Neil L. Mogge

Utility of the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS) and the Assessment of Depression Inventory (ADI) in screening for malingering among outpatients seeking to claim disability

A sample of 56 disability seekers were administered the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS), the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS), and the Assessment of Depression Inventory (ADI). Individuals were classified as honest or suspected malingerers based on their SIRS scores. Additionally, 60 individuals from the community completed the SIMS and the ADI honestly or as if they were malingering depression. Both malingering groups had significantly higher mean scores on the SIMS total and ADI feigning scales than both honest groups. The scores of the malingering groups did not significantly differ. The utility of various cut-off scores on these scales is presented and discussed. In the clinical sample, previously recommended SIMS total cut-off scores (>14 or >16) had excellent sensitivity, but low specificity. Conversely, the recommended ADI feigning cut-off score (>13) had excellent specificity, but low sensitivity. Increasing the SIMS total cut-off score to >19 and decreasing the ADI feigning cut-off score to >9 may improve their utility in screening for malingering among outpatients seeking to claim disability.

The negative distortion scale: a new PAI validity scale

The personality assessment inventory (PAI) includes three scales to address negative feigning, but none have proved successful under all circumstances, especially with forensic populations. Using psychiatric inpatients, a new validity scale was developed for individuals presenting with higher levels of psychopathology, as often is the case with forensic patients. Items with extreme response frequencies were identified from within PAIs eight clinical scales that address psycho-pathology; from these a negative distortion scale (NDS) was constructed. To evaluate efficacy of the NDS, the structured interview of reported symptoms (SIRS) was used as a criterion measure for malingering. The NDS was found to effectively discriminate suspected malingerers, and it added incremental validity to existing PAI validity measures.

A comparison of the behavioral observation system (BOS) with clinician ratings of psychosis and mania

This study investigated the relationship of the behavioral observation system (BOS; LePage & Mogge, 2001) and clinician ratings of psychosis and mania. Fifty interviews with psychiatric inpatients using the Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms, the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, and the Young Mania Rating scale were completed. Paraprofessionals completed a BOS on the patient during the same day of the clinicians interview. The results of the study demonstrate the convergent validity of the BOS scales and support the use of the BOS by paraprofessionals to assess behaviors associated with psychosis and mania.

Detecting random responding using the assessment of depression inventory: A brief screening measure of depression

Background: Traditionally, the assessment of random responding in psychological assessment tools has been the primary domain of large multi‐scale inventories. However, the ability of clinicians to assess random responding when using short symptom inventories is also an important facet of reliably assessing psychopathology and psychological distress. Methods: This study assesses the effectiveness of a short symptom inventory, the Assessment of Depression Inventory (ADI), to assess random responding. Results: The responses of 335 clinical patients, 150 responses from a feigning population, and 1,000 generated random profiles were compared to determine if the Random and Reliability scales of the ADI could detect adequately random responses. Conclusions: Findings indicate that even scales as short as four items can be used to detect random responses in symptom inventories at levels equivalent to or better than longer multi‐scale inventories. Depression and Anxiety, 2009. Published 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.