SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.14 issue2The effect of using countermeasures in interpreter-absent and interpreter-present interviewsThe influence of clinician gender and attitudes on judgments related to forensic considerations in ICD-11 paraphilic disorders: an Internet-based field study author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • On index processCited by Google
  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO
  • On index processSimilars in Google

Share


The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context

On-line version ISSN 1989-4007Print version ISSN 1889-1861

Abstract

PINA, David et al. Self-report measures for symptom validity assessment in whiplash-associated disorders. The European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context [online]. 2022, vol.14, n.2, pp.73-81.  Epub Oct 24, 2022. ISSN 1989-4007.  https://dx.doi.org/10.5093/ejpalc2022a7.

Background/Objective:

Whiplash-Associated Disorders (WAD) are one of the most complex conditions to evaluate because several of its symptoms are not observable with current diagnostic methods and cannot be quantified or evaluated correctly. No method is currently available to assess the risk of malingering in the aforementioned condition efficiently. Our aim is to study the capacity of several biopsychosocial psychometric self-report instruments, such as the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the Cervical Disability Index (NDI), the SF-36 Health Questionnaire, the Beck Anxiety and Depression Inventories (BDI-II and BAI), or the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire (BIPQ), to discriminate between patients diagnosed with WAD following a vehicle accident and non-clinical participants with malingering instructions.

Method:

A simulation design was used with 630 participants: 200 non-clinical controls with honest responding condition, 201 instructed malingerers, and 229 WAD clinical outpatients.

Results:

Our results showed an AUC range of .60 to .90, with the highest value being that of the BPI (.90), followed by the NDI (.88), and the lowest value that of the BIPQ (.60), followed by the BAI (.71).

Conclusions:

Overall, the BPI, the NDI, and SF-36 can correctly discriminate between groups with a good specificity (> 90%), while the BAI, BDI, and BIPQ showed a lower capacity, with a high rate of false positives in the case of the BDI and of false negatives in the other two. Practical and research implications are discussed.

Keywords : Malingering; Feigning; Neck injury; Symptom validity test; Simulation design.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in English     · English ( pdf )