Evaluation of embedded malingering indices in a non-litigating clinical sample using control, clinical, and derived groups

Russell D. Pella, Benjamin D. Hill, Jill Talley Shelton, Emily Elliot, Wm Drew Gouvier

Resultado de la investigación: Articlerevisión exhaustiva

27 Citas (Scopus)

Resumen

Although recent findings have indicated that a portion of college students presenting for psychoeducational evaluations fail validity measures, methods for determining the validity of cognitive test results in psychoeducational evaluations remain under-studied. In light of this, data are needed to evaluate utility of validity indices in this population and to provide base rates for students meeting research criteria for malingering and to report the relationship between testing performance and the level of external incentive. The authors utilized archival data from: (i) a university psychological clinic (n = 986) and (ii) a university control sample (n = 182). Empirically supported embedded validity indices were utilized to identify retrospectively suspected malingering patients. Group performance, according to invalidity and the level of incentive seeking, was evaluated through a series of multivariate mean comparisons. The current study supports classifying patients according to the level of incentive seeking when evaluating neurocognitive performance and feigned/exaggerated deficits.

Idioma originalEnglish (US)
Páginas (desde-hasta)45-57
Número de páginas13
PublicaciónArchives of Clinical Neuropsychology
Volumen27
N.º1
DOI
EstadoPublished - ene 2012

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Huella

Profundice en los temas de investigación de 'Evaluation of embedded malingering indices in a non-litigating clinical sample using control, clinical, and derived groups'. En conjunto forman una huella única.

Citar esto