No description available.

Research indicates that some college students may be strongly motivated to feign AHDD symptoms for desired external incentives, such as stimulant medication or academic accommodations. To date, literature examining feigned ADHD has been primarily focused on ADHD specific self-report measures (e.g., CAARS) and continuous performance tests (e.g., CPTs); however, little attention has been devoted to the use of multi-scale inventories in detecting feigned ADHD. For CPT measures, virtually no literature exists on the effectiveness of the TOVA to identify feigned ADHD, despite its frequent clinical use for establishing this diagnosis. The current study utilized a between-subjects simulation design to validate feigning cut scores on ADHD-specific measures using 66 feigners and 51 confirmed ADHD cases. As prior literature suggested, the results convincingly demonstrated that face-valid ADHD assessment measures were easily faked. Across both TOVA modalities (e.g., Auditory and Visual), the ADHD simulators performed significantly poorer than those diagnosed with ADHD. As an innovative approach, a Dissimulation-ADHD (Ds-ADHD) scale was developed and initially validated. The Ds-ADHD is composed of ten MMPI-2-RF items mistakenly believed to be clinical characteristics associated with ADHD. Requiring cross-validation, Ds-ADHD optimized cut scores and classification of ADHD feigners appears promising. They were clearly distinguishable from ADHD client, as well as those feigning general psychopathology. Recommendations for the utilization of the Ds-ADHD scale, and future directions for research are discussed.

Accurate self-report assessment of psychopathology depends on individuals responding honestly and accurately. Some respondents, however, may respond in a manner not representative of their traits/symptoms. The MMPI-2-RF contains “validity” scales to detect elevations on over-reporting (OR) or under-reporting (UR) scales which typically correspond to elevations on MMPI-2-RF substantive scales and on instruments administered alongside the MMPI-2-RF. We examined effects of OR and UR on the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5); a self-report instrument that assesses 25 pathological traits used with other diagnostic criteria to diagnose personality disorders (PDs) in Section III of the DSM-5. Using MMPI-2-RF validity scale scores, 908 students and 255 psychiatric outpatients were classified into OR, UR or within normal limit response groups. Significant group differences were found such that differences in the frequency of PD diagnosis emerged across response groups. We believe the PID-5 is vulnerable to OR and UR responding, which potentially compromises its validity.

Accurate self-report assessment of psychopathology depends on individuals responding honestly and accurately. Some respondents, however, may respond in a manner not representative of their traits/symptoms. The MMPI-2-RF contains “validity” scales to detect elevations on over-reporting (OR) or under-reporting (UR) scales which typically correspond to elevations on MMPI-2-RF substantive scales and on instruments administered alongside the MMPI-2-RF. We examined effects of OR and UR on the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5); a self-report instrument that assesses 25 pathological traits used with other diagnostic criteria to diagnose personality disorders (PDs) in Section III of the DSM-5. Using MMPI-2-RF validity scale scores, 908 students and 255 psychiatric outpatients were classified into OR, UR or within normal limit response groups. Significant group differences were found such that differences in the frequency of PD diagnosis emerged across response groups. We believe the PID-5 is vulnerable to OR and UR responding, which potentially compromises its validity.