Neurotoxicity is a term used to describe neurophysiological changes caused by exposure to toxic agents. Such exposure can result in neurocognitive symptoms and/or psychiatric disturbances. Common toxic agents include heavy metals, drugs, organophosphates, bacterial, and animal neurotoxins. Among heavy metal exposures, lead exposure is one of the most common exposures that can lead to significant neuropsychological and functional decline in humans. In this review, neurotoxic lead exposure's pathophysiology, etiology, and epidemiology are explored. In addition, commonly associated neuropsychological difficulties in intelligence, memory, executive functioning, attention, processing speed, language, visuospatial skills, motor skills, and affect/mood are explored.

This study examined the utility of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) validity scales for detecting feigning and exaggeration of attention-deficit/hyperactive disorder (ADHD) among college students. Under a simulation study design, participants with and without ADHD were assigned to perform honestly or to feign or exaggerate deficits related to ADHD while completing self-report symptom inventories. Participants instructed to feign produced symptom profiles similar to honest clinical profiles and more severe than honest nonclinical profiles. Participants with ADHD instructed to exaggerate produced less severe profiles than those instructed to feign and more severe profiles than clinical controls. MMPI-2-RF scale Fp-r showed potential for use in malingered ADHD detection at a revised cut score, which was significantly lower than the cut score suggested in the test manual; use of the revised cut score will require further validation. Scales F-r, Fs, and FBS-r did not classify well, but should be assessed in future studies of malingered ADHD. Detection of exaggeration was consistently poorer than detection of feigning.

No abstract

Since the early 2000s concern has increased that college students might feign ADHD in pursuit of academic accommodations and stimulant medication. In response, several studies have validated tests for use in differentiating feigned from genuine ADHD. Although results have generally been positive, relatively few publications have addressed the possible impact of the presence of psychological disorders comorbid with ADHD. Because ADHD is thought to have accompanying conditions at rates of 50% and higher, it is important to determine if the additional psychological disorders might compromise the accuracy of feigning detection measures. The present study extended the findings of Jasinski et al. (2011) to examine the efficacy of various measures in the context of feigned versus genuine ADHD with comorbid psychological disorders in undergraduate students. Two clinical groups (ADHD only and ADHD + comorbid psychological disorder) were contrasted with two non-clinical groups (normal controls answering honestly and normal participants feigning ADHD). Extending previous research to individuals with ADHD and either an anxiety or learning disorder, performance validity tests such as the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM), the Letter Memory Test (LMT), and the Nonverbal Medical Symptom Validity Test (NV-MSVT) were effective in differentiating both ADHD groups from normal participants feigning ADHD. However, the Digit Memory Test (DMT) underperformed in this study, as did embedded validity indices from the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-IV (WAIS-IV) and Woodcock Johnson Tests of Achievement-III (WJ-III).

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-RF (MMPI-2-RF) validity scales were evaluated to determine accuracy when differentiating honest responding, random responding, genuine posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and feigned PTSD. Undergraduate students (n = 109), screened for PTSD, were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 instructional groups: honest, feign PTSD, half random, and full random. Archival data provided clinical MMPI-2-RF profiles consisting of 31 veterans diagnosed with PTSD. Veterans were diagnosed with PTSD using a structured interview and had passed a structured interview for malingering. Validity scales working as a group had correct classification rates of honest (96.6%), full random (88.9%), genuine PTSD (80.7%), fake PTSD (73.1%), and half random (44.4%). Results were fairly supportive of the scales' ability to discriminate feigning and full random responding from honest responding of normal students as well as veterans with PTSD. However, the RF validity scales do not appear to be as effective in detecting partially random responding.