SAFETYLIT WEEKLY UPDATE

We compile citations and summaries of about 400 new articles every week.
RSS Feed

HELP: Tutorials | FAQ
CONTACT US: Contact info

Search Results

Journal Article

Citation

Young G. Psychol. Inj. Law 2015; 8(2): 169-183.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, Holtzbrinck Springer Nature Publishing Group)

DOI

10.1007/s12207-015-9226-2

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This article consists mostly of an appendix on the detection of feigned/malingered PTSD that was justified after analysis of extant malingering detection systems and then presented in Young (2014a) as a long table. The submission reviewers at the journal had considered it appropriate that, although it had been published in book format, it is opened up to peer-review commentary to deal with errors of omission and commission, thereby leading to relevant changes, if any, before further use other than as a guide to assessments in the area. In this regard, we solicit reviews, comments, criticisms, suggestions for change, and so on, with a response (rebuttal) to follow. The present malingered PTSD detection system constitutes the first in the field. It incorporates multiple corrections and additions relative to the extant systems on which it is based (MND, Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction; MPRD, Malingered Pain-Related Disability; respectively, Slick, Sherman, & Iverson, 1999; Bianchini, Greve, & Glynn, 2005). It includes very specific rules and procedures both for testing and considering inconsistencies/discrepancies in the file history. Therefore, it is comprehensive and lengthy, or takes about ten times as long to present in tabular format as the MND and MPRD systems on which it is based, (portions in italics indicate what is new to the system). It was constructed to permit the creation of equivalent systems for neurocognition and pain, presented in Young (2014a). The system is useful to mental health professionals not well-versed in psychological testing because, aside from its testing component, it includes extensive procedures for evaluating inconsistencies/discrepancies in examinee files. The system needs evaluation of its reliability and validity, as well as clinical utility.


Language: en

NEW SEARCH


All SafetyLit records are available for automatic download to Zotero & Mendeley
Print