Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psychological Injury: Law and Causality

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Malingering, Feigning, and Response Bias in Psychiatric/ Psychological Injury

Part of the book series: International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine ((LIME,volume 56))

  • 1497 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter, I present other issues related to malingering, such as legal ones, and the admissibility of expert opinions related to malingering. In this regard, begin the chapter, I concentrate on two chapters published in the work of Larrabee (2012a) in which Kaufmann was involved. Next, I focus on two chapters in Morgan and Sweet (2009). In beginning this review of the four mentioned chapters, I use the content-commentary format of the prior chapter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • A.C. Lawrence Leather Co. v. Loveday, 455 S.W. 2d 141 (Tenn. 1970).

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychiatric Association. 1994. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychiatric Association. 2000. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV-TR, 4th ed., text rev. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babikian, T., K.B. Boone, P. Lu, and G. Arnold. 2006. Sensitivity and specificity of various digit span scores in the detection of suspect effort. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 20: 145–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, N.L., M.J. Vasquez, and S.L. Shullman. 2013. Assessing employment discrimination and harassment. In Forensic psychology, Handbook of psychology, vol. 11, 2nd ed, ed. R.K. Otto, I.B. Weiner, and I.B. Weiner, 225–245. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barrash, J., J. Suhr, and K. Manzel. 2004. Detecting poor effort and malingering with an expanded version of the Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLTX): Validation with clinical samples. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 26: 125–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batzel v. Gault, Law No. 195596, Fairfax Circuit Court, 2002 (April 12, 2002 Order).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porath, Y.S., and A. Tellegen. 2008/2011. MMPI-2-RF: Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porath, Y.S., K.W. Greve, K.J. Bianchini, and P.M. Kaufmann. 2009a. The MMPI-2 Symptom Validity Scale (FBS) is an empirically validated measure of overreporting in personal injury litigants and claimants: Reply to Butcher et al. (2008). Psychological Injury and Law 2: 62–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porath, Y.S., K.W. Greve, K.J. Bianchini, and P.M. Kaufmann. 2009b. The MMPI-2 Symptom Validity Scale (FBS) is an empirically validated measure of overreporting in personal injury litigants and claimants: Reply to Williams et al. (2009). Psychological Injury and Law 3: 77–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benton, A.L., K. deS Hamsher, N.R. Varney, and O. Spreen. 1983. Contributions to neuropsychological assessment: A clinical manual. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benton, A.L., A.B. Sivan, K. deS Hamsher, N.R. Varney, and O. Spreen. 1994. Contributions to neuropsychologic assessment: A clinical manual, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boone, K.B. 2011. Clarification or confusion? A review of Rogers, Bender, and Johnson’s a critical analysis of the MND criteria for feigned cognitive impairment: Implications for forensic practice and research. Psychological Injury and Law 4: 157–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J.N., W.G. Dahlstrom, J.R. Graham, A. Tellegen, and B. Kaemmer. 1989. Manual for the restandardized Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: MMPI-2. An interpretive guide. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J.N., J.R. Graham, Y.S. Ben-Porath, A. Tellegen, W.G. Dahlstrom, and G. Kaemmer. 2001. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2: Manual for administration and scoring, 2nd ed. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Call, J.A. 2003. Liability for psychological injury: History of the concept. In Psychological injuries at trial, ed. I.Z. Schultz and D.O. Brady, 40–64. Chicago: American Bar Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corey, D.M., and R. Borum. 2013. Forensic assessment for high-risk occupations. In Forensic psychology, Handbook of psychology, vol. 11, 2nd ed, ed. R.K. Otto and I.B. Weiner, 246–270. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579, 113 S. Ct. 2786 (1993).

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J.J., T.S. McHugh, B.N. Axelrod, and R.A. Hanks. 2012. Performance validity and neuropsychological outcomes in litigants and disability claimants. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 26: 850–865. doi:10.1080/13854046.2012.686631.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebaugh, F., and J. Benjamin. 1937. Trauma and disease 56. As cited in J. A. Call (2003) Liability for psychological injury: History of the concept. In Psychological injury at trial, ed. I.Z. Schultz and D.O. Brady, 40–64. Chicago: American Bar Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erard, R.E. 2012. Expert testimony using the Rorschach Performance Assessment System in psychological injury cases. Psychological Injury and Law 5: 122–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faust, D. 2012. Criteria for appraising scientific status I: Daubert factors. In Coping with psychiatric and psychological testimony, 6th ed, ed. D. Faust, 42–87. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foote, W.E. 2013. Forensic evaluation in Americans with Disabilities Act cases. In Forensic psychology, Handbook of psychology, vol. 11, 2nd ed, ed. R.K. Otto and I.B. Weiner, 271–294. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foote, W.E., and C.R. Lareau. 2013. Psychological evaluation of emotional damages in tort cases. In Forensic psychology, Handbook of psychology, vol. 11, 2nd ed, ed. R.K. Otto and I.B. Weiner, 172–200. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013, 34 ALR 145 (D. C. Cir. 1923).

    Google Scholar 

  • General Electric v. Joiner, 522 U.S. 136 (1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 686N. W. 2d 391 (Mich. 2004).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert v. Derwinski, 1 Vet. App. 49 (1990).

    Google Scholar 

  • Glamann v. Kirk, 29 P.3d 255 (Alaska 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gold, A.D. 2003. Expert evidence in criminal law: The scientific approach. Toronto: Irwin Law.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gold, L.H., and D.W. Shuman. 2009. Evaluating mental health disability in the workplace: Model, process, and analysis. New York: Springer Science + Business Media.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Golz v. Shinseki, 590 F. 3d 1317 at 1323 (2010).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman-Delahunty, J., and W.E. Foote. 2009. Forensic evaluations advance scientific theory: Assessing causation of harm. [In special issue on case-based theory building.] Pragmatic Case Studies in Psychotherapy 5: 38–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman-Delahunty, J., and W.E. Foote. 2011. Evaluation for workplace discrimination and harassment. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, P. 2005. Green’s Word Memory Test for Windows: User’s manual. Edmonton: Green’s.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiffenstein, M.F. 2008. Basics of forensic neuropsychology. In Textbook of clinical neuropsychology, ed. J.E. Morgan and J. Richter, 905–941. New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiffenstein, M.F., and P.M. Kaufmann. 2012. Neuropsychology and the law: Principles of productive attorney-neuropsychologist relations. In Forensic neuropsychology: A scientific approach, 2nd ed, ed. G.J. Larrabee, 23–69. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiffenstein, M.F., W.J. Baker, and T. Gola. 1994. Validation of malingered amnesia measures with a large clinical sample. Psychological Assessment 6: 218–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffin, G.A.E., D.M. Glassmire, E.A. Henderson, and C. McCann. 1997. Rey II: Redesigning the Rey screening test of malingering. Journal of Clinical Psychology 53: 757–766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grove, W.M., D.H. Zald, B.S. Lebow, B.E. Snitz, and C. Nelson. 2000. Clinical versus mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment 12: 19–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heaton, R.K., I. Grant, and C.G. Matthews. 1991. Comprehensive norms for an expanded Halstead-Reitan Battery: Demographic corrections, research findings, and clinical applications. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilbronner, R.L., and G.K. Henry. 2012. Neuropsychological assessment and consultation in forensic practice: A practical approach to work-related injuries. In Neuropsychological assessment of work-related injuries, ed. S.S. Bush and G.L. Iverson, 303–320. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heilbronner, R.L., J.J. Sweet, J.E. Morgan, G.J. Larrabee, S.R. Millis, and Conference Participants. 2009. American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology Consensus Conference Statement on the neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 23: 1093–1129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henry, G.K., R.L. Heilbronner, W. Mittenberg, and C. Enders. 2006. The Henry-Heilbronner Index: A 15-item empirically derived MMPI-2 subscale for identifying probable malingering in personal injury litigants and disability claimants. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 20: 786–797.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill, A.B. 1965. The environment and disease: Association or causation? Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine 58: 295–300.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hiscock, M., and C.K. Hiscock. 1989. Refining the forced-choice method for the detection of malingering. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 11: 967–974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoyt, R.D. 2009. Is the fake bad scale test here to stay? Mass Torts 8(14–15): 23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inman, T.H., C.D. Vickery, D.T.R. Berry, D.G. Lamb, C.L. Edwards, and G.T. Smith. 1998. Development and initial validation of a new procedure for evaluating adequacy of effort given during neuropsychological testing: The Letter Memory Test. Psychological Assessment 10: 128–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Iverson, G.L., and R.T. Lange. 2012. Traumatic brain injury in the workplace. In Neuropsychological assessment of work-related injuries, ed. S.S. Bush and G.L. Iverson, 9–67. New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson v. Mason, Case No. 5:08-cv-5267-JLH (W.D. Ark, 2009) (October 8, 2009 Order).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, P.M. 2012. Admissibility of expert opinions based on neuropsychological evidence. In Forensic neuropsychology: A scientific approach, 2nd ed, ed. G.J. Larrabee, 70–100. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaufmann, P.M., Larrabee, G.J., and Bigler, E.D. 2010. Admissibility and appropriate use of symptom validity science in forensic consulting. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, CE Workshop presented at the 38th Annual INS meeting, Acapulco, Mexico.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kumho Tire Company v. Carmichael, 526 U.S. 137 (1999).

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladner v. Higgins, 71 So.2d 242 (La. App. 1954).

    Google Scholar 

  • Larrabee, G.J. 2000. Forensic neuropsychological assessment. In Clinician’s guide to neuropsychological assessment, 2nd ed, ed. R.D. Vanderploeg, 301–335. Mahwah: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larrabee, G.J. 2003. Detection of malingering using atypical performance patterns on standard neuropsychological tests. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 17: 410–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larrabee, G.J. 2012a. Assessment of malingering. In Forensic neuropsychology: A scientific approach, 2nd ed, ed. G.J. Larrabee, 116–159. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larrabee, G.J. 2012b. Forensic neuropsychology: A scientific approach. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lees-Haley, P.R., L.T. English, and W.J. Glenn. 1991. A Fake Bad Scale for the MMPI-2 for personal injury claimants. Psychological Reports 68: 203–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Limbaugh-Kirker v. Decosta, Case No. 06-CA-000706, Florida 20th Circuit, Lee County (February 9, 2009 Order).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lu, P.H., K.B. Boone, L. Cozolino, and C. Mitchell. 2003. Effectiveness of the Rey Osterrieth Complex Figure Test and the Meyers and Meyers Recognition Trial in the detection of suspect effort. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 17: 426–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mascenti v. Becker, 237 F. 3d 1223 (10th Cir. 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Means v. Gates, 558 S.E.2d 921 (S.C. Ct. App. 2001).

    Google Scholar 

  • Meehl, P.E. 1954. Clinical vs. statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Meyers, J.E., and A. Diep. 2000. Assessment of malingering in chronic pain patients using neuropsychological tests. Applied Neuropsychology 7: 133–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millis, S.R. 2009. What clinicians really need to know about symptom exaggeration, insufficient effort, and malingering: Statistical and measurement matters. In Neuropsychology of malingering casebook, ed. J.E. Morgan and J.J. Sweet, 21–38. New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore v. Shinseki, 555 F. 3d 1369 (2009).

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, J.E., and J.J. Sweet. 2009. Neuropsychology of malingering casebook. New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nason v. Shafranski, Florida 19th Circuit, St. Lucie County (September 11, 2008 Ruling).

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieves-Rodriguez v. Peake, 22 Vet. App. 295 at 304 (2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • Piechowski, L.D. 2013. Disability and worker’s compensation. In Forensic psychology, Handbook of psychology, vol. 11, 2nd ed, ed. R.K. Otto and I.B. Weiner, 201–224. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reitan, R.M., and D. Wolfson. 1993. The Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Test battery: Theory and clinical interpretation, 2nd ed. Tucson: Neuropsychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rey, A. 1941. L’examen psychologique dans les cas d’encephalopathie traumatique. Archives of Psychology 28: 286–340.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., S.D. Bender, and S.F. Johnson. 2011a. A critical analysis of the MND criteria for feigned cognitive impairment: Implications for forensic practice and research. Psychological Injury and Law 4: 147–156.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., S.D. Bender, and S.F. Johnson. 2011b. A commentary on the MND model and the Boone critique: “Saying it doesn’t make it so”. Psychological Injury and Law 4: 162–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohling, M.L., P. Green, L.M. Allen, and G.L. Iverson. 2002. Depressive symptoms and neurocognitive test scores in patients passing symptom validity tests. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 17: 205–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rondinelli, R.D., E. Genovese, R.T. Katz, T.G. Mayer, K.L. Mueller, M.I. Ranavaya, and C.R. Brigham (eds.). 2008. Guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment, 6th ed. Chicago: American Medical Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose v. Figgie International, Inc., 495 S. E.2d 77 (Ga. App. 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Salas v. United States, 974 F.Supp. 202 (USDC W.D. N.Y. 1997).

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, M. 1996. Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test: RAVLT: A handbook. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schutte, C., and B.N. Axelrod. 2013. Use of embedded cognitive symptom validity measures in mild traumatic brain injury. In Mild traumatic brain injury: System validity assessment and malingering, ed. D.A. Carone and S.S. Bush, 159–181. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, D. 2012. What is all the fuss about Daubert?: A re-analysis. Psychological Injury and Law 5: 202–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharland, M.J., and J.D. Gfeller. 2007. A survey of neuropsychologists’ beliefs and practices with respect to the assessment of effort. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 22: 213–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shuman, D.W. 2005. Disability claims in the administrative setting. Psychiatric and Psychological Evidence 9: 14.17–14.22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, S. 1956. Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slick, D.J., G. Hopp, E. Strauss, and G.B. Thompson. 1997/2005. Victoria Symptom Validity Test: Professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solomon v. TK Power, Case No. 06-CA-003088, Florida 4th Circuit, Duval County. (Plaintiff counsel withdraws FBS motion in limine, September 10, 2008).

    Google Scholar 

  • Southwire Co. v. George, 470 S.E. 2d 865 (Ga. 1996).

    Google Scholar 

  • Suhr, J.A., and D. Boyer. 1999. Use of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test in the detection of malingering in student simulator and patient samples. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology 21: 701–708.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, J.S. 2009. Personal injury court: Plaintiff attorney. In Neuropsychology of malingering casebook, ed. J.E. Morgan and J.J. Sweet, 494–507. New York: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Committee on the Judiciary. 2011. Federal rules of evidence. Retrieved from http://judiciary.house.gov/hearings/printers/112th/evidence2011.pdf

  • Thing v. La Chusa, 771 P.2d 814 (Cal. 1989).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tombaugh, T.N. 1996. TOMM: The Test of Memory Malingering manual. North Tonawanda: Multi-Health Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. McCarthy, 50 F.2d 2 (8th Cir. 1931).

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandergracht v. Progressive Express Case No. 02-CA-04552 Florida 13th Circuit, Hillsborough (Ruling to exclude FBS, March 9, 2005).

    Google Scholar 

  • Vickery, C.D., D.T.R. Berry, C.S. Dearth, V.L. Vagnini, R.E. Baser, D.E. Cragar, and S.A. Orey. 2004. Head injury and the ability to feign neuropsychological deficits. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 19: 37–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Victor, T.L., K.B. Boone, J.G. Serpa, J. Buehler, and E.A. Ziegler. 2009. Interpreting the meaning of multiple symptom validity test failure. The Clinical Neuropsychologist 23: 297–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Warrington, E. 1984. Recognition Memory Test manual. Windsor: Nfer-Nelson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams v. Bituminous Casualty Corp., 131 So. 2d 844 (La. App. 2d Cir. 1961).

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams v. CSX Transportation, Inc. Case 04-CA-008892, Florida 13th Circuit, Hillsborough County, (Sept 19, 2007 Order).

    Google Scholar 

  • Worthen, M.D., and R.G. Moering. 2011. A practical guide to conducting VA compensation and pension exams for PTSD and other mental disorders. Psychological Injury and Law 4: 187–216.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, G. 2007. Causality: Concepts, issues, and recommendations. In Causality of psychological injury: Presenting evidence in court, ed. G. Young, A.W. Kane, and K. Nicholson, 49–86. New York: Springer Science + Business Media.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Young, G. 2008a. Causality and causation in law, medicine, psychiatry, and psychology: Progression or regression? Psychological Injury and Law 1: 161–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, G. 2008b. Psychological injury and law: An integrative model. Psychological Injury and Law 1: 150–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, G. 2008c. Somatization, and medically unexplained symptoms in psychological injury: Diagnosis and dynamics. Psychological Injury and Law 1: 161–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Glendon College, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Gerald Young

Authors
  1. Gerald Young
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Young, G. (2014). Psychological Injury: Law and Causality. In: Malingering, Feigning, and Response Bias in Psychiatric/ Psychological Injury. International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine, vol 56. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-7899-3_10

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation