Two views of malingering
- 1 November 1990
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in The Clinical Neuropsychologist
- Vol. 4 (4) , 379-389
- https://doi.org/10.1080/13854049008401832
Abstract
Two views of malingering are juxtaposed. The first describes the conceptual muddle and subjectivity associated with assessments of alleged malingering. It is suggested that clinicians avoid the label, especially with patients they cannot help. The second view argues that avoiding the diagnostic process may place the clinician at a distinct disadvantage by missing deceptive behaviors. The authors express differences of opinion about the technology available for assessment, the importance of intentions, and the clinician's responsibility in legal dilemmas.Keywords
This publication has 22 references indexed in Scilit:
- Malingering following Minor head traumaThe Clinical Neuropsychologist, 1990
- Spurious StonesNephron, 1988
- Neuropsychological evidence of a factitious memory complaintJournal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 1987
- Persisting symptoms after mild head injury: A review of the postconcussive syndromeJournal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 1986
- Medical Consequences of Eating DisordersSouthern Medical Journal, 1985
- THE DETERMINATION OF MALINGERINGAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1980
- Artefactual Illness to Attract Medical AttentionThe British Journal of Psychiatry, 1980
- Symptom validity testing and symptom retraining: Procedures for the assessment and treatment of functional sensory deficits.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1979
- Prospects for faking believable deficits on neuropsychological testing.Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1978
- Rorschach performances of suspected malingerers.The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1945