Examining Base Rates of Symptom Endorsement and the Roles of Sex and Depressive Symptoms on the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomology (SIMS) in a Non-clinical Population

Zahid, Aqsa; Dhillon, Sonya; Zakzanis, Konstantine K.

doi:10.1007/s12207-021-09439-5

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As the knowledge base develops, a gradual shift from theoretical to empirically based models may be the natural course of development in clinical science. Wisdom et al, 2010;Zahid et al, 2022).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… c Score would fall below chance if a one‐tailed cutoff was used ( z = −1.65); ATR TSI‐2 , Atypical Response scale of the Trauma Symptom Inventory—2 (raw score; Ales & Erdodi, 2022); FDS, False Disorder Probability Score (Viglione & Giromini, 2020); GEC BRIEF , General Executive Composite of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function ( T ‐score; Abeare, Romero, et al., 2021); NIM PAI , Negative Impression Management scale of the Personality Assessment Inventory ( T ‐score; Hawes & Boccaccini, 2009; Kurtz & McCredie, 2022); SIMS, Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (raw score; Wisdom et al., 2010; Zahid et al., 2022). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

From “below chance” to “a single error is one too many”: Evaluating various thresholds for invalid performance on two forced choice recognition tests

Erdődi

2023

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was designed to empirically evaluate the classification accuracy of various definitions of invalid performance in two forced-choice recognition performance validity tests (PVTs; FCR CVLT-II and Test of Memory Malingering [TOMM-2]). The proportion of at and below chance level responding defined by the binomial theory and making any errors was computed across two mixed clinical samples from the United States and Canada (N = 470) and two sets of criterion PVTs. There was virtually no overlap between the binomial and empirical distributions. Over 95% of patients who passed all PVTs obtained a perfect score. At chance level responding was limited to patients who failed ≥2 PVTs (91% of them failed 3 PVTs). No one scored below chance level on FCR CVLT-II or TOMM-2. All 40 patients with dementia scored above chance. Although at or below chance level performance provides very strong evidence of non-credible responding, scores above chance level have no negative predictive value. Even at chance level scores on PVTs provide compelling evidence for non-credible presentation.A single error on the FCR CVLT-II or TOMM-2 is highly specific (0.95) to psychometrically defined invalid performance.Defining non-credible responding as below chance level

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From “below chance” to “a single error is one too many”: Evaluating various thresholds for invalid performance on two forced choice recognition tests

Erdődi

2023

Behavioral Sci & The Law

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, in one of the studies included in this special issue, the percentage of SVT failure was as high as 18.1% in a group of individuals assessed prior to psychotherapeutic treatment (Dandachi-FitzGerald et al, 2023), and previous studies have observed similar failure rates in other clinical samples with different SVTs (Bodenburg et al, 2022; Dandachi-FitzGerald et al, 2016; Schroeder & Martin, 2022). Of note, certain SVTs sometimes seem to yield a relatively high number of positive results even in nonclinical contexts (Boskovic et al, 2022; Zahid et al, 2023).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the credibility of clinical presentations using performance and symptom validity tests: Current trends and future directions—Part II.

Giromini,

Erdodi

2023

Psychology & Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This editorial article introduces the second special issue of Psychology & Neuroscience devoted to performance and symptom validity testing. The reason for including the second special issue is that we received an unusually large number of high-quality submissions that could not fit into a single volume. The articles included in this second part offer practical, immediately actionable knowledge to assessors while simultaneously advancing the methodology for calibrating instruments designed to evaluate the credibility of a given clinical presentation. In this introduction, we briefly summarize each article and reflect on an emerging epistemological question about the interpretation of noncredible results in the context of a clinical research study: If a relatively large proportion of clinical patients fail a validity test without any apparent external incentives to appear impaired, should this be interpreted as a possible vulnerability of that validity test to false-positive classifications or as evidence that noncredible responding is relatively common outside of medicolegal/forensic assessments? The methodological implications of symptom and performance validity research are discussed.

show abstract

Symptom coaching and symptom validity tests: An analog study using the structured inventory of malingered symptomatology, Self-Report Symptom Inventory, and Inventory of Problems-29

Bošković

Akca

Giromini

2022

Applied Neuropsychology: Adult

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Examining Base Rates of Symptom Endorsement and the Roles of Sex and Depressive Symptoms on the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomology (SIMS) in a Non-clinical Population

Cited by 3 publications

References 25 publications

From “below chance” to “a single error is one too many”: Evaluating various thresholds for invalid performance on two forced choice recognition tests

From “below chance” to “a single error is one too many”: Evaluating various thresholds for invalid performance on two forced choice recognition tests

Assessing the credibility of clinical presentations using performance and symptom validity tests: Current trends and future directions—Part II.

Symptom coaching and symptom validity tests: An analog study using the structured inventory of malingered symptomatology, Self-Report Symptom Inventory, and Inventory of Problems-29

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About