Scholarlink

<p>Psychological injuries refer to diagnoses and conditions that are contentious in court and related venues, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), chronic pain, and mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI). Forensic disability and related assessments (FDRA) must determine whether an examinee has engaged in malingering or related attributions, including feigning, or has demonstrated significant failures on validity testing. The assessor employs a comprehensive assessment approach, including the use of performance validity tests (PVTs) and symptom validity tests (SVTs) to determine the credibility or&#xa0;validity of the examinee’s presentation as part of the assessment undertaken. There are several issues concerning the definition of malingering in the context of psychological injury. The article reviews existing approaches to malingering and related definitions, highlighting their inconsistencies and proposing improvements. It also introduces a well-defined hierarchy of terms related to malingering, feigning, invalid response set, and minor symptom exaggeration, while indicating terms that should no longer be used. The article aims to assist forensic assessors in clarifying their understanding of malingering and related concepts, by&#xa0;offering a coherent framework for report&#xa0;writing and testimony. The limitations in the current terminology indicate a need for practice guidelines that include multiple examples.</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 and Malingering-Related Assessments in Psychological Injury: Definitions and a Hierarchy of Terms

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年1月28日

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

摘要

Psychological injuries refer to diagnoses and conditions that are contentious in court and related venues, such as posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), chronic pain, and mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI). Forensic disability and related assessments (FDRA) must determine whether an examinee has engaged in malingering or related attributions, including feigning, or has demonstrated significant failures on validity testing. The assessor employs a comprehensive assessment approach, including the use of performance validity tests (PVTs) and symptom validity tests (SVTs) to determine the credibility or validity of the examinee’s presentation as part of the assessment undertaken. There are several issues concerning the definition of malingering in the context of psychological injury. The article reviews existing approaches to malingering and related definitions, highlighting their inconsistencies and proposing improvements. It also introduces a well-defined hierarchy of terms related to malingering, feigning, invalid response set, and minor symptom exaggeration, while indicating terms that should no longer be used. The article aims to assist forensic assessors in clarifying their understanding of malingering and related concepts, by offering a coherent framework for report writing and testimony. The limitations in the current terminology indicate a need for practice guidelines that include multiple examples.