Negative Impression Management Research Articles

29 Examining the Relationship between Symptom and Performance Validity Measures Across Referral Subtypes

Objective:Performance validity (PVT) and symptom validity tests (SVT) have become standard practice in assessing credibility of neuropsychological profiles and symptom report. While PVTs assess cognitive task engagement, SVTs assess credibility of patient symptom report. Although prior research aimed to conceptualize the relationship between the two validity measure types, it generally focused on SVTs from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2 &RF) and the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptoms (SIMS; Ord et al., 2021, MMPI-2; Van Dyke et al., 2013). Further studies have demonstrated mixed results, with many studies concluding that symptom and performance validity are separate but related constructs. The current study aimed to assess the relationship between PVTs and SVTs utilizing symptom validity measures from the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) across three samples, including neurodevelopmental, psychiatric, and traumatic brain injury groups.Participants and Methods:Participants included 634 individuals consecutively referred for neuropsychological assessment who completed the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) and the PAI (mean Age = 41.7, SD = 15.7; mean Education = 13.7, SD = 2.7; 53% female; 89% Caucasian). Participants were divided into three groups based on referral, including neurodevelopmental (mean Age = SD = 10.7; mean Education = 13.4, SD = 2.5; 39% female; 79% Caucasian), psychiatric (mean Age = 44.7, SD = 15.0; mean Education = 13.8, SD = 2.8; 58% female; 90% Caucasian), and traumatic brain injury samples (mean Age = SD = 15.5; mean Education = 13.3, SD = 2.3; 50% female; 91% Caucasian). Four structural equation models (latent variable models) were constructed. The first model was fit across the entire sample while the remaining three were fit for the aforementioned subsamples. TOMM trials modeled the performance validity latent variable while SVTs from the PAI modeled the symptom validity latent variable (Positive Impression Management and Defensiveness Index modeled underreporting; Negative Impression Management, Malingering Index, and Cognitive Bias Scale modeled overreporting).Results:In the full sample model overreporting significantly predicted performance validity (p < 0.001, r = -0.31), indicating higher symptom overreporting related to poorer performance validity while symptom underreporting did not significantly predict performance validity (p = 0.09, r = 0.08). In the neurodevelopmental model overreporting did not significantly predict performance validity (p = 0.44, r = 0.10). Further, symptom underreporting did not significantly predict performance validity (p = 0.40, r = 0.10). Similarly, for the TBI model, overreporting did not significantly predict performance validity (p = 0.82, r = -0.02) and symptom underreporting did not significantly predict performance validity (p = 0.50, r = -0.08). For the psychiatric sample symptom underreporting did not significantly predict performance validity (p = 0.06, r = 0.11); however, symptom overreporting significantly predicted performance validity (p < 0.001, r = - 0.39).Conclusions:The current study expands on prior research comparing the relationship between SVTs and PVTs in neuropsychological evaluation utilizing SVTs from the PAI. Results of the present study suggest the relationship between the SVTs and PVTs varies by referral type and further supports using both PVTs and SVTs in neuropsychological assessment.

1 Psychometric comparison of the long and short forms of the Personality Assessment Inventory in a neuropsychiatric population

Objective:The Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991; 2007) is a 344 item self-report measure of personality, psychopathology, and factors affecting treatment. The PAI short form (PAI-SF) contains the first 160 items of the PAI and is often favoured as a screening tool or brief version to mitigate respondent burden and fatigue. The PAI has been psychometrically validated among numerous populations (Slavin-Mulford et al., 2012), while psychometric research on the PAI-SF is gradually emerging. The psychometric properties of the PAI-SF range from adequate to strong in psychiatric (Sinclair et al., 2009), forensic (Sinclair et al., 2010), outpatient and nonclinical (Ward et al., 2018), and stroke (Udala et al., 2020) samples. To advance research validating the PAI-SF among diverse populations, this project investigated the psychometric comparability between the PAI and the PAI-SF in a neuropsychiatric population. Based on previous literature, it was hypothesized that the PAI-SF would produce congruent results to the PAI in this sample.Participants and Methods:For this study, participant files (N=214) were collected retrospectively from short- and long-term residential psychiatric and substance use treatment facilities in Minnesota for patients with neurological and cognitive concerns referred for neuropsychological evaluation. The PAI-SF was scored using the first 160 items from a patient’s long-form PAI protocol. To determine the psychometric comparability of long- and short-forms, paired-samples t-tests, intraclass correlations, and percent agreement in clinical classification between forms were analyzed.Results:Analyses of participant data found that intra-class correlations ranged from .87 to .98 for each subscale on the PAI when compared to the PAI-SF, demonstrating good to excellent reliability between forms. Symptoms are considered clinically elevated when they exceed the clinical significance threshold for a subscale (typically a T-score of 70+). Agreement between the PAI and PAI-SF subscales in the classification of clinically elevated scores ranged from 86% to 100%. When forms did not agree, the PAI-SF was more likely to be clinically significant relative to the PAI. A comparison of subscale means between forms was examined by independent samples T-tests with a Bonferroni correction. Results revealed significant differences between the PAI and PAI-SF on one validity scale (Negative Impression Management), three clinical scales (Anxiety; Depression; Antisocial Features), and one treatment scale (Treatment Rejection).Conclusions:Results demonstrated that the PAI and PAI-SF have high reliability between forms in a neuropsychiatric population. Although mean scores differed on a small number of subscales between the PAI and PAI-SF, differences did not appear sufficiently large enough to shift clinical classifications, as the two forms performed similarly in their identification of clinically elevated scales. Findings align with previous literature and suggest that the PAI-SF may perform adequately in a neuropsychiatric population if brevity or participant burden is of concern. However, caution is warranted when making clinical decisions with the PAI-SF as more research is needed.

Examination of the relationship between symptom and performance validity measures across referral subtypes

ABSTRACT Introduction The extent to which performance validity (PVT) and symptom validity (SVT) tests measure separate constructs is unclear. Prior research using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2 & RF) suggested that PVTs and SVTs are separate but related constructs. However, the relationship between Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) SVTs and PVTs has not been explored. This study aimed to replicate previous MMPI research using the PAI, exploring the relationship between PVTs and overreporting SVTs across three subsamples, neurodevelopmental (attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)/learning disorder), psychiatric, and mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Methods Participants included 561 consecutive referrals who completed the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) and the PAI. Three subgroups were created based on referral question. The relationship between PAI SVTs and the PVT was evaluated through multiple regression analysis. Results The results demonstrated the relationship between PAI symptom overreporting SVTs, including Negative Impression Management (NIM), Malingering Index (MAL), and Cognitive Bias Scale (CBS), and PVTs varied by referral subgroup. Specifically, overreporting on CBS but not NIM and MAL significantly predicted poorer PVT performance in the full sample and the mTBI sample. In contrast, none of the overreporting SVTs significantly predicted PVT performance in the ADHD/learning disorder sample but conversely, all SVTs predicted PVT performance in the psychiatric sample. Conclusions The results partially replicated prior research comparing SVTs and PVTs and suggested that constructs measured by SVTs and PVTs vary depending upon population. The results support the necessity of both PVTs and SVTs in clinical neuropsychological practice.

Negative impression management: the troublemaker as trouble seeker

Extending the discourse on impression management, we explore a counter-intuitive workplace deviance phenomenon whereby employees aim to get themselves fired from their jobs. Employing exploratory qualitative methods, we collected evidence from employees who practice deliberate negative impression management (NIM), from parties who witnessed NIM, and from Human Resource (HR) managers who have dealt with NIM, in two distinct geographies: Israel and Taiwan. The paper outlines the diverse sources of NIM, its specified and unspecified aims, its actual consequences, and its prevalence. This unique dataset offers insights that extend our understanding of impression management theory and practice, serving as a mean to explicating a variant of deviant behavior at the workplace and providing information to HR personnel on ways to engage with the issue.

Grooved Pegboard adds incremental value over memory-apparent performance validity tests in predicting psychiatric symptom report

The present study evaluated whether Grooved Pegboard (GPB), when used as a performance validity test (PVT), can incrementally predict psychiatric symptom report elevations beyond memory-apparent PVTs. Participants (N = 111) were military personnel and were predominantly White (84%), male (76%), with a mean age of 43 (SD = 12) and having on average 16 years of education (SD = 2). Individuals with disorders potentially compromising motor dexterity were excluded. Participants were administered GPB, three memory-apparent PVTs (Medical Symptom Validity Test, Non-Verbal Medical Symptom Validity Test, Reliable Digit Span), and a symptom validity test (Personality Assessment Inventory Negative Impression Management [NIM]). Results from the three memory-apparent PVTs were entered into a model for predicting NIM, where failure of two or more PVTs was categorized as evidence of non-credible responding. Hierarchical regression revealed that non-dominant hand GPB T-score incrementally predicted NIM beyond memory-apparent PVTs (F(2,108) = 16.30, p < .001; R2 change = .05, β = −0.24, p < .01). In a second hierarchical regression, GPB performance was dichotomized into pass or fail, using T-score cutoffs (≤29 for either hand, ≤31 for both). Non-dominant hand GPB again predicted NIM beyond memory-apparent PVTs (F(2,108) = 18.75, p <.001; R2 change = .08, β = −0.28, p < .001). Results indicated that noncredible/failing GPB performance adds incremental value over memory-apparent PVTs in predicting psychiatric symptom report.

Does the leader's negative feedback benefit employees' creative process engagement? The mediating effect of impression management motivation

PurposeDrawing from impression management theory, this study examines how the leader's negative feedback affects the employees' creative process engagement (CPE) and whether impression management motivation plays a mediating role in this process. In addition, the moderating role of face consciousness is analyzed in the relationship between negative feedback and impression management motivation.Design/methodology/approachA time-lagged design with three data-collection points was implemented based on a dataset of two studies of follower–leader pairs (Ns = 165, 30 and 682, 89) in China. Ordinary least squares regression analyses were conducted to test the hypotheses.FindingsThe leader's negative feedback positively affected employees' CPE via impression management motivation. The relationship was stronger when face consciousness salience was high.Practical implicationsThis study suggests that negative feedback is also valuable. Supervisors should learn how to stimulate employees' impression management motivation when delivering negative feedback and ensure that employees know that CPE can bring help and status rewards. Moreover, supervisors may consider using face strategies when providing negative feedback.Originality/valueThis study provides new insights into the association between the leader's negative feedback and employees' CPE by impression management as a psychological mechanism and face consciousness as an important boundary condition. It lays a foundation for further systematic research on CPE based on sociological theory.

Take Their Word for It: The Inventory of Problems Provides Valuable Information on Both Symptom and Performance Validity

This study was designed to compare the validity of the Inventory of Problems (IOP-29) and its newly developed memory module (IOP-M) in 150 patients clinically referred for neuropsychological assessment. Criterion groups were psychometrically derived based on established performance and symptom validity tests (PVTs and SVTs). The criterion-related validity of the IOP-29 was compared to that of the Negative Impression Management scale of the Personality Assessment Inventory (NIM PAI ) and the criterion-related validity of the IOP-M was compared to that of Trial-1 on the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM-1). The IOP-29 correlated significantly more strongly (z = 2.50, p = .01) with criterion PVTs than the NIM PAI (r IOP-29 = .34; r NIM- PAI = .06), generating similar overall correct classification values (OCC IOP-2 9: 79–81%; OCC NIM-PAI : 71–79%). Similarly, the IOP-M correlated significantly more strongly (z = 2.26, p = .02) with criterion PVTs than the TOMM-1 (r IOP-M = .79; r TOMM-1 = .59), generating similar overall correct classification values (OCC IOP-M : 89–91%; OCC TOMM-1 : 84–86%). Findings converge with the cumulative evidence that the IOP-29 and IOP-M are valuable additions to comprehensive neuropsychological batteries. Results also confirm that symptom and performance validity are distinct clinical constructs, and domain specificity should be considered while calibrating instruments.

Relationship of Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) over-reporting scales to performance validity testing in a military neuropsychological sample

ABSTRACT This study evaluated the Personality Assessment Inventory’s (PAI) symptom validity-based over-reporting scales with concurrently administered performance validity testing in a sample of active-duty military personnel seen within a neuropsychology clinic. We utilize two measures of performance validity to identify problematic performance validity (pass all/fail any) in 468 participants. Scale means, sensitivity, specificity, predictive value, and risk ratios were contrasted across symptom validity-based over-reporting scales. Results indicate that the Negative Impression Management (NIM), Malingering Index (MAL), and Multiscale Feigning Index (MFI) scales are the best at classifying failed performance validity testing with medium to large effects (d = .61–.73). In general, these scales demonstrated high specificity and low sensitivity. Roger’s Discriminant Function (RDF) had negligible group differences and poor classification. The Feigned Adult ADHD index (FAA) performed inconsistently. This study provides support for the use of several PAI over-reporting scales at detecting probable patterns of performance-based invalid responses within a military sample. Military clinicians using NIM, MAL, or MFI are confident that those who elevate these scales at recommended cut scores are likely to fail concurrent performance validity testing. Use of the Feigned Adult FAA and RDF scales is discouraged due to their poor or mixed performance.

Detection of Feigning of Different Symptom Presentations With the PAI and IOP-29.

This study examined the effectiveness of the negative distortion measures from the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) and Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29), by investigating data from a community and a forensic sample, across three different symptom presentations (i.e., feigned depression, posttraumatic stress disorder [PTSD], and schizophrenia). The final sample consisted of 513 community-based individuals and 288 inmates (total N = 801); all were administered the PAI and the IOP-29 in an honest or feigning conditions. Statistical analyses compared the average scores of each measure by symptom presentation and data source (i.e., community vs. forensic sample) and evaluated diagnostic efficiency statistics. Results suggest that the PAI Negative Impression Management scale and the IOP-29 are the most effective measures across all symptom presentations, whereas the PAI Malingering Index and Rogers Discriminant Function generated less optimal results, especially when considering feigned PTSD. Practical implications are discussed.

"Why Are You Running Away From Social Media?" Analysis of the Factors Influencing Social Media Fatigue: An Empirical Data Study Based on Chinese Youth.

In the digital era, social media is increasingly permeating the fragmented lives of people. While enjoying the convenience and speed of online socializing, people are gradually surrounded by a variety of information. Through observations and interviews, we found that young people are plagued by negative comparisons, interaction dysfunction, information overload, social overload, and intergenerational communication in the process of participating in social media. Increasing numbers of young people feel overwhelmed in the process of online socialization and the phenomenon of social media fatigue (SMF) gradually spreads. This study combined the existing relevant theoretical models of the influencing factors of SMF and the real-life empirical materials of youth groups. Furthermore, this study enriched into new research variables and validated the data of relevant variables through a questionnaire survey (n = 663) to explore the influencing factors of SMF of youth groups and inductively analyze the inner logic of the emergence of SMF among such groups. It was found that negative comparison, interaction dysregulation, information overload, social overload, self-efficacy, and impression management all had significant positive effects on SMF behaviors, while privacy anxiety and intergenerational communication had no significant positive effects on SMF behaviors.

Impression Management and Group Member Performance: Examining the Role of Collective Altruism

There is debate in the literature regarding when impression management motivates affiliative behavior (i.e., helping others) and how well individuals perform organizational tasks when the driving motivation is to “look good.” Based on social exchange and sensemaking theories and research, and considering the increasing use of groups and teams in today’s workplaces, we propose that characteristics of the groups to which members belong enable them to make sense of, and interpret, their collective environment and subsequently determine how they should behave to look their best. Specifically, we identify collective altruism as an important group characteristic affecting how individuals’ positive (i.e., self-promotion, exemplification, ingratiation) and negative (i.e., supplication, intimidation) impression management tactics influence their willingness to help fellow group members. Findings from a sample of entrepreneurial networking groups illustrate that the relationship between positive impression management tactics and affiliative behavior was more strongly positive when collective altruism was higher, rather than lower; and, the relationship between negative impression management tactics and affiliative behavior was positive when collective altruism was higher, and not significant when it was lower. We discuss implications for both theory and practice.

Role of Power and LMX on the use of Upward Impression Management Tactics

The human being is full of emotions and expressions. An individual expresses his/her emotion through certain behavior and expect that others would be able to understand his/her emotion. People generally able to capture the exact emotion of the person based on expressed behavior. Impression management is also a behavior that reflects or articulates the image of an individual. In present scenario, individuals are more inclined towards building their image at the workplace. Therefore, they use various impression management for projecting different image. However, there are several factors, which affect the selection of a particulate impression tactic. This research paper is based on an experimental study, which is designed to assess the impact of the leader’s perceived power and leader member-exchange (LMX) on the selection of impression management tactics by subordinates for getting positive performance rating from their leaders. To the best of our knowledge, the impact of the perceived power of the leader and LMX on IM tactics is being assessed for the first time. Leader’s power and LMX, are manipulated through video clips. This experimental study was conducted on graduate and postgraduate students. Results show that the use of IM by subordinates significantly depends on the relationship between leader and subordinate as well as the perceived leaders’ power by the subordinates. As results state that subordinates use positive impression management tactics (ingratiation and self-promotion) more for the leaders with high LMX & high perceived power. Subordinates may also use negative impression management tactics (supplication and intimidation) for the leaders with low LMX & low perceived power for receiving positive performance rating. Keywords: Perceived leader’s power; leader member exchange; impression management tactics

Specificity and item endorsement rates of personality assessment inventory over-reporting scales across ethnic, gender, and diagnostic groups in a forensic inpatient sample

The accurate evaluation of response style, particularly with respect to overreporting, is imperative in forensic settings wherein an external incentive to feign exists. Given the high cost of false positive errors in this context, as well as the associated cost of false negative errors, evaluators need to ensure that overreporting methods are effective with the unique patient populations with whom they work. Complicating this issue is that forensic samples often differ in predictable ways from the normative samples upon which typical psychological assessment instruments were normed. The purpose of the present investigation was to evaluate the specificity of the overreporting indices on the Personality Assessment Inventory, one of the most commonly used personality inventories, in a forensic sample with no ostensible incentive to feign. Although item endorsement and configural elevations on the Negative Impression Management (NIM) scale and the Malingering Index (MAL) were associated with genuine psychopathology, results indicated that the overall specificity estimates across groups were generally adequate. Further, and consistent with prior research, Rogers Discriminant Function (RDF) performed poorly in this sample.

Introducing Psychological Injury and Law

Psychology injury and law is a specialized forensic psychology field that concerns reaching legal thresholds for actionable negligent or related injuries having a psychological component, such as for posttraumatic stress disorder, chronic pain, and mild traumatic brain injury. The presenting psychological injuries have to be related causally to the event at issue, and if pre-existing injuries, vulnerabilities, or psychopathologies are involved at baseline, they have to be exacerbated by the event at issue, or added to in unique ways such that the psychological effects of the event at issue go beyond the de minimis range. The articles in this special issue deal with the legal aspects of cases of psychological injury, including in legal steps and procedures to follow and the causal question of whether an index event is responsible for claimed injuries. They deal with the major psychological injuries, and others such as somatic symptom disorder and factitious disorder. They address best practices in assessment such that testimony and reports proffered to court are probative, i.e., helping the trier of fact to arrive at judicious decisions. The articles in the special issue review the reliable and valid tests in the field, including those that examine negative response bias, negative impression management, symptom exaggeration, feigning, and possible malingering. The latter should be ruled in only through the most compelling evidence in the whole file of an examinee, including test results and inconsistencies. The court will engage in admissibility challenges when testimony, reports, opinions, conclusions, and recommendations do not meet the expected standards of being scientific, comprehensive, impartial, and having considered all the reliable data at hand. The critical topics in the field that cut across the articles in the special issue relate to (a) conceptual and definitional issues, (b) confounds and confusions, (c) assessment and testing, (d) feigning/malingering, and (e) medicolegal/legal/court implications. The articles in the special issue are reviewed in terms of these five themes.

A-212 The Relationships between PAI over-reporting SVTs and PVTs in a Military Sample

Abstract Objective Recent research has worked to explore the relationships between symptom and performance validity testing. The current study sought to examine the association between PAI over-reporting SVTs and well validated stand-alone and embedded PVTs. Methods Retrospective review of 468 active duty Army cases referred for outpatient neuropsychological testing at a Military Health Center. Each subject was administered the PAI, MSVT, NV-MSVT, and RBANS Effort Index. Groups were defined in two ways, as valid (0 PVT failures) or invalid (1 or more PVT failures) and based on the number of failed PVTs (0, 1, 2, and 3). Results Partial results are summarized here for the valid/invalid analysis. The PAI Negative Impression Management (NIM), Multi-Feigning Index (MFI), and Malingering Index (MAL) differed significantly as a function of PVT performance (p &amp;lt; .05). Differences on Rogers Discriminant Function were not significant. AUC for NIM, MAL, and MFI were .69, .66, and .54 (respectively). AUC for RDF was unacceptable at .49. At a T-score of 64 the NIM scale had specificity of .91, sensitivity of .32 and at a T-score of 59 the MAL had specificity of .91 and sensitivity of .14. Conclusions There appears an association between PVTs and PAI over-reporting scales, such that elevations on the NIM, MAL, and MFI scales are related to PVT failure. However, the sensitives of these scales are limited in predicting PVT failure. To this end, the current data are in line with previous studies that indicate the need to administer both performance and symptom validity scales.

A-220 Screening for Cognitive Over-Reporting with the Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory

Abstract Objective Considerable research in veteran and military populations has focused on the development of embedded symptom validity indicators on the Neurobehavioral Symptom Inventory (NSI) including the low frequency (LOW6), negative impression management (NIM5), and validity (VAL10) scales. These measures have been less studied in other clinical settings. This study examined embedded NSI validity scales in a rehabilitation setting. Method Participants (N = 94) underwent outpatient neuropsychological evaluation using the NSI, MMPI-2-RF, and Memory Complaints Inventory (MCI), among other measures. Cognitive symptom over-reporting was psychometrically determined if the MCI (average score &amp;gt; 39) and MMPI-2-RF (RBS &amp;gt; 79 T or FBS &amp;gt; 79 T) were elevated. Results Thirty-four participants (36%) met over-reporting criteria. NSI total scores were significantly different between over-reporting (M = 48.7, SD = 12.2) and non-over-reporting (M = 28.1, SD = 14.3) groups (p &amp;lt; .0001, d = 1.5). Receiver operating characteristic analysis using embedded NSI scales to classify cases showed area under the curve (AUC) values of .82 for LOW6 and NIM5, and .83 for VAL10. A VAL10 cutoff (&amp;gt;18) showed sensitivity of 56% and 90% specificity. VAL10 scores of 4 or below demonstrated 100% sensitivity and may be considered evidence that additional assessment of cognitive over-reporting is not needed. Conclusion Findings support the utility of NSI validity indicators to screen for cognitive over-reporting in a rehabilitation setting.

Hold Your Horses: Negative Anticipatory Impression Management and its Motivations

An emergent stream of research shows that managers engage in various impression management strategies to manage external perceptions by placing their firms in the best possible light. Drawing from this work, we develop theory around when and why managers may choose to engage in a novel form of preemptive impression management—negative anticipatory impression management (NAIM)—to recalibrate stakeholder expectations. Specifically, we posit that managers use actions and communications that deliberately convey pessimism to reduce the liability of inflated expectations. We then propose two factors—media coverage and the manager’s regulatory focus—that act as moderators. This underscores how managers use negative information to their advantage and further grounds the relevance of executive personality in impression management decision-making.

Psychological predictors of functional outcomes in service members with traumatic brain injury

ABSTRACT Primary Objective Research is increasingly demonstrating the significant impact that non-medical factors can have on outcomes of service members (SMs) with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Thus, the current study examined which demographic, TBI-related factors, and psychological variables are most predictive of functional outcomes. Research Design Retrospective database analysis from medical chart review. Methods and Procedures One hundred forty-one patients who received rehabilitation services at an outpatient TBI military treatment facility between 2013 and 2018. Data collected included demographic variables, time since injury, neuropsychological measures, psychological diagnoses, Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) scores, and Walter Reed Functional Impairment Scale (FIS). Hierarchical linear regression models were used to predict functional outcomes (measured by FIS total, work, social functioning scales). Main Outcomes and Results Results indicated that comorbid PTSD diagnosis and PAI Negative Impression Management (NIM) score were predictive of total functional, work, and social outcomes, over and above demographic and TBI-related factors. Conclusions Current findings confirmed the importance of evaluating and treating psychological factors, as well as exploring one’s responding style (NIM), when managing chronic mTBI in SMs. Given ongoing findings of psychological underpinnings to mTBI outcome, there is further need to focus on early interventions to optimize psychological and functional outcomes for SMs.

Detecting Feigning in Adolescents on the Personality Assessment Inventory—Adolescent Form

Much of the research on identifying feigning in psychological assessment has focused on adults with less attention to adolescents. The purpose of the present study is to expand the limited literature on detecting feigning in adolescents using the Personality Assessment Inventory – Adolescent. The study included 114 nonclinical adolescents (ages 15 to 18) recruited from high schools in the Midwest who were randomly assigned to experimental groups: honest nonclinical, uncoached feigning, and coached feigning. 50 randomly selected individuals with depression from the PAI-A clinical standardization sample were included as the honest clinical group. Sample demographics included a mean age of 16.64 years; 51.2% young men, 48.2% young women; 85.4% Caucasian, 6.7% African American, 5.5% Hispanic, and 2.4% Asian. 80% of feigning profiles reported clinical levels of depression. MANOVA results showed strong support for the Rogers Discriminant Function (RDF; d range = 1.85–2.05). The Negative Impression Management (NIM) scale also demonstrated promise (d range = 0.77–1.08), while the smallest effects for detecting feigning were found for the Malingering Index (d range = 0.58–0.70). The negative distortion indices showed good utility in differentiating between groups. Cut-scores and pragmatic implications are presented.

Discriminating malingered attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder from genuine symptom reporting using novel Personality Assessment Inventory validity measures

It is now widely understood that ADHD can be feigned easily and convincingly. Despite this, almost no methods exist to assist clinicians in identifying when such behavior occurs. Recently, new validity indicators specific to feigned ADHD were reported for the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI). Derived from a logistic regression, these algorithms are said to have excellent specificity and good sensitivity in identifying feigned ADHD. However, these authors compared those with genuine ADHD only to nonclinical undergraduate students (asked to respond honestly or asked to simulate ADHD); no criterion group of definite malingerers was included. We therefore investigated these new validity indicators with 331 postsecondary students who underwent assessment for possible ADHD and compared scores of those who were eventually diagnosed with ADHD (n = 111) to those who were not [Clinical controls (66), Definite malingerers (36); No diagnosis (117)]. The two proposed PAI algorithms were found to have poor positive predictive value (.19 and .17). Self-report validity measures from the Connors’ Adult Attention Rating Scale, and the Negative Impression Management scale on the PAI returned more positive results. Overall, more research is needed to better identify noncredible ADHD presentation, as the PAI-based methods proposed by Aita et al. appear inadequate as symptom validity measures.