2016
DOI: 10.1007/s12207-016-9257-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI): a New Instrument for the Assessment of Distorted Symptom Endorsement

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

8
100
3
1

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(112 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
8
100
3
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Fourth, we did not apply the full version of the SRSI, as recommended by Merten et al . (); thus, a closer examination of detection accuracy was limited. Therefore, the findings concerning the SRSI subscales should be taken with caution and further tested using the whole SRSI.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 3 more Smart Citations
“…Fourth, we did not apply the full version of the SRSI, as recommended by Merten et al . (); thus, a closer examination of detection accuracy was limited. Therefore, the findings concerning the SRSI subscales should be taken with caution and further tested using the whole SRSI.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…However, these atypical items are often obvious to the examinees, a shortcoming that diminishes the reliability of SIMS. Additionally, the SIMS includes items pertaining to complaints such as amnesia, psychosis, and low intelligence, which are frequent within the criminal context, but not in civil medico-legal setting (Merten, Merckelbach, Giger, & Stevens, 2016).…”
Section: Symptom Endorsement In Feigned Ptsdmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Iverson & Binder, 2000) or examining over-endorsement of physical or psychological symptoms on self-report tests (Merten, Merckelbach, Giger, & Stevens, 2016). Such tests are called Symptom Validity Tests and have shown to be useful in forensic settings (see Bianchini, Mathias, & Greve, 2001;Sleep, Petty, & Wygant, 2015), but less so in medical settings (Rogers, Sewell, & Salekin, 1994;Schoenberg, Dorr, & Morgan, 2003).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%