Abstract

A reflection on the exchange between Larrabee et al. (2017) and Nichols (2017) is provided by a clinical psychologist who co-authored an early critique questioning the validity of the FBS as a measure of over reporting and who, based on subsequent studies demonstrating the effectiveness of the FBS in identifying non-credible report of somatic and cognitive complaints, changed his opinion regarding the utility of the FBS/FBS-r as a symptom validity measure. Given the accumulated evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of the FBS/FBS-r as a symptom validity measure, reasons for the continued debate over the validity and utility of the FBS/FBS-r are discussed.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.