The SIMS Screen for Feigned Mental Disorders: the Development of Detection‐based Scales

Abstract

Time-efficient screens for feigned mental disorders (FMDs) constitute important tools in forensic assessments. The Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS) is a 75-item true-false questionnaire that has been extensively studied as an FMD screen. However, the SIMS scales are not based on established detection strategies, and only its total score is utilized as a feigning screen. This investigation develops two new feigning scales based on well-established detection-strategies: rare symptoms (RS) and symptom combinations (SC). They are studied in a between-subjects simulation design using inpatients with partial-malingering (i.e., patients with genuine disorders asked to feign greater disabilities) conditions. Subject to future cross-validation, the SC scale evidenced the highest effect size (d=2.01) and appeared the most effective at ruling out examinees, who have a high likelihood of genuine responding.

The Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…Smith and Burger (1997) obtained alpha coefficients ranging from .80 to .86 in a sample in which the majority (87%) was instructed to feign symptoms (N = 476 undergraduates), whereas Merckelbach and Smith (2003) found coefficients that varied between .24 (Low Intelligence) and .59 (Affective Disorders) in a sample where the majority (81%) was asked to respond honestly (N = 298 undergraduates). Alpha values are higher in feigning than in honest conditions; a pattern that is also evident in the data reported by Rogers, Robinson, and Gillard (2014). The influence of sample characteristics is further illustrated by the discrepancies between the results of Merckelbach and Smith (2003) and Vitacco et al (2007; N = 100 competency to stand trial patients, 21% malingering).…”

“…Yet in the former study it was the highest coefficient for subscales, while in the latter it was the lowest. Poor alphas for the Affective Disorders subscale (.31-.37) were also found by Rogers et al (2014) in their clinical samples. Studies uniformly find that the alpha coefficients of the subscales are lower than that of the total scale, which is to be expected given that internal reliability is a function of item number.…”

“…Studies uniformly find that the alpha coefficients of the subscales are lower than that of the total scale, which is to be expected given that internal reliability is a function of item number. The internal consistency of the SIMS total scale is generally satisfactory (e.g., α = .80 in Cima et al, 2003; .72 in Merckelbach & Smith, 2003; .92-.94 in Rogers et al, 2014;and .96 in Vitacco et al, 2007).…”

“…The SIMS has poor specificity when cut scores of > 14 and > 16 are employed (see also Rogers et al, 2014). How problematic this is depends on the purpose for which the SIMS is utilized.…”

Towards Balanced VA and SSA Policies in Psychological Injury Disability Assessment

“…For work on the SIMS questionnaire, seeRogers, Robinson and Gillard (2014) and van Impelen, Merckelbach,Jelicic and Merten (2014) Henry, Heilbronner, Mittenberg, Hellemann and Myers (2014). developed a cognitive complaints scale for the MMPI-2, and Nguyen,Green and Barr (2015) showed the efficacy of the F family and related scales on negative response bias in the MMPI-2-RF for differentiating feigning in neurological, psychiatric, and medical complaints examinees.Marx, Wolf, Cornette, Rosen, Schnurr, Friedman, Keane, and Speroff (2015b, in press) studied the value of the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule-2.0 (WHODAS 2.0; World Health Organization, Üstün, Chatterji, Konstanjsek, Rehm, Kennedy, Epping-Jordan, Saxena, von Korff, Pull, and WHO/NIH Joint Project, 2010) in evaluating functionality (disability) in US military veterans seeking compensation for PTSD.…”