Symptom validity assessment: Practice issues and medical necessityNAN Policy & Planning Committee

Ronald M. Ruff · Alexander I. Tröster · Jeffery T. Barth · Sandra P. Koffler · Neil H. Pliskin · C. Silver

836 citations0/0 files storedArchives of Clinical Neuropsychology

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Deception detection and forensic psychology Psychological Testing and Assessment Historical and Modern Theater Studies

Abstract

Symptom exaggeration or fabrication occurs in a sizeable minority of neuropsychological examinees, with greater prevalence in forensic contexts. Adequate assessment of response validity is essential in order to maximize confidence in the results of neurocognitive and personality measures and in the diagnoses and recommendations that are based on the results. Symptom validity assessment may include specific tests, indices, and observations. The manner in which symptom validity is assessed may vary depending on context but must include a thorough examination of cultural factors. Assessment of response validity, as a component of a medically necessary evaluation, is medically necessary. When determined by the neuropsychologist to be necessary for the assessment of response validity, administration of specific symptom validity tests are also medically necessary.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 836 citations exist upstream.

References

2000“Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct”2002Base Rates of Malingering and Symptom Exeggeration 1999Diagnostic Criteria for Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction: Proposed Standards for Clinical Practice and Research 1990Psychological assessment versus psychological testing: Validation from Binet to the school, clinic, and courtroom.

Cited by

2021American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN) 2021 consensus statement on validity assessment: Update of the 2009 AACN consensus conference statement on neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering 2015Neuropsychologists’ Validity Testing Beliefs and Practices: A Survey of North American Professionals 2019A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Test of Memory Malingering in adults: Two decades of deception detection 2012The Efficiency and Accuracy of The Test of Memory Malingering Trial 1, Errors on the First 10 Items of The Test of Memory Malingering, and Five Embedded Measures in Predicting Invalid Test Performance 2008Detecting Malingering in Traumatic Brain Injury and Chronic Pain: A Comparison of Three Forced-Choice Symptom Validity Tests 2012Computerized Neuropsychological Assessment Devices: Joint Position Paper of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology and the National Academy of Neuropsychology 2011

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.