Evaluating malingering in cognitive and memory examinations: a guide for clinicians

D. Tracy
{"title":"Evaluating malingering in cognitive and memory examinations: a guide for clinicians","authors":"D. Tracy","doi":"10.1192/APT.BP.114.012906","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Cognitive and memory testing are a common part of clinical practice, but professional concerns are sometimes raised that the individual being tested might be feigning deficits. Most clinicians have limited experience and training in detecting malingering in such cognitive testing, and the very issue raises considerable ethical dilemmas. Nevertheless, psychiatric work faces ever greater potential for legal scrutiny, and failure to appropriately evaluate potential malingering risks professional embarrassment and distress. There is a need for clinicians to make themselves aware of the ways in which malingered behaviour might be evaluated through the clinical history, the use of routine psychometric testing and, particularly, the use of symptom validity (‘malingering’) tests. This article describes these factors and gives guidance on the appropriate reporting of findings.","PeriodicalId":89879,"journal":{"name":"Advances in psychiatric treatment : the Royal College of Psychiatrists' journal of continuing professional development","volume":"20 1","pages":"405-412"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1192/APT.BP.114.012906","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in psychiatric treatment : the Royal College of Psychiatrists' journal of continuing professional development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/APT.BP.114.012906","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Cognitive and memory testing are a common part of clinical practice, but professional concerns are sometimes raised that the individual being tested might be feigning deficits. Most clinicians have limited experience and training in detecting malingering in such cognitive testing, and the very issue raises considerable ethical dilemmas. Nevertheless, psychiatric work faces ever greater potential for legal scrutiny, and failure to appropriately evaluate potential malingering risks professional embarrassment and distress. There is a need for clinicians to make themselves aware of the ways in which malingered behaviour might be evaluated through the clinical history, the use of routine psychometric testing and, particularly, the use of symptom validity (‘malingering’) tests. This article describes these factors and gives guidance on the appropriate reporting of findings.
评估认知和记忆检查中的装病:临床医生指南
认知和记忆测试是临床实践的一个常见部分,但专业人士有时会担心,被测试的个人可能是假装的缺陷。大多数临床医生在这种认知测试中检测装病方面的经验和培训都很有限,而且这个问题本身就引发了相当大的伦理困境。然而,精神病学工作面临着更大的法律审查的可能性,而不能恰当地评估潜在的装病风险会使专业人员感到尴尬和痛苦。临床医生有必要让自己意识到,通过临床病史、使用常规心理测试,特别是使用症状效度(“装病”)测试,可以评估装病行为的方式。本文描述了这些因素,并给出了适当报告发现的指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信