighton, A. H., Wygant, D. B., Applegate, K. C., Umlauf, R. L., & Granacher, R. P. (2014). Can brief measures effectively screen for pain and somatic malingering? Examination of the Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire and Pain Disability Index. The Spine Journal, 14, 2042–2050.Google Scholar
DeClue, G. (2011). Harry Potter and the structured interview of reported symptoms. Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology, 3, 1–18.Google Scholar
Delis, D. C., Kramer, J. H., Kaplan, E., & Ober, B. A. (2000). CVLT-II: California verbal learning test: Adult version. . San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Delis, D. C., Kramer, J. H., Kaplan, E., & Ober, B. A. (2017). CVLT-3: California verbal learning test (3rd ed.). Bloomington, MN: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Dhillon, S., Bagby, R. M., Kushner, S. C., & Burchett, D. (2017). The impact of underreporting and overreporting on the validity of the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID-5): A simulation analog design investigation. Psychological Assessment, 29, 473–478.Google Scholar
Dragon, W. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Handel, R. W. (2012). Examining the impact of unscorable responses on the validity and interpretability of MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF Restructured Clinical (RC) Scale scores. Assessment, 19(1), 101–113.Google Scholar
Fernandez, K., Boccaccini, M. T., & Noland, R. M. (2008). Detecting over- and underreporting of psychopathology with the Spanish-language Personality Assessment Inventory: Findings from a simulation study with bilingual speakers. Psychological Assessment, 20, 189–194.Google Scholar
Fishbain, D. A., Cole, B., Cutler, R.B., Lewis, J., Rosomoff, H. L., & Rosomoff, R. S. (2003). A structured evidenced-based review on the meaning of nonorganic physical signs: Waddell signs. Pain Medicine, 4, 141–181.Google Scholar
Fishbain, D. A., Cutler, R. B., Rosomoff, H. L., & Rosomoff, R. S. (2004). Is there a relationship between nonorganic physical findings (Waddell Signs) and secondary gain/malingering? Clinical Journal of Pain, 20, 399–408.Google Scholar
Frederick, R. I. (2000). A personal floor effect strategy to evaluate the validity of performance on memory tests. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 22, 720–730.Google Scholar
Frederick, R. I. (2003a). Validity Indicator Profile (enhancement and profile report). Minnetonka, MN: Pearson Assessments.Google Scholar
Frederick, R. I. (2003b). Review of the validity indicator profile. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 2(3–4), 125–145.Google Scholar
Friedhoff, L. A., Burchett, D., Alosco, M., Rapier, J. L., Benitez, A., Gunstad, J., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2014). MMPI-2-RF VRIN-r and TRIN-r associations with neuropsychological measures in a university-based neuropsychological evaluation setting. Paper presented at the Annual Symposium on Recent MMPI-2, MMPI-2-RF, & MMPI-A Research, Scottsdale, AZ, April 25–26.Google Scholar
Frueh, B. C., Hamner, M. B., Cahill, S. P., Gold, P. B., & Hamlin, K. (2000). Apparent symptom overreporting among combat veterans evaluated for PTSD. Clinical Psychology Review, 20(7), 853–885.Google Scholar
Gaines, M. V. (2009). An examination of the combined use of the PAI and the M-FAST in detecting malingering among inmates. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University.Google Scholar
Gervais, R. O., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Wygant, D. B., & Green, P. (2007). Development and validation of a Response Bias Scale (RBS) for the MMPI-2. Assessment, 14, 196–208.Google Scholar
Gervais, R. O., Rohling, M. L., Green, P., & Ford, W. (2004). A comparison of WMT, CARB, and TOMM failure rates in non-head injury disability claimants. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19, 475–87.Google Scholar
Gervais, R. O., Tarescavage, A. M., Greiffenstein, M. F., Wygant, D. B., Deslauriers, C., & Arends, P. (2018). Inconsistent responding on the MMPI-2-RF and uncooperative attitude: Evidence from cognitive performance validity measures. Psychological Assessment, 30, 410–415.Google Scholar
Glassmire, D. M., Jhawar, A., Burchett, D., & Tarescavage, A. M. (2016). Evaluating item endorsement rates for the MMPI-2-RF F-r and Fp-r scales across ethnic, gender, and diagnostic groups with a forensic inpatient unit. Psychological Assessment, 29, 500–508.Google Scholar
Glassmire, D. M., Tarescavage, A. M., & Gottfried, E. D. (2016). Likelihood of obtaining Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS) and SIRS-2 elevations among forensic psychiatric inpatients with screening elevations on the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test. Psychological Assessment, 28(12), 1586–1596.Google Scholar
Graham, J. R. (2012). MMPI-2: Assessing Personality and Psychopathology (5th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Green, P. (2003). Green’s word memory test. Edmonton: Green’s Publishing.Google Scholar
Green, P. (2004). Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT) for Microsoft Windows: User’s manual. Edmonton: Green’s Publishing.Google Scholar
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.Google Scholar
Green, P., Rohling, M. L., Lees-Haley, P. R., & Allen, L. (2001). Effort has a greater effect on test scores than severe brain injury in compensation claimants. Brain Injury, 15, 1045–1060.Google Scholar
Greiffenstein, M. F., Baker, W. J., & Gola, T. (1994). Validation of malingered amnesia measures with a large clinical sample. Psychological Assessment, 6, 218–224.Google Scholar
Greve, K. W., Ord, J. S., Bianchini, K. J., & Curtis, M. S. (2009). Prevalence of malingering in patients with chronic pain referred for psychologic evaluation in a medico-legal context. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 90, 1117–1126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guy, L. S., & Miller, H. A. (2004). Screening for malingered psychopathology in a correctional setting: Utility of the Miller-Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST). Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31, 695–716.Google Scholar
Handel, R. W., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Tellegen, A., & Archer, R. P. (2010). Psychometric functioning of the MMPI-2-RF VRIN-r and TRIN-r scales with varying degrees of randomness, acquiescence, and counter-acquiescence. Psychological Assessment, 22, 87–95.Google Scholar
Hawes, S. W. & Boccaccini, M. T. (2009). Detection of overreporting of psychopathology on the Personality Assessment Inventory: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Assessment, 21, 112–124.Google Scholar
Heilbronner, R. L., Sweet, J. J., Morgan, J. E., Larrabee, G. J., Millis, S. R., & Conference Participants. (2009). American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology Consensus Conference Statement on the neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23(7), 1093–1129.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Himsl, K., Burchett, D., Tarescavage, A., & Glassmire, D. M. (2017). Assessing reading ability for psychological testing in forensic assessments: An investigation with the WRAT-4 and MMPI-2-RF. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 16(3), 239–248.Google Scholar
Hiscock, M., & Hiscock, C. K. (1989). Refining the forced-choice method for the detection of malingering. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 11(6), 967–974.Google Scholar
Hoelzle, J. B., Nelson, N. W., & Arbisi, P. A. (2012). MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-Restructured Form validity scales: Complimentary approaches to evaluate response validity. Psychological Injury and Law, 5, 174–191.Google Scholar
Holden, R. R., Kroner, D. G., Fekken, G. C., & Popham, S. M. (1992). A model of personality test item response dissimulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 272–279.Google Scholar
Holden, R. R., & Lambert, C. E. (2015). Response latencies are alive and well for identifying fakers on a self-report personality inventory: A reconsideration of van Hooft and Born (2012). Behavioral Research, 47, 1436–1442.Google Scholar
Hopwood, C. J., Morey, L. C., Rogers, R., & Sewell, K. (2007). Malingering on the Personality Assessment Inventory: Identification of specific feigned disorders. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88, 43–48.Google Scholar
Hopwood, C. J., Orlando, M., & Clark, T. C. (2010). The detection of malingered pain-related disability with the Personality Assessment Inventory. Rehabilitation Psychology, 55, 307–310.Google Scholar
Hopwood, C. J., Talbert, C. A., Morey, L. C., & Rogers, R. (2008). Testing the incremental utility of the Negative Impression-Positive Impression differential in detecting simulated Personality Assessment Inventory profiles. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 64(3), 338–343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hunt, S., Root, J. C., & Bascetta, B. L. (2013). Effort testing in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: Validity indicator profile and test of memory malingering performance characteristics. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 29, 164–172.Google Scholar
Ingram, P. B., & Ternes, M. S. (2016). The detection of content-based invalid responding: A meta-analysis of the MMPI-2 Restructured Form’s (MMPI-2-RF) over-reporting Validity Scales. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 30(4), 473–496.Google Scholar
Inman, T. H., Vickery, C. D., Berry, D. T., Lamb, D. G., Edwards, C. L., & Smith, G. T. (1998). Development and initial validation of a new procedure for evaluating adequacy of effort given during neuropsychological testing: The letter memory test. Psychological Assessment, 10(2), 128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Iverson, G. L. (1998). 21-Item Test research manual. Vancouver: University of British Columbia.Google Scholar
Jackson, D. N., & Messick, S. (1958). Content and style in personality assessment. Psychological Bulletin, 55(4), 243–252.Google Scholar
Jasinski, L. J., Berry, D. T., Shandera, A. L., & Clark, J. A. (2011). Use of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale Digit Span subtest for malingering detection: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 33(3), 300–314.Google Scholar
Jasinski, L. J., Harp, J. P., Berry, D. T., Shandera-Ochsner, A. L., Mason, L. H., & Ranseen, J. D. (2011). Using symptom validity tests to detect malingered ADHD in college students. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 25(8), 1415–1428.Google Scholar
Johnson, T., Kulesa, P., Cho, Y. I., & Shavitt, S. (2005). The relation between culture and response styles: Evidence from 19 countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 264–277.Google Scholar
Jürges, H. (2007). True health vs response styles: Exploring cross-cultural differences in self-reported health. Health Economics, 16, 163–178.Google Scholar
Keeley, J. W., Webb, C., Peterson, D., Roussin, L., & Flanagan, E. H. (2016). Development of a Response Inconsistency Scale for the Personality Inventory for DSM-5. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98(4), 351–359.Google Scholar
Larrabee, G. J. (2003a). Exaggerated MMPI-2 symptom report in personal injury litigants with malingered neurocognitive deficit. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 18, 673–686.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Larrabee, G. J. (2003b). Detection of malingering using atypical performance patterns on standard neuropsychological tests. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 17, 410–425.Google Scholar
Lees-Haley, P. R., English, L. T., & Glenn, W. J. (1991). A fake bad scale on the MMPI-2 for personal-injury claimants. Psychological Reports, 68, 203–201.Google Scholar
Lewis, C., & Morrissey, C. (2010). The association between self-report and informant reports of emotional problems in a high secure intellectual disability sample. Advances in Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities, 4(2), 44–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, J. L., Simcox, A. M., & Berry, D. T. R. (2002). Screening for feigned psychiatric symptoms in a forensic sample by using the MMPI-2 and the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology. Psychological Assessment, 14, 170–176.Google Scholar
Lezak, M. (1983). Neuropsychological Assessment (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lezak, M., Howieson, D.B., & Loring, D.W. (2004). Neuropsychological Assessment (4th ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Liu, C., Liu, Z., Chiu, H. F. K., Carl, T. W., Zhang, H., Wang, P., et al. (2013). Detection of malingering: Psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the structured interview of reported symptoms-2. BMC Psychiatry, 13, https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-13-254Google Scholar
Main, C.J. (1983). The Modified Somatic Perception Questionnaire (MSPQ). Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 27, 503–514.Google Scholar
McBride, W. F., Crighton, A. H., Wygant, D. B., & Granacher, R .P. (2013). It’s not all in your head (or at least your brain): Association of traumatic brain lesion presence and location with performance on measures of response bias and forensic evaluation. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 31, 774–778.Google Scholar
Merckelbach, H., & Smith, G. P. (2003). Diagnostic accuracy of the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS) in detecting instructed malingering. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 18, 145–152.Google Scholar
Miller, H. A. (2001). Miller-Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST): Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Miller, H. A. (2004). Examining the use of the M-FAST with criminal defendants incompetent to stand trial. International Journal of Offender and Comparative Criminology, 48, 268–280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Millis, S. R., & Kler, S. (1995). Limitations of the Rey Fifteen-Item Test in the detection of malingering. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 9(3), 241–244.Google Scholar
Millon, T., Millon, C., & Grossman, S. (2015). Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory – IV manual (4th ed.). Bloomington: NCS Pearson.Google Scholar
Mittenberg, W., Patton, C., Canyock, E. M., & Condit, D. C. (2002). Base rates of malingering and symptom exaggeration. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24, 1094–1102.Google Scholar
Mogge, N. L., Lepage, J. S., Bell, T., & Ragatz, L. (2010). The negative distortion scale: A new PAI validity scale. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology, 21, 77–90.Google Scholar
Montes, O., & Guyton, M. R. (2014). Performance of Hispanic inmates on the Spanish Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST). Law and Human Behavior, 38, 428–438.Google Scholar
Morey, L. C. (1991/2007). Personality Assessment Inventory professional manual (2nd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Musso, M. W., Hill, B. D., Barker, A. A., Pella, R. D., & Gouvier, W. D. (2016). Utility of the Personality Assessment Inventory for detecting malingered ADHD in college students. Journal of Attention Disorders, 20(9), 763–774.Google Scholar
Nadolny, E., & O’Dell, R. T. (2010). Measures of central tendency and intercorrelations within and between the SIMS and the M-FAST among medium security prison inmates. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 28, 51–67.Google Scholar
Neo, B., Sellbom, M., & Wygant, D. B. (in press). Evaluating the Psychometric Effects and Assessment of Inconsistent Responding on the Psychopathic Personality Inventory-Revised in a Correctional Sample. Journal of Personality Disorders.Google Scholar
Pankratz, L. (1979). Symptom validity testing and symptom retraining: Procedures for the assessment and treatment of functional sensory deficits. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 409–410.Google Scholar
Pollard, C. A. (1984). Preliminary validity study of the Pain Disability Index. Perceptual Motor Skills, 59, 974.Google Scholar
Rey, A. (1941). L’examen psychologique dans les cas d’encephalopathie traumatique. Archives de Psychologie, 28, 286–340.Google Scholar
Rey, A. (1964). L’examen clinique en psychologie. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Roberson, C. J., Boone, K. B., Goldberg, H., Miora, D., Cottingham, M., Victor, T. et al. (2013). Cross validation of the b Test in a large known groups sample. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 27, 495–508.Google Scholar
Robles, L., Salazar, L. E., Boone, K. B., & Glaser, D. F. (2015). Specificity data for the b Test, Dot Counting Test, Rey-15 Item Plus Recognition, and Rey Word Recognition Test in monolingual Spanish-speakers. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 37, 614–621.Google Scholar
Rogers, R. (2018a). Detection strategies for malingering and defensiveness. In Rogers, R. & Bender, S. D. (Eds.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (4th ed., pp. 18–41). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Rogers, R. (2018b). Structured interviews and dissimulation. In Rogers, R. & Bender, S.D. (Eds.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (4th ed., pp. 423–448). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Rogers, R., Bagby, R. M., & Dickens, S. E. (1992). Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS) and professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Rogers, R., Ornduff, S. R., & Sewell, K. W. (1993). Feigning specific disorders: A study of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI). Journal of Personality Assessment, 60, 554–560.Google Scholar
Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., & Gillard, N. D. (2010). Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (2nd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., Morey, L. C., & Ustad, K. L. (1996). Detection of feigned mental disorders on the Personality Assessment Inventory: A discriminant analysis. Journal of Personality Assessment, 67, 629–640.Google Scholar
Rubenzer, S. (2010). Review of the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms-2 (SIRS-2). Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology, 2, 273–286.Google Scholar
Sanchez, G., Ampudia, A. Jimenez, F., & Amado, B. G. (2017). Contrasting the efficacy of the MMPI-2-RF overreporting scales in the detection of malingering. The European Journal of Psychology Applied in the Legal Context, 9, 51–56.Google Scholar
Schmidt, M. (1996). Rey auditory verbal learning test: A handbook. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.Google Scholar
Schutte, C., & Axelrod, B. N. (2013). Use of embedded cognitive symptom validity measures in mild traumatic brain injury cases. In Bush, S. S. (Ed.), Mild traumatic brain injury: Symptom validity assessment and malingering (pp. 159–181). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Sellbom, M., & Bagby, R. M. (2008a). Response styles on multiscale inventories. In Rogers, R. (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed., pp. 182–206). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Sellbom, M., & Bagby, R. M. (2008b). Validity of the MMPI-2-RF (Restructured Form) L-r and K-r scales in detecting underreporting in clinical and nonclinical samples. Psychological Assessment, 20, 370–376.Google Scholar
Sellbom, M., Wygant, D. B., & Bagby, R. M. (2012). Utility of the MMPI-2-RF in detecting non-credible somatic complaints. Psychiatry Research, 197, 295–301.Google Scholar
Sharf, A. J., Rogers, R., Williams, M. M., & Henry, S. A. (2017). The effectiveness of the MMPI-2-RF in detecting feigned mental disorders and cognitive deficits: A meta-analysis. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 39, 441–455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-017-9590-1Google Scholar
Slick, D., Hopp, G., Strauss, E., & Thompson, G. (1997). The Victoria Symptom Validity Test. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Slick, D. J., Sherman, E. M., & Iverson, G. L. (1999). Diagnostic criteria for malingered neurocognitive dysfunction: Proposed standards for clinical practice and research. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 13, 545–561.Google Scholar
Smith, G. P. (2008). Brief screening measures for the detection of feigned psychopathology. In Rogers, R. (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed., pp. 323–339). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Smith, G. (2018). Brief measures for the detection of feigning and impression management. In Rogers, R. & Bender, S. D. (Eds.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (4th ed., pp. 449–472). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Sollman, M. J., & Berry, D. T. (2011). Detection of inadequate effort on neuropsychological testing: A meta-analytic update and extension. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 26(8), 774–789.Google Scholar
Spencer, R. J., Axelrod, B. N., Drag, L. L., Waldron-Perrine, B., Pangilinan, P. H., & Bieliauskas, L. A. (2013). WAIS-IV reliable digit span is no more accurate than age corrected scaled score as an indicator of invalid performance in a veteran sample undergoing evaluation for mTBI. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 27(8), 1362–1372.Google Scholar
Stedman, J. M., McGeary, C. A., & Essery, J. (2017). Current patterns of training in personality assessment during internship. Journal of Clinical Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22496Google Scholar
Sullivan, K., & King, J. (2010). Detecting faked psychopathology: A comparison of two tests to detect malingered psychopathology using a simulation design. Psychiatry Research, 176, 75–81.Google Scholar
Sweet, J. J., Condit, D. C., & Nelson, N. W. (2008). Feigned amnesia and memory loss. In Rogers, R. (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed., pp. 218–236). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Tarescavage, A. M., & Glassmire, D. M. (2016). Differences between structured interview of reported symptoms (SIRS) and SIRS-2 sensitivity estimates among forensic inpatients: A criterion groups comparison. Law and Human Behavior, 40, 488–502.Google Scholar
Thompson, G. B. (2003). The Victoria Symptom Validity Test: An enhanced test of symptom validity. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 2, 43–67.Google Scholar
Tombaugh, T. N. (1996). Test of Memory Malingering: TOMM. New York: MHS Assessments.Google Scholar
Tombaugh, T. N. (2002). The Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) in forensic psychology. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 2, 69–96.Google Scholar
Tylicki, J. L. Wygant, D. B., Tarescavage, A. M., Frederick, R. I., Tyner, E. A., Granacher, R. P., & Sellbom, M. (2018). Comparability of Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS) and Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms – 2nd Edition (SIRS-2) classifications with external response bias criteria. Psychological Assessment, 30, 1144–1159.Google Scholar
Van Impelen, A., Merckelbach, H., Jelicic, M., & Merten., T. (2014). The Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS): A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 28, 1336–1365.Google Scholar
Veazey, C. H., Hays, J. R., Wagner, A. L., & Miller, H. A. (2005). Validity of the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test in psychiatric inpatients. Psychological Reports, 96, 771–774.Google Scholar
Vickery, C. D., Berry, D. T., Inman, T. H., Harris, M. J., & Orey, S. A. (2001). Detection of inadequate effort on neuropsychological testing: A meta-analytic review of selected procedures. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 16(1), 45–73.Google Scholar
Vitacco, M. J., Rogers, R., Gabel, J., & Munizza, J. (2007). An evaluation of malingering screens with competency to stand trial patients: a known-groups comparison. Law and Human Behavior, 31, 249–260.Google Scholar
Waddell, G., McCulloch, J.A., Kummel, E., & Venner, R. M. (1980). Nonorganic physical signs in low-back pain. Spine, 5, 117–125.Google Scholar
Weiss, R. A., Rosenfeld, B., & Farkas, M. R. (2011). The utility of the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms in a sample of individuals with intellectual disabilities. Assessment, 18(3), 284–290.Google Scholar
Widows, M., & Smith, G. P. (2005). Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS): Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Wiggins, C. W., Wygant, D. B., Hoelzle, J. B., & Gervais, R. O. (2012). The more you say the less it means: Overreporting and attenuated criterion validity in a forensic disability sample. Psychological Injury and Law, 5, 162–173.Google Scholar
Wygant, D. B., Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M., Rapier, J. L., Allgeier, L. M., & Granacher, R. P. (2011). Association of the MMPI-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) Validity Scales with structured malingering criteria. Psychological Injury and Law, 4, 13–23.Google Scholar
Wygant, D. B., Arbisi, P. A., Bianchini, K. J., & Umlauf, R. L. (2017). Waddell nonorganic signs: New evidence suggests somatic amplification among outpatient chronic pain patients. The Spine Journal, 17, 505–510.Google Scholar
Wygant, D. B., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Arbisi, P. A. (2004). Development and initial validation of a scale to detect infrequent somatic complaints. Poster presented at the 39th Annual Symposium on Recent Developments of the MMPI-2/MMPI-A, Minneapolis, MN, May.Google Scholar
Wygant, D. B., Walls, B. D., Brothers, S. L., & Berry, D. T. R. (2018). Assessment of malingering and defensiveness on the MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-RF. In Rogers, R & Bender, S. D. (Eds.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (4th ed., pp. 267–279). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×