We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
The impact of expertise and sufficient information on psychologists' ability to detect malingering.
- Authors
Bourg, Sherrie; Connor, Edward J.; Landis, Edward E.; Bourg, S; Connor, E J; Landis, E E
- Abstract
Twenty-two forensic diplomates and 22 general clinical psychologists were asked to review a variety of psychological data from one of four cases (two cases of malingering and two cases of legal insanity) to determine whether data suggested malingering or insanity. Of the 44 psychologists who reviewed cases, 86.4% accurately determined whether their protocol was from a malingerer or an insane person. Forensic diplomates and clinical psychologists were equally accurate in their determinations; only three subjects from each group misidentified their case. In spite of their success, confidence levels for both groups were reported as moderate. These results contradict previous studies that have found psychologists to not only be poor detectors of malingering, but also overconfident in their ability to detect it. It is believed that the success of psychologists in this study compared to previous studies was due to improved methodology.
- Subjects
UNITED States; INSANITY (Law); MALINGERING; MALINGERING diagnosis; PSYCHOLOGISTS; CRIMINAL liability; EXPERT evidence; CLINICAL psychology; SPECIALISTS; FORENSIC sciences; FORENSIC medicine; FORENSIC psychiatry
- Publication
Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 1995, Vol 13, Issue 4, p505
- ISSN
0735-3936
- Publication type
journal article
- DOI
10.1002/bsl.2370130406