Detection of malingering on the MMPI: A meta-analysis

Berry, David T. R.; Baer, Ruth A.; Harris, Monica J.

doi:10.1016/0272-7358(91)90005-f

Cited by 177 publications

(125 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

114

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…those based on cutoff scores) with ''actual'' classifications based on results from the MMPI-2 F scale and the TOMM. The F scale has repeatedly been cited as one of the best available discriminators of honest versus malingered symptom profiles (see, e.g., Bagby, Rogers, & Buis, 1994;Berry, Baer, & Harris, 1991;Rogers, Sewell, & Ustad, 1995), and published data regarding the TOMM suggest a high rate of classification accuracy (Rees et al, 1998). Because many clinicians who administer multiple tests of malingering may encounter discrepant findings, analyses comparing two of the most well validated malingering classifications against other, less widely studied measures provides important data regarding test overlap.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Do tests of malingering concur? Concordance among malingering measures

Farkas

Rosenfeld

Robbins

et al. 2006

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Malingering test accuracy is increasingly a major issue in psychology and law. Integrating results across measures might offset limitations of a single test, but the practical benefits of using several tests depend on the extent to which they misclassify the same individuals. Data from 66 evaluatees were used to assess the degree of overlap and consistency of classification among several commonly used malingering instruments. Although correlative data indicated that measures were highly redundant even across symptom domains, classification accuracy analyses revealed that findings based on conjunctions of these scales may not overlap to the degree that the correlations might suggest.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Do tests of malingering concur? Concordance among malingering measures

Farkas

Rosenfeld

Robbins

et al. 2006

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In two large meta-analytic studies of the MMPI (Berry, Baer, & Harris, 1991) and the MMPI-2 (Rogers, Sewell, & Salekin, 1994), the Infrequency (F) scale and the F minus K index have been shown to be the best validity indices for detecting exaggerated response biases. Because the F and FÀK indices are often elevated in profiles of those with serious psychopathology, discriminating between those who are malingering and those with a bona fide psychiatric disorder is sometimes difficult.…”

Section: Validated Measures Of Malingeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Psychopathy and malingering of psychiatric disorder in criminal defendants

Kucharski

Duncan²,

Egan

et al. 2006

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because the use of deception is an important clinical characteristic of psychopathy, there is intuitive appeal to the idea that psychopathy and malingering are associated. There is, however, very little research showing that psychopaths are more likely to malinger. We classified a sample of criminal defendants as high, moderate, or low in psychopathy, based on PCL-R scores, and compared their scores on indices typically used to detect malingering on the MMPI-2, the PAI and the SIRS. The high psychopathy group scored significantly higher on the MMPI-2 F and F-K; the PAI NIM, and the SIRS, but not the MMPI-2 Fb, F(p), or the PAI RDF or Mal, lending some support for the DSM-IV recommendation that malingering should be considered whenever there is a diagnosis of antisocial personality disorder. Logistic regression analysis (LGA) revealed that Factor I but not Factor II of the PCL-R significantly discriminated malingerers from nonmalingerers with 75% correct classification. However, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis revealed that psychopathy ratings had poor sensitivity and specificity in the detection of malingering. Calculation of the percentages of those exceeding accepted cut-offs on each of the malingering measures revealed that a high percentage of severe psychopaths did not attempt to feign psychiatric disorder. The results suggest that psychopathy is not a clinically useful indictor of malingering. The results are discussed in terms of confirmatory bias and the impact such a bias could have on the evaluation of criminal defendants.

show abstract

“…For example, one of the distinct advantages of using the MMPI-2 in personality assessment is that there are nearly a dozen widely employed ways of assessing protocol validity (for example, Arbisi & BenPorath, 1995;Bagby, Nicholson, Rogers, Buis, Seeman, & Rector, 1997;Berry, Baer, & Harris, 1991;Berry, Adams, Smith, Greene, Sekirnjak, Wieland, & Tharpe, 1997;Tellegen, 1988;Wetter, Baer, Berry, Smith, & Larsen, 1992). Measures to assess uncooperative responding (all true or all false response sets), incomplete responding (Cannot Say), inconsistent responding (VRIN and TRIN), and the presentation of oneself in a superlative manner (Scale S) have been explored widely.…”

Section: The Assessment Of Invalid Response Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamics of personality test responses: The empiricist's manifesto revisited

Butcher

2000

J. Clin. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Detection of malingering on the MMPI: A meta-analysis

Cited by 177 publications

References 35 publications

Do tests of malingering concur? Concordance among malingering measures

Do tests of malingering concur? Concordance among malingering measures

Psychopathy and malingering of psychiatric disorder in criminal defendants

Dynamics of personality test responses: The empiricist's manifesto revisited

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About