Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Loading next page...
/lp/oxford-university-press/symptom-validity-assessment-practice-issues-and-medical-necessity-nan-10XiN7euRX
References (16)
-
A. Horton, G. Iverson (1998)
Detection of Malingering During Head Injury LitigationArchives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 14
-
Julie Suhr (2007)
Book Review: Detection of Response Bias in Forensic NeuropsychologyCriminal Justice Review, 32
-
(1991)
Guidelines for providers of services to ethnic, linguistic, and culturally diverse populations -
J. Meyers, M. Volbrecht (2003)
A validation of multiple malingering detection methods in a large clinical sample.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists, 18 3
-
J. Butcher, R. Reitan, O. Parsons (1998)
Detection of Malingering during Head Injury Litigation -
G. Larrabee (2003)
Detection of Malingering Using Atypical Performance Patterns on Standard Neuropsychological TestsThe Clinical Neuropsychologist, 17
-
K. Bianchini, C. Mathias, K. Greve (2001)
Symptom Validity Testing: A Critical ReviewThe Clinical Neuropsychologist, 15
-
J. Matarazzo (1990)
Psychological assessment versus psychological testing. Validation from Binet to the school, clinic, and courtroom.The American psychologist, 45 9
-
(1999)
Malingering: Differential diagnosis Forensic neuropsychology: Fundamentals and practice -
—Richard Whately (2002)
Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct.The American psychologist, 57 12
-
D. Slick, J. Tan, E. Strauss, D. Hultsch (2004)
Detecting malingering: a survey of experts' practices.Archives of clinical neuropsychology : the official journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists, 19 4
-
Nathaniel Nelson, K. Boone, Alvin Dueck, L. Wagener, P. Lu, C. Grills (2003)
Relationships Between Eight Measures of Suspect EffortThe Clinical Neuropsychologist, 17
-
D. Slick, E. Sherman, G. Iverson (1999)
Diagnostic criteria for malingered neurocognitive dysfunction: proposed standards for clinical practice and research.The Clinical neuropsychologist, 13 4
-
W. Mittenberg, Christina Patton, Elizabeth Canyock, D. Condit (2002)
Base Rates of Malingering and Symptom ExeggerationJournal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 24
-
Alija Kulenović, V. Buško (2006)
Standards for educational and psychological testing -
M. Cima, H. Merckelbach, S. Hollnack, C. Butt, K. Kremer, R. Schellbach-Matties, P. Muris (2003)
The Other Side of Malingering: SupernormalityThe Clinical Neuropsychologist, 17
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press
- Copyright
- © Published by Oxford University Press.
- ISSN
- 0887-6177
- eISSN
- 1873-5843
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.acn.2005.02.002
- pmid
- 15896556
- Publisher site
- See Article on Publisher Site
Abstract
AbstractSymptom exaggeration or fabrication occurs in a sizeable minority of neuropsychological examinees, with greater prevalence in forensic contexts. Adequate assessment of response validity is essential in order to maximize confidence in the results of neurocognitive and personality measures and in the diagnoses and recommendations that are based on the results. Symptom validity assessment may include specific tests, indices, and observations. The manner in which symptom validity is assessed may vary depending on context but must include a thorough examination of cultural factors. Assessment of response validity, as a component of a medically necessary evaluation, is medically necessary. When determined by the neuropsychologist to be necessary for the assessment of response validity, administration of specific symptom validity tests are also medically necessary.
Journal
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology – Oxford University Press
Published: Jun 1, 2005
Keywords: Malingering Symptom validity testing Medical necessity Neuropsychological assessment