Feigned neurocognitive deficit: Taxon or dimension?

Walters, Glenn D.; Berry, David T. R.; Rogers, Richard; Payne, Joshua W.; Granacher, Robert P.

doi:10.1080/13803390802363728

Cited by 32 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Their findings strongly supported a dimensional approach to the feigning of mental disorders. A similar taxometric analysis was conducted on the domain of feigned cognitive deficits, again with strong support for the dimensional model (Walters et al, ). In applying a sophisticated analysis, feigning clearly appears to be dimensional in nature.…”

Section: Practice Issuesmentioning

confidence: 87%

An International Perspective on Feigned Mental Disabilities: Conceptual Issues and Continuing Controversies

Merten¹,

Rogers

2017

Behavioral Sci & The Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In forensic contexts, an increased prevalence of feigned symptom presentations should be expected, although it will probably vary by the context and specific forensic issue. Forensic experts should examine this possibility proactively while maintaining a balanced perspective that actively considers clinical data for both feigning and genuine responding. Psychological measures and standardized methods developed for feigning and other response styles can facilitate these often complex determinations. The current article provides an international perspective on the issue of feigned mental disabilities. In particular, important conceptual issues are discussed, such as the categorical versus dimensional approaches to feigning, and the advisability of well-defined rather than single-point cut scores for accuracy in clinical decision-making. Salient problems of differential diagnosis include a spectrum from malingering and factitious disorders to somatoform and conversion disorders. In rendering these important diagnostic distinctions, the questions of motivations and intentions remain key. However, the establishment of motivation cannot be facilely assumed from the context. Instead, forensic psychologists and psychiatrists bear the professional burden of carefully evaluating motivation and recognizing the clinical reality that sometimes the motivation in especially challenging cases may not be fully determined. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Practice Issuesmentioning

confidence: 87%

An International Perspective on Feigned Mental Disabilities: Conceptual Issues and Continuing Controversies

Merten¹,

Rogers

2017

Behavioral Sci & The Law

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Published studies addressing Q1 or Q2, as they bear on psychopathy, include, for example: Edens, Marcus, Lilienfeld, and Poythress (2006); Guay and Knight (2003); Guay, Ruscio, Knight, and Hare (2007); Harris, Rice, and Quinsey (1994); Skilling, Harris, Rice, and Quinsey (2002); Vasey, Kotov, Frick, and Loney (2005); and Walters, Duncan, and Mitchell-Perez (2007). Studies addressing these questions within the context of malingering, include : Frazier, Youngstrom, Naugle, Haggerty, and Busch (2007); Strong, Greene, and Schinka (2000); Walters et al (2008); and Walters, Berry, Rogers, Payne, and Granacher (2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Taxonic Latent Structure and Taxometrics in Forensic Mental Health

Maraun

Hart

2016

Psychol Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, researchers in the field of forensic mental health have attempted to address the technical, empirical question of whether important clinical problems, such as psychopathy or malingering, constitute taxa (i.e., discrete conditions). In this paper, we provide a detailed elucidation of the foundational logic of the quantitative methods employed to answer this question, focusing on the taxometric procedures developed by Paul Meehl and colleagues. We attempt to demonstrate that research on taxonicity is hampered by (a) researchers' unfamiliarity with or misunderstanding of the logic underlying latent variable technologies and (b) the fundamental incapacity of Meehlian procedures to provide a test of taxonicity. We conclude by discussing the utility of taxometric procedures to research in forensic mental health and, more broadly, in the field of applied psychological measurement.

show abstract

“…Despite the propensity for neuropsychologists to use pass/fail cutoffs to determine whether a patient was putting forth adequate effort during an evaluation, a large amount of literature indicates that effort lies on a continuum (Rogers, 2008; Walters, Berry, Rogers, Payne, & Granacher, 2009; Walters et al, 2008), and the tendency to dichotomize this construct presents a number of limitations. For example, there is a long history of criticizing the dichotomization of any continuous variable, as it results in a loss of information (Cohen, 1983; MacCallum, Zhang, Preacher, & Rucker, 2002; Maxwell & Delaney, 1993; Zhao & Kolonel, 1992).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effort in acute traumatic brain injury: Considering more than pass/fail.

Agbayani

Hawes

Jokic

et al. 2014

Rehabilitation Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose/Objective Performance validity is often conceptualized as a dichotomous process. Effort likely lies on a continuum, however, and psychologists’ tendency to rely on pass/fail descriptors of one's effort may not be the only approach. The current study aims to show that when performance validity is considered on a continuum, it may provide clinical information related to cognitive functioning. Research Method/Design Forty-four patients with moderate or severe traumatic brain injury were evaluated with the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status upon their emergence from posttraumatic amnesia. From this data, previously developed effort index scores and “other cognitive functions” index scores were calculated. Results Performance on the effort index significantly accounted for the patients’ performance on a cognitive composite score after considering education and severity of injury. Conclusions/Implications Findings suggest that more in-depth analysis of validity test performance is beneficial to gauge a patient's level of effort and is important to consider when interpreting results and in treatment planning.

show abstract

Feigned neurocognitive deficit: Taxon or dimension?

Cited by 32 publications

References 34 publications

An International Perspective on Feigned Mental Disabilities: Conceptual Issues and Continuing Controversies

An International Perspective on Feigned Mental Disabilities: Conceptual Issues and Continuing Controversies

The Taxonic Latent Structure and Taxometrics in Forensic Mental Health

Effort in acute traumatic brain injury: Considering more than pass/fail.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About