Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

SVTs and PVTs are Not Junk Science: A Response to Leonhard and Leonhard

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Leonhard and Leonhard (2025) argue that Symptom Validity Tests (SVTs) and Performance Validity Tests (PVTs) constitute a form of junk science. This qualification stands in sharp contrast to the breadth and depth of the scientific work on validity tests. Leonhard and Leonhard treat these tests as if they were equivalent to polygraph evidence, a move that betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the conceptual and empirical foundations of these instruments. More than a year ago, we invited Leonhard and Leonhard to provide case law examples -if only a few- demonstrating that SVTs and/or PVTs contributed to risky legal decisions. So far, they have not been willing or able to cite a single instance. We therefore reiterate our invitation: show us the cases.
Original languageEnglish
Article number11
Number of pages5
JournalPsychological Injury and Law
Volume19
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 10 Mar 2026

Keywords

  • Performance validity tests Symptom validity tests Expert witnesses Junk science
  • GENERAL ACCEPTANCE
  • TESTIMONY

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'SVTs and PVTs are Not Junk Science: A Response to Leonhard and Leonhard'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this