On the diagnosis of malingered pain-related disability: Lessons from cognitive malingering research. Classification accuracy of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2)-Restructured form validity scales in detecting malingered pain-related disability. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press (Original manual published in 2008).īianchini, K. MMPI-2-RF (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form): Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation (rev. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87(1), 84–94.īen-Porath, Y. A survey of psychological test use patterns among forensic psychologists. The Fake Bad Scale (FBS): Malingering or ligation response syndrome-which is it? The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 31(8), 1406–1411.Īrcher, R.
Form vs function, fighting the last war: a reflection on the exchange between Larrabee, Bianchini, Boone, and Rohling (2017) and Nichols (2017) over Nichols and Gass (2015). Clusters of financially incentivized chronic pain patients using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF). Recommendations for forensic evaluators and areas for future research are presented accordingly.Īguerrevere, L. Both measures are better equipped to detect feigned psychopathology than cognitive or medical impairments. Notably, the MMPI-2-RF excels in its accumulation of research support and civil litigant-specific norms, whereas the PAI leads SVT research in innovation and advanced detection techniques. The strengths of each measure are contrasted, revealing general themes. However, they must be interpreted with special caution in the unique context of psychological injury evaluations, where there runs a greater risk of false-positive identification of overreporting. Findings from this narrative review suggest that both the MMPI-2-RF and the PAI are sound SVTs with growing bodies of empirical support. Each instrument is reviewed for its overreporting scales, including scale development strategies, standard cutoff values, and research support, with particular attention afforded to psychological injury litigation considerations. It then focuses on two of the most well-established SVTs, i.e., the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) and the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI). This literature review first covers foundational knowledge to guide evaluators in the careful interpretation of SVTs. It is thus imperative for psychological injury evaluators to possess a working understanding of the conceptual and empirical foundations of symptom validity tests (SVTs). Among the most pressing considerations in psychological injury litigation is potential overreporting of symptoms or impairments by the plaintiff.
0 kommentar(er)
