Scholarlink

<p>The estimated base rate or prevalence of malingering and related attributions, for example, invalid response set, is a critical issue in forensic disability and related assessment (FDRA). There are two major estimates in the field on the question: 40 ± 10% and 15 ± 15%. We analyzed the existing literature on studies that addressed the question in forensically relevant samples, especially 70 studies&#xa0;involving performance validity tests (PVTs) and seven studies involving symptom validity tests (SVTs). There are more conservative and more liberal criteria that could be used to determine the base rate at issue in each study examined and, consequently, we used all of them. These criteria for the possible base rate of invalid response set, malingering, and related attributions include failing criteria considered more conservative or stringent ones,&#xa0;such as (a) failing at a significantly below chance level&#xa0;on a multiple-option forced-choice PVT, or (b)&#xa0;being attributed definite malingering according to the Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction (MND)&#xa0;system. More liberal or less stringent criteria for the question include (a) failing at two or (b)&#xa0;two or more PVTs in an administered PVT battery without taking into consideration the number of PVTs in the battery. The present article introduces the extensive literature review undertaken. The second article in the two-article series examines the data from the 70 PVT studies in multiple new ways, and the results are outlined here in two tables. Irrespective of the criteria used, the obtained rates over the 70 PVT and seven SVT&#xa0;studies examined support the lower estimate of 15 ± 15%, with minor variations.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Invalid Response Set, Malingering, and Related Base Rate in Psychological Injury I: Performance Validity Tests

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月28日

查看全文
  • Gerald Young,
  • Laszlo Erdodi,
  • Luciano Giromini,
  • Thomas Merten,
  • Richard Rogers

摘要

The estimated base rate or prevalence of malingering and related attributions, for example, invalid response set, is a critical issue in forensic disability and related assessment (FDRA). There are two major estimates in the field on the question: 40 ± 10% and 15 ± 15%. We analyzed the existing literature on studies that addressed the question in forensically relevant samples, especially 70 studies involving performance validity tests (PVTs) and seven studies involving symptom validity tests (SVTs). There are more conservative and more liberal criteria that could be used to determine the base rate at issue in each study examined and, consequently, we used all of them. These criteria for the possible base rate of invalid response set, malingering, and related attributions include failing criteria considered more conservative or stringent ones, such as (a) failing at a significantly below chance level on a multiple-option forced-choice PVT, or (b) being attributed definite malingering according to the Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction (MND) system. More liberal or less stringent criteria for the question include (a) failing at two or (b) two or more PVTs in an administered PVT battery without taking into consideration the number of PVTs in the battery. The present article introduces the extensive literature review undertaken. The second article in the two-article series examines the data from the 70 PVT studies in multiple new ways, and the results are outlined here in two tables. Irrespective of the criteria used, the obtained rates over the 70 PVT and seven SVT studies examined support the lower estimate of 15 ± 15%, with minor variations.