Intraindividual variability as an indicator of malingering in head injury

The utility of various measures of malingering was evaluated using an analog design in which half the participants (composed of three groups: naive healthy people, professionals working with head-injured people, individuals who suffered a head injury but not currently in litigation) were asked to tr...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Archives of clinical neuropsychology 2002-07, Vol.17 (5), p.423-444
Main Authors: Strauss, Esther, Slick, Daniel J, Levy-Bencheton, Judi, Hunter, Michael, MacDonald, Stuart W.S, Hultsch, David F
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult and adolescent clinical studies
Biological and medical sciences
Head injury
Inconsistency
Malingering
Medical sciences
Organic mental disorders. Neuropsychology
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychopathology. Psychiatry
Variability
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The utility of various measures of malingering was evaluated using an analog design in which half the participants (composed of three groups: naive healthy people, professionals working with head-injured people, individuals who suffered a head injury but not currently in litigation) were asked to try their best and the remainder was asked to feign believable injury. Participants were assessed with the Reliable Digit Span (RDS) task, the Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT), and the Computerized Dot Counting Test (CDCT) on three separate occasions in order to determine whether repeat administration of tests improves prediction. The results indicated that regardless of an individual's experience, consideration of both level of performance (particularly on forced-choice symptom validity tasks) and intraindividual variability holds considerable promise for the detection of malingering.
ISSN:0887-6177
1873-5843
DOI:10.1016/S0887-6177(01)00126-3