Experimental simulation

Type of malingering scenario makes a difference

Harald Merckelbach, Tom Smeets, Marko Jelicic

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

Abstract

Using a simulation design, we tested in 486 undergraduates whether different case vignettes differentially affect the sensitivity of a self-report instrument designed to detect malingering (the Wildman Symptom Checklist). One group of participants (n = 387) was instructed to respond honestly, while three groups instructed to malinger (each n = 33) each received a different case vignette: in the manslaughter and the wrongful death vignettes malingering of symptoms was for the purpose of reducing criminal responsibility, while in the personal injury vignette malingering would lead to the acquisition of compensation money. The criminal case vignettes elicited malingering behaviour that was easier to detect than the civil case vignette, sensitivity rates being .82/.73 and .55, respectively. Thus, when testing the diagnostic qualities of such instruments it may be wise to rely on multiple case vignettes, including civil cases.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)378-386
JournalJournal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology
Volume20
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Malingering
Checklist
Self Report
Wounds and Injuries

Cite this

@article{793e16f21afa4e0d9c9867484a30ed33,
title = "Experimental simulation: Type of malingering scenario makes a difference",
abstract = "Using a simulation design, we tested in 486 undergraduates whether different case vignettes differentially affect the sensitivity of a self-report instrument designed to detect malingering (the Wildman Symptom Checklist). One group of participants (n = 387) was instructed to respond honestly, while three groups instructed to malinger (each n = 33) each received a different case vignette: in the manslaughter and the wrongful death vignettes malingering of symptoms was for the purpose of reducing criminal responsibility, while in the personal injury vignette malingering would lead to the acquisition of compensation money. The criminal case vignettes elicited malingering behaviour that was easier to detect than the civil case vignette, sensitivity rates being .82/.73 and .55, respectively. Thus, when testing the diagnostic qualities of such instruments it may be wise to rely on multiple case vignettes, including civil cases.",
author = "Harald Merckelbach and Tom Smeets and Marko Jelicic",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1080/14789940802456686",
language = "English",
volume = "20",
pages = "378--386",
journal = "Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology",
issn = "1478-9949",
publisher = "ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD",
number = "3",

}

Experimental simulation : Type of malingering scenario makes a difference. / Merckelbach, Harald; Smeets, Tom; Jelicic, Marko.

In: Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, Vol. 20, No. 3, 2009, p. 378-386.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleScientificpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Experimental simulation

T2 - Type of malingering scenario makes a difference

AU - Merckelbach, Harald

AU - Smeets, Tom

AU - Jelicic, Marko

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Using a simulation design, we tested in 486 undergraduates whether different case vignettes differentially affect the sensitivity of a self-report instrument designed to detect malingering (the Wildman Symptom Checklist). One group of participants (n = 387) was instructed to respond honestly, while three groups instructed to malinger (each n = 33) each received a different case vignette: in the manslaughter and the wrongful death vignettes malingering of symptoms was for the purpose of reducing criminal responsibility, while in the personal injury vignette malingering would lead to the acquisition of compensation money. The criminal case vignettes elicited malingering behaviour that was easier to detect than the civil case vignette, sensitivity rates being .82/.73 and .55, respectively. Thus, when testing the diagnostic qualities of such instruments it may be wise to rely on multiple case vignettes, including civil cases.

AB - Using a simulation design, we tested in 486 undergraduates whether different case vignettes differentially affect the sensitivity of a self-report instrument designed to detect malingering (the Wildman Symptom Checklist). One group of participants (n = 387) was instructed to respond honestly, while three groups instructed to malinger (each n = 33) each received a different case vignette: in the manslaughter and the wrongful death vignettes malingering of symptoms was for the purpose of reducing criminal responsibility, while in the personal injury vignette malingering would lead to the acquisition of compensation money. The criminal case vignettes elicited malingering behaviour that was easier to detect than the civil case vignette, sensitivity rates being .82/.73 and .55, respectively. Thus, when testing the diagnostic qualities of such instruments it may be wise to rely on multiple case vignettes, including civil cases.

U2 - 10.1080/14789940802456686

DO - 10.1080/14789940802456686

M3 - Article

VL - 20

SP - 378

EP - 386

JO - Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology

JF - Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology

SN - 1478-9949

IS - 3

ER -