Malingering Research - A Multi-Method Perspective (1.5 CEs)

During the past two decades over 1,200 papers on malingering research were published. To offer an overview and an update on the status of the art, this symposium adopts a multi-method perspective and reports on a series of studies conducted using different instruments. Mike Bagby and Danielle Burchett will start off the session by presenting some updates on MMPI findings. Next, John Kurtz will focus on the PAI and present data from a series of studies focusing on the PAI validity scales. Don Viglione and Luciano Giromini will then discuss some emerging findings addressing the validity and cross-cultural generalizability of the IOP-29. Lastly, Laszlo Erdodi will close the session by reporting on recent advances in performance validity assessment. By discussing the unique strengths and weaknesses of each specific method/test, this integrated paper session will help attendees to learn how to integrate their testing results when adopting a multi-method approach in their forensic evaluations.

Chair

Luciano Giromini | University of Turin

Discussant

Dustin B. Wygant | Eastern Kentucky University 

Goals & Objectives 

1. List the most widely researched psychological measures of symptom credibility/validity. 
2. Describe the major strengths and limitations of various MMPI, PAI, and IOP-29 indicators do symptom credibility/validity. 
3. Apply an evidence-based approach to combine the results of multiple performance validity tests (PVTs) into a single validity composite. 
4. Explain why practitioners performs symptom and/or performance validity assessments should always try to use multiple indicators, possible taken from different tests.