Detection of Malingering in Psychic Damage Ascertainment

  • Giuseppe Sartori
  • Andrea Zangrossi
  • Graziella Orrù
  • Merylin Monaro
Chapter

Abstract

Malingering is the intentional feigning or exaggeration of physical or psychological symptoms. Since the beginning of 1900 malingering detection has been one of the main challenges in medico-legal practice and in particular in psychiatric and cognitive assessment, as behavioral symptoms are very easy to produce, so that the need for specific tools and strategies for malingering detection is crucial. Although several tools and strategies are available, conclusions are often derived from mere subjective impressions and in many cases they lead to misclassifications. Here we present a non-exhaustive review of strategies for the detection of malingering, starting from the logic underlying a qualitative analysis of symptoms, to validated tools specifically designed to detect attempts at simulating or exaggerating psychopathological, psychiatric or cognitive diseases. Finally, we describe two recent approaches to the malingering detection problem. These approaches are grounded on the analysis of the reaction-times and on the dynamic analysis of kinematic features of mouse trajectories while an examinee is answering to double-choice questions.

References

  1. 1.
    Mittenberg W, Patton C, Canyock EM, Condit DC (2002) Base rates of malingering and symptom exaggeration. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 24(8):1094–1102CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Larrabee GJ (2013) Detection of malingering using atypical performance patterns on standard neuropsychological tests. Clin Neuropsychol 17(3):410–425CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ardolf BR, Denney RL, Houston CM (2007) Base rates of negative response bias and malingered neurocognitive dysfunction among criminal defendants referred for neuropsychological evaluation. Clin Neuropsychol 21(6):899–916CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Green P, Rohling ML, Lees-Haley PR, Allen LM 3rd (2001) Effort has a greater effect on test scores than severe brain injury in compensation claimants. Brain Inj 15(12):1045–1060CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Drob SL, Meehan KB, Waxman SE (2009) Clinical and conceptual problems in the attribution of malingering in forensic evaluations. J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 37(1):98–106PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sartori G, Agosta S, Zogmaister C, Ferrara SD, Castiello U (2008) How to accurately detect autobiographical events. Psychol Sci 19(8):772–780CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cornell DG, Hawk GL (1989) Clinical presentation of malingerers diagnosed by experienced forensic psychologists. Law Hum Behav 13:375–383CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Larrabee GJ (1990) Cautions in the use of neuropsychological evaluation in legal settings. Neuropsychology 4:239–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Berry DTR, Baer RA, Harris MJ (1991) Detection of malingering on the MMPI: a meta-analysis. Clin Psychol Rev 11:585–598. In: Psychol Inj and Law (2010) 3:295–303Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boone KB (ed) (2007) Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment: a neuropsychological perspective. Guilford Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Larrabee GJ (ed) (2007) Assessment of malingered neuropsychological deficits. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Butcher JN, Dahlstrom WG, Graham JR, Tallagen A, Kaemmer B (eds) (1989) MMPI-2: manual for administration and scoring. University of Minnesota Press, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rogers R, Bagby RM, Dickens SE (1992) Structured interview of reported symptoms: professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources, OdessaGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith GP, Burger GK (1997) Detection of malingering: validation of the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS). J Am Acad Psychiatry Law 25(2):183–189PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Morey LC (1991) Personality assessment inventory: professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources, OdessaGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Beaber RJ, Marston A, Michelli J, Mills MJ (1985) A brief test for measuring malingering in schizophrenic individuals. Am J Psychiatry 142(12):1478–1481CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tombaugh TN (1996) Test of memory malingering. Multi-Health Systems, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Tombaugh TN (1997) The Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM): normative data from cognitively intact and cognitively impaired individuals. Psychol Assess 9(3):260–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Green P, Allen l, Astner K (eds) (1997) The word memory test: a manual for the oral and computerized forms. CogniSyst Inc, DurhamGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Allen LM, Conder RL, Green P, Cox DR (1997) CARB 97 manual for the computerized assessment of response bias. CogniSyst, DurhamGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lezak MD, Howieson DB, Bigler ED, Tranel D (1995) Neuropsychological assessment. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rey A (1941) L’examen psychologie dans las cas d’encephalopathie traumatique. Archives de Psychologie 23(112):286–340Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rey A (ed) (1964) L’examen clinique en psychologie. Presses Universitaires de France, ParisGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Granhag PA, Vrij A, Verschuere B (2015) Deception detection: current challenges and new approaches. Wiley, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Walczyk JJ, Igou FP, Dixon AP, Tcholakian T (2013) Advancing lie detection by inducing cognitive load on liars: a review of relevant theories and techniques guided by lessons from polygraph-based approaches. Front Psychol 4:14CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Verschuere B, Ben-Shakhar G, Meijer E (2011) Memory detection: theory and application of the concealed information test. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Greenwald AG, McGhee DE, Schwartz JLK (1998) Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. J Pers Soc Psychol 74(6):1464–1480CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Agosta S, Sartori G (2013) The autobiographical IAT: a review. Front Psychol 4:519CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Freng S, Kehn A (2013) Determining true and false witnessed events: can an eyewitness-implicit association test distinguish between the seen and unseen? Psychiatry Psychol Law 20:761–780CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sartori G, Agosta S, Gnoato F (2007) High accuracy detection of malingered whiplash syndrome. Paper presented at the International Whiplash Trauma Congress, MiamiGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mitchell TM (1997) Machine learning. WCB/McGraw-Hill, ColumbusGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Mitchell TM, Hutchinson R, Niculescu RS, Pereira F, Wang X, Just M, Newman S (2004) Learning to decode cognitive states from brain images. Mach Learn 57:145–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Haynes JD, Rees G (2006) Decoding mental states from brain activity in humans. Nat Rev Neurosci 7:523–534CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Monaro M, Gamberini L, Sartori G (2016) Identity verification using a kinematic memory detection technique. Proceeding of 7th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics (in press)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Vrij A (ed) (2015) Deception detection: current challenges and new approaches. Wiley, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Freeman JB, Dale R, Farmer TA (2011) Hand in motion reveals mind in motion. Front Psychol 2:59CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Duran N, Dale R, McNamara DS (2010) The action dynamics of overcoming the truth. Psychon Bull Rev 17(4):486–491CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hibbeln M, Jenkins J, Schneider C, Valacich J, Weinmann M (2014) Investigating the effect of fraud on mouse usage in human-computer interactions. International Conference on Information Systems (ICIS 2014)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Valacich JS, Jenkins JL, Nunamaker JF Jr, Hariri S, Howie J (2013) Identifying insider threats through monitoring mouse movements in Concealed Information Tests. Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Deception Detection SymposiumGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Vitacco MJ, Jackson RL, Rogers R, Neumann CS, Miller HA, Gabel J (2008) Detection strategies for malingering with the miller forensic assessment of symptoms test—a confirmatory factor analysis of its underlying dimensions. Assessment 15(1):97–103CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giuseppe Sartori
    • 1
  • Andrea Zangrossi
    • 1
  • Graziella Orrù
    • 1
  • Merylin Monaro
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of General PsychologyUniversity of PadovaPadovaItaly

Personalised recommendations