Author ORCID Identifier

Dustin B. Wygant ORCID iD iconhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1874-9821

Department

Psychology

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

7-2015

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Forensic neuropsychiatric assessment requires thorough consideration of malingering and response bias. Neuropsychiatric evaluations are complicated due to the multiple domains in which symptoms and impairment present. Moreover, symptom exaggeration in these evaluations can also present along various symptom domains (e.g., psychological, neurocognitive, somatic). Consequently, steps must be taken to ensure adequate coverage of response bias across all three domains of function.

PURPOSE: The following article reviews the conceptualization of malingering in neuropsychiatric settings, as well as various approaches and measures that can be helpful in the assessment of malingering and response bias.

CONCLUSIONS: Forensic neuropsychiatric assessment requires thorough consideration of malingering and response bias. These evaluations are complicated due to the multiple domains in which symptoms and impairment present. Performance and symptom validity measures should be routinely included in these evaluations. Collaboration between psychiatry and psychology can provide the optimal multi-method approach needed for thorough neuropsychiatric assessment in forensic cases. We illustrate our points with two case studies from forensic traumatic brain injury neuropsychiatric evaluations.

Journal Title

NeuroRehabilitation

Share

COinS
 
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.