Confronting Patients About Insufficient Effort: The Impact on Subsequent Symptom Validity and Memory Performance

a Department of Psychology , University of Utah , Salt Lake City , UT , USA.
The Clinical Neuropsychologist (Impact Factor: 1.72). 10/2012; 26(8). DOI: 10.1080/13854046.2012.722230
Source: PubMed


Symptom validity tests (SVTs) are commonly used to assess effort in neuropsychological evaluations. However, no empirical research or official guidelines exist about how clinicians should proceed if a patient produces a non-valid SVT result. The purpose of this study was to examine whether confronting patients immediately after scoring in a non-valid range on a SVT would have an impact on subsequent symptom validity and memory tests performance. Archival patient data for 507 adults with clinically definite multiple sclerosis (MS) (ages 18-76) were examined. All patients completed the Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT), the Wechsler Memory Scale, 3rd edition (WMS III), and the Beck Depression Inventory, 2nd edition (BDI II). Although the majority (89%) of patients produced valid VSVT scores (the Valid group), 56 patients produced non-valid VSVT scores. Due to a change in clinical procedure, 28 of the 56 were confronted regarding their non-valid VSVT performances and were asked to complete the test a second time (the CONF group), while the remaining 28 proceeded with testing as usual following a non-valid score (the N-CONF group). Results showed that 68% of the CONF group produced valid VSVT scores on re-administration, as well as memory performances that were comparable to those of the Valid group. In contrast the N-CONF group produced memory scores that were significantly below the Valid group. This is the first study to provide empirical support for the effectiveness of intervention when patients exhibit inadequate effort on SVTs in clinical, non-forensic settings.

Download full-text


Available from: Yana Suchy,
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The term factitious or induced illness (FII) has replaced Munchausen's syndrome by proxy, originally described by Meadow in 1977. We review evidence for the existence of this clinical problem, which is a form of child abuse. We described the epidemiology of FII and the methods of assessment of the perpetrators, and outline the psychological and demographic characteristics of these individuals. Three quarters of these (mostly women) have factitious or somatoform disorders, 90% or more severe personality disorders (particularly cluster B), and half report histories of repeated self-harm. One particular characteristic noted in over half the women with FII is the tendency to pathological lying (pseudologia fantastica), which in some can be traced to adolescence. There is an important relation between factitious illness in an adult and factitious or induced illness in a child, and the detection of one should provoke a search for the other. Families are selected for intervention where a psychiatric formulation is apparent and a treatment plan can be applied to this. Factors that influence selection include the potential for working in partnership, where there is some degree of parental acknowledgement of problems, and where better prognostic factors exist. Total denial of maltreatment or any problems means that intervention is not feasible, except in the mildest of cases. If treatment aimed at reunification is embarked upon, a clear treatment plan with explicit criteria for success, shared with all professionals is necessary. Effective management includes containment of the fabricator's long term tendency to somatize or deceive, harnessing the strength of the non-abusive carer or family members, and management of any parenting breakdown that has accompanied FII behaviour. Long-term follow up by primary health, paediatric and child and family psychiatric teams will be necessary to maintain the child's progress and prevent future relapse, or a return to somatization by the abuser.
    Psychiatry 02/2006; 5(2):60-65. DOI:10.1383/psyt.2006.5.2.60
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: During the last decades, symptom validity has become an important topic in the neuropsychological and psychiatric literature with respect to how it relates to malingering, factitious disorder, and somatoform complaints. We conducted a survey among neuropsychologists (N = 515) from six European countries (Germany, Italy, Denmark, Finland, Norway, and the Netherlands). We queried the respondents about the tools they used to evaluate symptom credibility in clinical and forensic assessments and other issues related to symptom validity testing (SVT). Although the majority of the respondents demonstrated technical knowledge about symptom validity, a sizeable minority of the respondents relied on outdated notions (e.g., the idea that clinicians can determine symptom credibility based on intuitive judgment). There is little consensus among neuropsychologists on how to instruct patients when they are administered SVTs and how to handle test failure. Our findings indicate that the issues regarding how to administer and communicate the SVT results to patients warrant systematic research.
    Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 09/2013; 28(8). DOI:10.1093/arclin/act073 · 1.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We explored the effects of feedback on symptom reporting. Two experimental groups (n = 15 each) were given a scenario with the option to exaggerate symptoms. Compared with a control condition (n = 15), both groups scored significantly higher on the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology. Next, one group was confronted in a sympathetic way about their symptom validity test failure, whereas the other group was confronted in a neutral manner. Both groups subsequently completed the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI). BSI scores of both feedback groups remained significantly higher than those of control participants. Participants who had been provided with sympathetic feedback or neutral feedback did not differ in their BSI scores. Even participants who indicated during the exit interview that they had given up symptom exaggeration attained significantly higher BSI scores than those of controls, indicating that exaggeration has residual effects that are resistant to corrective feedback. We discuss cognitive dissonance as a model for understanding the residual effects of symptom exaggeration.
    Applied Neuropsychology 11/2013; DOI:10.1080/23279095.2013.816850 · 1.97 Impact Factor
Show more