Brushed-Off Testimony

In line with years of tradition, soldiers young and old come together at the local pub or hall to swap war stories of time in the trenches. For the forensic clinician, the trenches represent the hard-fought battles during expert testimony. As it turns out, our pub was a social gathering at the 2012 meeting of the American Psychology Law Society in San Juan, Puerto Rico. The University of Alabama Psychology Law Program hosted a social gathering for its faculty, graduate students, alumni, and friends to come together and share stories and camaraderie. It was in this setting that we launched into a spirited discussion of similar experiences testifying in rural county courts

Assessment of validity and response bias in neuropsychiatric evaluations

BACKGROUND: Forensic neuropsychiatric assessment requires thorough consideration of malingering and response bias. Neuropsychiatric evaluations are complicated due to the multiple domains in which symptoms and impairment present. Moreover, symptom exaggeration in these evaluations can also present along various symptom domains (e.g., psychological, neurocognitive,somatic). Consequently, steps must be taken to ensure adequate coverage of response bias across all three domains of function. PURPOSE: The following article reviews the conceptualization of malingering in neuropsychiatric settings, as well as various approaches and measures that can be helpful in the assessment of malingering and response bias. CONCLUSIONS: Forensic neuropsychiatric assessment requires thorough consideration of malingering and response bias. These evaluations are complicated due to the multiple domains in which symptoms and impairment present. Performance and symptom validity measures should be routinely included in these evaluations. Collaboration between psychiatry and psychology can provide the optimal multi-method approach needed for thorough neuropsychiatric assessment in forensic cases. We illustrate our points with two case studies from forensic traumatic brain injury neuropsychiatric evaluations

Elucidating the Construct Validity of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory Triarchic Scales

This study sought to replicate and extend Hall and colleagues’ (2014) work on developing and validating scales from the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) to index the triarchic psychopathy constructs of boldness, meanness, and disinhibition. This study also extended Hall et al.’s initial findings by including the PPI Revised (PPI–R). A community sample (n D 240) weighted toward subclinical psychopathy traits and a male prison sample (n D 160) were used for this study. Results indicated that PPI–Boldness, PPI–Meanness, and PPI–Disinhibition converged with other psychopathy, personality, and behavioral criteria in ways conceptually expected from the perspective of the triarchic psychopathy model, including showing very strong convergent and discriminant validity with their Triarchic Psychopathy Measure counterparts. These findings further enhance the utility of the PPI and PPI–R in measuring these constructs

Trial 1 versus Trial 2 of the Test of Memory Malingering: Evaluating Accuracy Without a “Gold Standard”

This study examines the accuracy of the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM), a frequently administered measure for evaluating effort during neurocognitive testing. In the last few years, several authors have suggested that the initial recognition trial of the TOMM (Trial 1) might be a more useful index for detecting feigned or exaggerated impairment than Trial 2, which is the source for inference recommended by the original instruction manual (Tombaugh, 1996). We used latent class modeling (LCM) implemented in a Bayesian framework to evaluate archival Trial 1 and Trial 2 data collected from 1198 adults who had undergone outpatient forensic evaluations. All subjects were tested with two other performance validity tests (the Word Memory Test and the Computerized Assessment of Response Bias), and for 70% of the subjects, data from the California Verbal Learning Test–Second Edition Forced Choice trial were also available. Our results suggest that not even a perfect score on Trial 1 or Trial 2 justifies saying that an evaluee is definitely responding genuinely, although such scores imply a lower-than-base-rate probability of feigning. If one uses a Trial 2 cut-off higher than the manual’s recommendation, Trial 2 does better than Trial 1 at identifying individuals who are almost certainly feigning while maintaining a negligible false positive rate. Using scores from both trials, one can identify a group of definitely feigning and very likely feigning subjects who comprise about two-thirds of all feigners; only 1 percent of the members of this group would not be feigning

Utility of the MMPI–2-RF (Restructured Form) Validity Scales in Detecting Malingering in a Criminal Forensic Setting: A Known-Groups Design

The current study examined the utility of the recently released Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory—2 Restructured Form (MMPI–2-RF; Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008) validity scales to detect feigned psychopathology in a criminal forensic setting. We used a known-groups design with the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS; Rogers, Bagby, & Dickens, 1992) as the external criterion to determine groups of probable malingering versus nonmalingering. A final sample of 125 criminal defendants, who were administered both the SIRS and the MMPI–2-RF during their evaluations, was examined. The results indicated that the two MMPI–2-RF validity scales specifically designed to detect overreported psychopathology, F-r and FP-r, best differentiated between the malingering and nonmalingering groups. These scales added incremental predictive utility to one another in this differentiation. Classification accuracy statistics substantiated the recommended cut scores in the MMPI–2-RF manual (Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008) in this forensic setting. Implications for these results in terms of forensic assessment and detection of malingering are discussed. DOI: 10.1037/a001822

It\u27s Not All in Your Head (or at Least Your Brain): Association of Traumatic Brain Lesion Presence and Location with Performance on Measures of Response Bias in Forensic Evaluation

This study examined the relationship between lesion presence and localization and performance on measures of cognitive response bias, specifically in individuals purporting to have a traumatic brain injury. Ninety-two participants, all of whom were involved in workers’ compensation or personal injury litigation, were administered an extensive neuropsychological battery, including neuroimaging (magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography), at a neuropsychiatric clinic in Lexington, KY. Those with evidence of intracranial injury on neuroimaging findings were placed in the head injury lesion litigation group and were coded based on the anatomical location and type of intracranial injury. Results demonstrated no significant relationships between lesion location and performance on performance validity tests (PVTs), as well as the Response Bias Scale of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form. Given the lack of research concerning lesions and performance validity tests, this study addresses important questions about the validity of PVTs as specific measures of response bias in patients who have structural changes secondary to traumatic brain injury. Copyright#2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd

Civil and Criminal Forensic Psychological Assessment: Similarities and Unique Challenges

The current article reflects on the similarities and unique challenges of civil and criminal forensic psychological assessment. We begin with an overall review of the general roles and ethical responsibilities of the forensic psychologist working in any legal arena. Topics such as ethics of the forensic examiner, the role of psychiatric diagnosis, consideration of malingering and response bias, use of psychological testing, and researching relevant laws and psycholegal questions are covered. We then discuss the particular challenges of working in a criminal forensic setting (e.g., conducting assessments in a correctional setting, working with potentially dangerous evaluees), as well as civil forensic setting (e.g., role of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in civil litigation). This paper will highlight that while there are unique challenges and aspects of working in a particular area of the law, more often than not, the same general principles and skill sets of forensic psychological assessment will translate between each area

Viewing Psychopathy from the Perspective of the Personality Psychopathology Five Model: Implications for DSM-5

The current study examined the association between domains from the Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5; Harkness & McNulty, 1994) model, which is a dimensional model of pathological personality that corresponds closely to the proposed domains of th

Measuring Internalizing Psychopathology Using the MMPI-3: An Examination of Convergent, Discriminant, and Incremental Validity

Contemporary assessment of internalizing psychopathology emphasizes measuring transdiagnostic symptom dimensions rather than discrete diagnoses. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) family of instruments includes broadband personality and psychopathology inventories that are particularly well-suited for assessing internalizing symptom dimensions. Although significant evidence exists supporting the validity of MMPI-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) scale scores against mood disorders and related symptoms, the MMPI-3 contains new scales relevant to internalizing psychopathology and significant alterations to existing scales, necessitating a re-examination of substantive scale validity. The current study included 253 undergraduate students and 386 correctional inmates who completed the MMPI-3 and self-report measures of internalizing psychopathology. Correlational analyses were used to examine the convergent and discriminant validity of MMPI-3 scale scores against internalizing criteria, with results indicating that hypothesized convergent associations were of moderate-to-large effect sizes with smaller discriminant associations across both samples. Regression analyses were used to evaluate the incremental validity of MMPI-3 scale scores over MMPI-2-RF analogues in predicting internalizing outcomes, with MMPI-3 scale accounting for significant additional variance across criteria. Overall, findings generally support the convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity of MMPI-3 scales in measuring internalizing psychopathology. Exceptions to this general pattern of results, limitations, implications, and future research directions are discussed

Interview with Dr. Dustin Wygant [video]

Dr. Dustin Wygant, Assistant Professor in EKU\u27s Department of Psychology, received his PhD in Clinical Psychology from Kent State University. He is director of the Personality Assessment & Psychopathology Lab, which has several projects underway, including Examination of the Proposed DSM-5 Diagnostic Criteria for Antisocial Personality Disorder: Links to Psychopathy and Neurocognitive Deficits at Northpoint Training Center near Danville, KY and Elaborating on the Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) Model of Psychopathy at Madison County jail and Rockcastle County jail