Abstract
The assessment of malingering is a fundamental component of forensic evaluations that should be considered with each referral. In systematizing the evaluation of malingering, one option is the standardized administration of screens as an initial step. The current study assessed the effectiveness of three common screening measures: the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST; Miller, 2001), the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS; Widows & Smith, 2004), and the Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised Atypical Presentation Scale (ECST-R ATP; Rogers, Tillbrook, & Sewell, 2004). Using the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS) as the external criterion, 100 patients involved in competency to stand trial evaluations were categorized as either probable malingerers (n=21) or nonmalingerers (n=79). Each malingering scale produced robust effect sizes in this known-groups comparison. Results are discussed in relation to the comprehensive assessment of malingering within a forensic context.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Jackson et al. (2004) obtained their results using a slightly modified version of the M-FAST. They dropped one item while continuing to rely on the recommended cut-score. In the current study, we used all the M-FAST items and the recommended cut-score.
Relying on a single test for determining malingering should be avoided in clinical practice; instead, multiple methods (e.g., testing, direct observation) should be used to diagnose malingering.
Cohen (1988) recommended the following Cohen's d classifications: .2=small, .5=moderate, .8=large.
References
American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed. Text revision). Washington, DC: Author.
Bonnie, R. J., & Grisso, T. (2000). Adjudicative competency and youthful offenders. In T. Grisso & R. G. Schwartz (Eds.), Youth on Trial: A developmental perspective of juvenile justice (pp. 73–103). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Edens, J. F., Otto, R. K., & Dwyer, T. (1999). Utility of the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology in identifying persons motivated to malinger psychopathology. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 27, 387–396.
Guy, L. S., & Miller, H. A. (2004). Screening for malingered psychopathology in a correctional setting: Utility of the Miller-Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 31, 695–716.
Jackson, R. L., Rogers, R., & Sewell, K. W. (2005). Forensic applications of the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST): Screening for feigned disorders in competency to stand trial evaluations. Law and Human Behavior, 29, 199–210.
Lally, S. J. (2003). What tests are acceptable for use in forensic evaluations? A survey of experts. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34, 491–498.
Lewis, J. L., Simcox, A. M., & Berry, D. T. R. (2002). Screening for feigned psychiatric symptoms in a forensic sample by using the MMPI-2 and the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology. Psychological Assessment, 14, 170–176.
Luis, J. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Efficacy of the structured inventory of reported symptoms (SIRS): A meta-analysis. Univ Microfilms International.
Miller, H. A. (2001). M-FAST: Miller-Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Rogers, R. (1997). Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (2nd ed.). New York: The Guilford Press.
Rogers, R. (1999). Models of feigned mental illness. Professional Psychology, 21, 182–188.
Rogers, R. (2001). Handbook of diagnostic and structured interviewing. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Rogers, R., Bagby, R. M., & Dickens, S. E. (1992). Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Rogers, R., & Bender, S. D. (2003). Evaluation of malingering and deception. In A. Goldstein (Ed.), Handbook of psychology: Forensic psychology (Vol. 11, pp. 109–129): John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Rogers, R., & Cruise, K. R. (1998). Assessment of malingering with simulation designs: Threats to external validity. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 273–285.
Rogers, R., Jackson, R. L., & Kaminski, P. L. (2005). Factitious psychological disorders: The overlooked response style in forensic evaluations. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 5, 21–41.
Rogers, R., Jackson, R. L., Sewell, K. W., & Harrison, K. S. (2004). An examination of the ECST-R as a screen for feigned incompetency to stand trial. Psychological Assessment, 16, 139–145.
Rogers, R., Jackson, R. L., Sewell, K. W., & Salekin, K. L. (2005). Detection strategies for malingering: A confirmatory factor analysis of the SIRS. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 511–525.
Rogers, R., Salekin, R. T., Sewell, K. W., Goldstein, A., & Leonard, K. (1998). A comparison of forensic and nonforensic malingerers: A prototypical analysis of explanatory models. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 353–367.
Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., Grandjean, N. R., & Vitacco, M. (2002). The detection of feigned mental disorders on specific competency measures. Psychological Assessment, 14, 177–183.
Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., Martin, M., & Vitacco, M. J. (2003). Detection of feigned mental disorders: A meta-analysis of the MMPI-2 and malingering. Assessment, 10, 160–177.
Rogers, R., Tillbrook, C. E., & Sewell, K. W. (2004). Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial-Revised (ECST-R) and professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Rogers, R., & Vitacco, M. J. (2002). Forensic assessment of malingering and related response styles. In B. Van Dorsten (Ed.), Forensic Psychology: From Classroom to Courtroom (pp. 83–104). New York, NY: Kulwer Academic Press.
Skeem, J. L., Golding, S. L., Berge, G., & Cohn, N. B. (1998). Logic and reliability of evaluations of competence to stand trial. Law and Human Behavior, 22, 519–547.
Veazey, C. H., Hays, J. R., Wagner, A. L., & Miller, H. A. (2005). Validity of the miller forensic assessment of symptoms test in psychiatric inpatients. Psychological Reports, 96, 771–774.
Widows, M. R., & Smith, G. P. (2004). SIMS: Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Vitacco, M.J., Rogers, R., Gabel, J. et al. An Evaluation of Malingering Screens with Competency to Stand Trial Patients: A Known-Groups Comparison. Law Hum Behav 31, 249–260 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-006-9062-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10979-006-9062-8