The detection of malingering in neuropsychological assessment

Franzen, Michael D.; Iverson, Grant L.; McCracken, Lance M.

doi:10.1007/bf01112573

Cited by 101 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 66 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Franzen et al [1990] regard amnesia malingering as an attractive option because of the high probability of prior familiarity with genuine amnestics and the extensive media coverage of memory deficits after head injury or psychological trauma. It is also more difficult to evaluate the validity of a memory deficit than a somatic complaint, as it is assessed indirectly by behavioral assessment.…”

Section: Malingered Conditions In Behavioral Toxicologymentioning

confidence: 98%

“…2. Establishing the credibility and validity of psychological diagnosis of neurotoxic effects in the clinical setting and in behavioral toxicology research-Doubts about the clinician's capacity to detect malingering accurately is, unfortunately, founded in empirical data [Faust et al, 1988;Franzen et al, 1990]. Statistical research algorithms have shown high accuracy in distinguishing impaired from malingering subjects, but clinicians' attempts have been less successful [Franzen et al, 1990].…”

Section: The Importance Of Malingering Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When diagnosing malingering, several differential diagnosis questions need to be addressed. Malingering is distinct from factitious disorder [Overholser, 1990] and conversion/somatoform disorders mainly in the motivation and intention for symptom production [Drob and Berger, 1987;DSM-IV, 1994;Mark et al, 1987;Franzen et al, 1990].…”

Section: What Is Malingering?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Detecting potential false-negatives (malingerers classified as mentally ill or neurologically damaged) and to distinguish them from false-positives (mentally ill or neurologically damaged patients are classified as malingerers)-Reduction of these errors may enable genuine patients to be treated and may prevent their stigmatization as malingerers and the development of antagonism toward the health care system [Franzen, 1990]. 2.…”

Section: The Importance Of Malingering Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Malingering assessment in behavioral toxicology: What, why, and how

Ben-Avi¹,

Rabin

Melamed³

et al. 1998

Am. J. Ind. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Neurobehavioral assessment is frequently made in a forensic context. The cognitive assessment may be biased due to an intentional manipulation of data by the patient motivated by attainment of compensation, that is, malingering. Although malingering is highly relevant in behavioral toxicology, the issue and its assessment are underrepresented in the literature. A routine assessment of malingering is important to reduce false‐positive and false‐negative errors in assessment, thereby establishing the credibility and validity of behavioral assessment. In the long run, the routine inclusion of malingering measurements might reduce claims and encourage employers to be more cooperative in behavioral toxicology studies. Guidelines for malingering assessment and research, inferred from the clinical and research literature, are discussed. Sensitivity to the problematic issues involved in assessing malingering behavior is an important step toward malingering detection in the clinical setting and to the establishment of assessment methods that are less confounded by these issues. Am. J. Ind. Med. 34:325–330, 1998. © 1998 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

show abstract

Section: Malingered Conditions In Behavioral Toxicologymentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: The Importance Of Malingering Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: What Is Malingering?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Importance Of Malingering Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Malingering assessment in behavioral toxicology: What, why, and how

Ben-Avi¹,

Rabin

Melamed³

et al. 1998

Am. J. Ind. Med.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…5 Indeed, experts 6 have pointed out that the most prominent Ganser symptom -that is, approximate answering -is also a typical 'fake bad response style', but that in itself does not imply that Ganser syndrome is a manifestation of malingering. 7 Meanwhile, with only one exception, 4 studies have failed to look at the performance of patients with Ganser-like symptoms on well-established malinger tests. The case example that follows exemplifies that by using specialized malinger tools, clinicians can evaluate more thoroughly the probability of Ganser syndrome and its differential diagnostic alternatives, notably malingering.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Detecting malingering of Ganser‐like symptoms with tests: A case study

Merckelbach

Peters

Jelícic

et al. 2006

Psychiatry Clin Neurosci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A middle-aged man presented with Ganser symptoms. He had been involved in a car crash and was seeking disability insurance benefits. Extensive testing with malinger instruments revealed that he performed below chance on simple memory tests and endorsed a variety of nonexistent symptoms. With this in mind, the authors collected collateral information which showed that the patient was involved in high level sports activities that were difficult to reconcile with the severe cognitive dysfunctions that he claimed to suffer from. The case demonstrates that Ganser-like symptoms deserve close scrutiny, preferably with malinger tests.

show abstract

Rey II: Redesigning the Rey screening test of malingering

et al. 1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study has redesigned the Rey 15-item Visual Memory Test (1964) by introducing more complex figures and by increasing internal logic and pattern redundancy. Standardized administrative procedures and rules for a simple qualitative scoring system were established. Performance on the original Rey continued to be significantly contaminated by ability components and illness while performance on the Rey II qualitative scoring system was not significantly related to intelligence, age, mental status or memory. The Rey II demonstrated improved face validity. Linear Discriminant Function Analysis indicated that the qualitative scoring system had a higher classification accuracy than the quantitative system on both instruments; the Rey II qualitative scoring system accurately detected 31% more college malingerers than the Rey quantitative and 21% more clinical malingerers than the Rey II quantitative. A malingering cut-off of two qualitative errors gave the Rey II a 79% higher sensitivity in the college malingerers and 29% higher specificity in the clinical population than the standard quantitative Rey cut-off of nine items.

show abstract

The detection of malingering in neuropsychological assessment

Cited by 101 publications

References 66 publications

Malingering assessment in behavioral toxicology: What, why, and how

Malingering assessment in behavioral toxicology: What, why, and how

Detecting malingering of Ganser‐like symptoms with tests: A case study

Rey II: Redesigning the Rey screening test of malingering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About