A Clinical Comparison, Simulation Study Testing the Validity of SIMS and IOP-29 with an Italian Sample

被引:48
作者
Giromini L. [1 ]
Viglione D.J. [2 ]
Pignolo C. [1 ]
Zennaro A. [1 ]
机构
[1] Department of Psychology, University of Turin, Via Po 14, Turin
[2] California School of Professional Psychology, Alliant International University - San Diego, 10455 Pomerado Road, San Diego, 92131, CA
关键词
Anxiety; Depression; Inventory of Problems; Malingering; Psychosis; SIMS;
D O I
10.1007/s12207-018-9314-1
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The Inventory of Problems–29 (IOP-29) was recently introduced as a brief, easy-to-use measure of non-credible mental and cognitive symptoms that may be applied to a wide variety of contexts or clinical conditions. The current study compared its validity in discriminating bona fide versus feigned (via experimental malingering paradigm) psychopathology against that of the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS). Specifically, 452 Italian adult volunteers participated in this study: 216 were individuals with mental illness who were asked to take the SIMS and IOP-29 honestly, and 236 were nonclinical participants (experimental simulators) who took the same two tests with the instruction to feign a psychopathological condition. Two main, broad categories of symptom presentations were investigated: (a) psychotic spectrum disorders and (b) anxiety, depression, and/or trauma-related disorders. Data analysis compared the effect sizes of the differences between the patients and experimental simulators, as well as the AUC and classification accuracy statistics for both the SIMS and IOP-29. The results indicate that the IOP-29 outperformed the SIMS, with the differences between the two tools being more notable within the psychotic (IOP-29 vs. SIMS: d = − 1.80 vs. d = − 1.06; AUC =.89 vs. AUC =.79) than within the anxiety, depression, and/or trauma related subgroup (IOP-29 vs. SIMS: d = − 2.02 vs. d = − 1.62; AUC =.90 vs. AUC =.86). This study also demonstrates that the IOP-29, with its single cutoff score, is generalizable culturally and linguistically from the USA (English) to Italy (Italian). © 2018, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.
引用
收藏
页码:340 / 350
页数:10
相关论文
共 38 条
[1]  
Abramsky A.B., Assessment of Test Behaviors as a Unique Construct in the Evaluation of Malingered Depression on the Inventory of Problems: Do Test Behaviors Add Significant Variance beyond Problem Endorsement Strategies?, (2005)
[2]  
Brislin R.W., Translation and content analysis of oral and written material, Handbook of cross-cultural psychology, 1, pp. 389-444, (1980)
[3]  
Bush S.S., Heilbronner R.L., Ruff R.M., Psychological assessment of symptom and performance validity, response bias, and malingering: official position of the Association for Scientific Advancement in Psychological Injury and Law, Psychological Injury and Law, 7, pp. 197-205, (2014)
[4]  
Bush S.S., Ruff R.M., Troster A.I., Barth J.T., Koffler S.P., Pliskin N.H., Reynolds C.R., Silver C.H., Symptom validity assessment: practice issues and medical necessity. Official position of the National Academy of Neuropsychology, Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 20, pp. 419-426, (2005)
[5]  
Clegg C., Fremouw W., Mogge N., Utility of the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS) and the Assessment of Depression Inventory (ADI) in screening for malingering among outpatients seeking to claim disability, Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 20, 2, pp. 239-254, (2009)
[6]  
Cohen J., Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, (1988)
[7]  
Cohen J., A power primer, Psychological Bulletin, 112, pp. 155-159, (1992)
[8]  
Dandachi-FitzGerald B., Ponds R.W.H.M., Merten T., Symptom validity and neuropsychological assessment: a survey of practices and beliefs of neuropsychologists in six European countries, Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 28, pp. 771-783, (2013)
[9]  
Erdodi L.A., Aggregating validity indicators: The salience of domain specificity and the indeterminate range in multivariate models of performance validity assessment, Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, (2017)
[10]  
Geisinger K.F., Testing and assessment in cross-cultural psychology, Handbook of psychology. Part one, pp. 95-117, (2003)