Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology

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

Hiscock Forced-Choice Test

  • Merrill HiscockEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57111-9_1990

Synonyms

Digit memory test; Hiscock malingering test

Description

The Hiscock Forced-Choice Test (hereafter referred to as the Hiscock test) was described in a case report (Hiscock and Hiscock 1989). Although the authors subsequently referred to the test as the Digit Memory Test (DMT), it is commonly known as the Hiscock malingering test or simply the Hiscock test. The test has never been distributed as a commercial product, but the senior author has responded to requests for information about the test by sending instructions for constructing the stimuli, administering the test, and interpreting the results.

The Hiscock test comprises 72 stimulus cards, each of which contains a five-digit target. The target, which varies randomly from one card to the next, is presented for 5 s. After a variable delay, the patient is shown a response card containing two five-digit numbers, one of which is identical to the previous target. The other five-digit number on the response card (the foil) always...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References and Readings

  1. Binder, L. M., & Pankratz, L. (1987). Neuropsychological evidence of a factitious memory complaint. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 9, 167–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Binder, L. M., & Willis, S. C. (1991). Assessment of motivation after financially compensable minor head trauma. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 3, 175–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brady, J. P., & Lind, D. L. (1961). Experimental analysis of hysterical blindness. Archives of General Psychiatry, 4, 331–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. D’Arcy, R. C. N., & McGlone, J. (2000). Profound amnesia does not impair performance on 36-item digit memory test: A test of malingered memory. Brain and Cognition, 44, 54–58.Google Scholar
  5. Grosz, H. J., & Zimmerman, J. (1965). Experimental analysis of hysterical blindness: A follow-up report and new experimental data. Archives of General Psychiatry, 13, 255–260.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Guilmette, T. J., Hart, K. J., & Giuliano, A. J. (1993). Malingering detection: The use of a forced-choice method in identifying organic versus simulated memory impairment. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 7, 59–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Guilmette, T. J., Hart, K. J., Giuliano, A. J., & Leininger, B. E. (1994). Detecting simulated memory impairment: Comparison of the Rey Fifteen-Item Test and the Hiscock Forced-Choice Procedure. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 8, 283–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hiscock, M., & Hiscock, C. K. (1989). Refining the forced-choice method for the detection of malingering. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 11, 967–974.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hiscock, C. K., Rustemier, P. J., & Hiscock, M. (1993). Determination of criminal responsibility: Application of the two-alternative forced-choice stratagem. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 20, 391–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Hiscock, C. K., Branham, J. D., & Hiscock, M. (1994). Detection of feigned cognitive impairment: The two-alternative forced-choice method compared with selected conventional tests. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 16, 95–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Inman, T. H., & Berry, D. T. R. (2002). Cross-validation of indicators of malingering: A comparison of nine neuropsychological tests, four tests of malingering, and behavioral observations. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 17, 1–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Inman, T. H., Vickery, C. D., Berry, D. T. R., Lamb, D. G., Edwards, C. L., & Smith, G. T. (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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lezak, M. D. (1983). Neuropsychological assessment (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Pankratz, L. (1979). Symptom validity testing and symptom retraining: Procedures for the assessment and treatment of functional sensory deficits. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 409–410.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Pankratz, L. (1983). A new technique for the assessment and modification of feigned memory deficit. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 57, 367–372.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Pankratz, L., Fausti, S. A., & Peed, S. (1975). A forced-choice technique to evaluate deafness in the hysterical or malingering patients. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 43, 421–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Prigatano, G. P., & Amin, K. (1993). Digit memory test: Unequivocal cerebral dysfunction and suspected malingering. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 15, 537–546.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Prigatano, G. P., Smason, I., Lamb, D. G., & Bortz, J. J. (1997). Suspected malingering and the digit memory test: A replication and extension. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 12, 609–619.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Slick, D. I., Hopp, G., Strauss, E., & Thompson, G. B. (1997). Victoria symptom validity test. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
  20. Slick, D. I., 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Strauss, E., Spreen, O., & Sherman, E. M. (2006). A compendium of neuropsychological tests: Administration, norms, and commentary (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Tombaugh, T. (1996). Test of memory malingering (TOMM). North Tonawanda: Multi Health Systems.Google Scholar
  23. Vickery, C. D., Berry, D. T. R., Inman, T. H., Harris, M. J., & Orey, S. A. (2001). Detection of inadequate effort on neuropsychological testing: A meta-analytic review of selected procedures. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 16, 45–73.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA