An overview of malingering and deception in neuropsychiatric cases

Forensic practitioners must shoulder special responsibilities when evaluating over-stated pathology (e.g., malingering) as well as simulated adjustment. Such determinations may modify or even override other clinical findings. As a result, practitioners must be alert to their own misassumptions that may unintentionally bias their conclusions about response styles. Detection strategies for malingering-based on unlikely or markedly amplified presentations-are highlighted in this article. Given page constraints, assessment methods for feigning are succinctly presented with their applications to administrative, civil, and criminal referrals.

Automated summary

Forensic practitioners have special responsibilities when evaluating over-stated pathology and simulated adjustment, as these determinations can override other clinical findings. This article highlights detection strategies for malingering and presents succinct assessment methods for feigning, applicable to administrative, civil, and criminal cases.