Differentiating Factitious from Malingered Symptomatology: the Development of a Psychometric Approach

Alfons van Impelen, Harald Merckelbach, Marko Jelicic, Isabella J M Niesten, Joost À Campo

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Psychometric symptom validity assessment is becoming increasingly part and parcel of psychological and neuropsychological assessments. An unresolved and rarely addressed issue concerns the differentiation between factitious and malingered symptom presentations: present-day symptom validity tests can assess whether an examinee presents with noncredible symptomatology, but not why an examinee does so. We explored this issue by developing the Symptom and Disposition Interview (SDI); a symptom validity test that incorporates strategies intended to gauge internal incentives associated with factitious disorder. The merits of the SDI were explored and compared to a traditional symptom validity test (the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology) in two analogue studies, each with factitious and malingering conditions (n = 24-30 per condition) and a clinical control group (n = 34, n = 40). Overall, the results were positive: The SDI was as effective in detecting feigned symptom presentations as a traditional symptom validity test and superior in differentiating factitious from malingered symptom presentations. We conclude that the SDI is not ready for clinical use, but that psychometric approaches to the assessment of factitious symptomatology, such as the SDI, appear sufficiently promising to warrant future research.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)341-357
Number of pages17
JournalPSYCHOLOGICAL INJURY & LAW
Volume10
Issue number4
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2017

Keywords

  • Journal Article
  • TESTS
  • Feigning
  • Malingering
  • NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
  • Factitious disorder
  • Response bias
  • DISORDERS
  • SECONDARY GAIN
  • Symptom validity
  • ACCURACY
  • PERFORMANCE VALIDITY
  • DYNAMICS
  • SIMS
  • STRUCTURED-INVENTORY

Cite this

@article{ea8e15a791eb4aea84c1e919399ad8ae,
title = "Differentiating Factitious from Malingered Symptomatology: the Development of a Psychometric Approach",
abstract = "Psychometric symptom validity assessment is becoming increasingly part and parcel of psychological and neuropsychological assessments. An unresolved and rarely addressed issue concerns the differentiation between factitious and malingered symptom presentations: present-day symptom validity tests can assess whether an examinee presents with noncredible symptomatology, but not why an examinee does so. We explored this issue by developing the Symptom and Disposition Interview (SDI); a symptom validity test that incorporates strategies intended to gauge internal incentives associated with factitious disorder. The merits of the SDI were explored and compared to a traditional symptom validity test (the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology) in two analogue studies, each with factitious and malingering conditions (n = 24-30 per condition) and a clinical control group (n = 34, n = 40). Overall, the results were positive: The SDI was as effective in detecting feigned symptom presentations as a traditional symptom validity test and superior in differentiating factitious from malingered symptom presentations. We conclude that the SDI is not ready for clinical use, but that psychometric approaches to the assessment of factitious symptomatology, such as the SDI, appear sufficiently promising to warrant future research.",
keywords = "Journal Article, TESTS, Feigning, Malingering, NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT, Factitious disorder, Response bias, DISORDERS, SECONDARY GAIN, Symptom validity, ACCURACY, PERFORMANCE VALIDITY, DYNAMICS, SIMS, STRUCTURED-INVENTORY",
author = "{van Impelen}, Alfons and Harald Merckelbach and Marko Jelicic and Niesten, {Isabella J M} and Campo, {Joost {\`A}}",
year = "2017",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1007/s12207-017-9301-y",
language = "English",
volume = "10",
pages = "341--357",
journal = "PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURY & LAW",
issn = "1938-971X",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "4",

}

Differentiating Factitious from Malingered Symptomatology : the Development of a Psychometric Approach. / van Impelen, Alfons; Merckelbach, Harald; Jelicic, Marko; Niesten, Isabella J M; Campo, Joost À.

In: PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURY & LAW, Vol. 10, No. 4, 12.2017, p. 341-357.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Differentiating Factitious from Malingered Symptomatology

T2 - the Development of a Psychometric Approach

AU - van Impelen, Alfons

AU - Merckelbach, Harald

AU - Jelicic, Marko

AU - Niesten, Isabella J M

AU - Campo, Joost À

PY - 2017/12

Y1 - 2017/12

N2 - Psychometric symptom validity assessment is becoming increasingly part and parcel of psychological and neuropsychological assessments. An unresolved and rarely addressed issue concerns the differentiation between factitious and malingered symptom presentations: present-day symptom validity tests can assess whether an examinee presents with noncredible symptomatology, but not why an examinee does so. We explored this issue by developing the Symptom and Disposition Interview (SDI); a symptom validity test that incorporates strategies intended to gauge internal incentives associated with factitious disorder. The merits of the SDI were explored and compared to a traditional symptom validity test (the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology) in two analogue studies, each with factitious and malingering conditions (n = 24-30 per condition) and a clinical control group (n = 34, n = 40). Overall, the results were positive: The SDI was as effective in detecting feigned symptom presentations as a traditional symptom validity test and superior in differentiating factitious from malingered symptom presentations. We conclude that the SDI is not ready for clinical use, but that psychometric approaches to the assessment of factitious symptomatology, such as the SDI, appear sufficiently promising to warrant future research.

AB - Psychometric symptom validity assessment is becoming increasingly part and parcel of psychological and neuropsychological assessments. An unresolved and rarely addressed issue concerns the differentiation between factitious and malingered symptom presentations: present-day symptom validity tests can assess whether an examinee presents with noncredible symptomatology, but not why an examinee does so. We explored this issue by developing the Symptom and Disposition Interview (SDI); a symptom validity test that incorporates strategies intended to gauge internal incentives associated with factitious disorder. The merits of the SDI were explored and compared to a traditional symptom validity test (the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology) in two analogue studies, each with factitious and malingering conditions (n = 24-30 per condition) and a clinical control group (n = 34, n = 40). Overall, the results were positive: The SDI was as effective in detecting feigned symptom presentations as a traditional symptom validity test and superior in differentiating factitious from malingered symptom presentations. We conclude that the SDI is not ready for clinical use, but that psychometric approaches to the assessment of factitious symptomatology, such as the SDI, appear sufficiently promising to warrant future research.

KW - Journal Article

KW - TESTS

KW - Feigning

KW - Malingering

KW - NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT

KW - Factitious disorder

KW - Response bias

KW - DISORDERS

KW - SECONDARY GAIN

KW - Symptom validity

KW - ACCURACY

KW - PERFORMANCE VALIDITY

KW - DYNAMICS

KW - SIMS

KW - STRUCTURED-INVENTORY

U2 - 10.1007/s12207-017-9301-y

DO - 10.1007/s12207-017-9301-y

M3 - Article

C2 - 29299086

VL - 10

SP - 341

EP - 357

JO - PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURY & LAW

JF - PSYCHOLOGICAL INJURY & LAW

SN - 1938-971X

IS - 4

ER -