Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology

2018 Edition
| Editors: Jeffrey S. Kreutzer, John DeLuca, Bruce Caplan

Malingering

  • Robert L. HeilbronnerEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57111-9_1004

Synonyms

Dissimulation; Exaggerating; Feigning; Response bias

Definition

Malingering is described as the intentional production of false or grossly exaggerated physical or psychological symptoms, motivated by external incentives (APA 2000). Rewards may include money, drugs, insurance settlement, or avoidance of punishment, work, military service, jury duty, etc. Malingering is difficult to diagnose because it is not easy to gather overt evidence (e.g., patients do not admit to exaggerating or fabricating their symptoms); also, the symptoms are often emotional and mental, although certainly individuals can malinger physical symptoms. There are published diagnostic classification systems (e.g., Bianchini et al. 2005; Slick et al. 1999) that better represent current neuropsychological knowledge regarding malingering indicators than the current version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV-TR, APA 2000). These systems are felt to offer a reliable means of...

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

References and Readings

  1. American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology. (2007). AACN practice guidelines for neuropsychological assessment and consultation. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 21, 209–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed., text revision). Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar
  3. Bianchini, K. J., Greve, K. W., & Glynn, G. (2005). On the diagnosis of malingered pain related disability: Lessons from cognitive malingering research. The Spine Journal, 5, 404–417.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Boone, K. B. (2007). Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment: A neuropsychological perspective. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  5. Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists. (1991). Specialty guidelines for forensic psychologists. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 655–665.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Heilbronner, R. L., Sweet, J. J., Morgan, J. E., Larrabee, G. J., & Millis, S. R. (2009). AACN consensus conference statement on the neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23, 1093–1129.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Larrabee, G. J. (2007). Assessment of malingered neuropsychological deficits. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Millis, S. R. (2009). Assessment of incomplete effort and malingering in the neuropsychological examination. In J. Morgan & J. Ricker (Eds.), Textbook of clinical neuropsychology. New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
  9. Morgan, J. E., & Sweet, J. J. (2009). Neuropsychology of malingering casebook. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  10. Rogers, R. (2008). Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  11. Slick, D. J., Sherman, E. M. S., & Iverson, G. L. (1999). Diagnostic criteria for malingered neurocognitive dysfunction: Proposed standards for clinical practice and research. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 13, 545–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sweet, J. J. (1999). Malignering: Differential diagnosis. In J. Sweet (Ed.), Forensic neuropsychology: Fundamentals and practice. Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chicago Neuropsychology GroupChicagoUSA