Characteristics of Malingered PTSD with and without Memory Recovery

Malingering of PTSD has received a fair amount of research attention. Although symptoms of trauma are a common focus of forensic evaluations, PTSD is particularly difficult to assess in forensic cases for many reasons. First, due to their complex symptom presentation, those with PTSD may elevate symptom validity scales embedded in psychological measures. Also, due to the devastating impact of trauma, those with PTSD are eligible to receive compensation for their condition, making the possibility of malingering more pertinent. Further complicating this matter is the presence of dissociative amnesia, a symptom sometimes experienced by trauma victims, where there is a disruption in the function of memory during the trauma. These forgotten memories, however, may return to one's conscious memory at a later time, known as memory recovery.;One-hundred and one individuals participated in the study. Participants completed an online survey (demographic questionnaire, PTSD Checklist, Trauma History Screen). These measures were used for group assignment: Symptomatic Comparison Group, Continuous Memory Malingering Group, or Recovered Memory Malingering Group. All participants completed the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), Trauma Symptom Inventory-2-Alternative (TSI-2-A), Dissociative Experiences Scale-Revised (DESR), Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM), Reactions to Research Participation Questionnaire-Revised (RRPQ-R), and a trauma interview. Malingering groups completed a post-study questionnaire, and the Recovered Memory Malingering Group completed an additional interview.;Results showed that the Comparison Group was significantly different from the Malingering Groups on the TOMM, BDI-II, TSI-2-A, and DESR. Also, an ANOVA comparing the three groups on malingering outcome score was significant. Finally, Malingering Groups were less likely to show the presence of narrative features associated with actual trauma narratives (temporal disorganization, abandoned utterances, jumps in trauma content). The Comparison Group showed more narrative incoherency than did the Malingering Groups.;Overall, the study detected malingered versus genuine posttraumatic symptoms, using various malingering detection measures. Also, the study used modified instructions for the TOMM, which emphasized that trauma survivors sometimes experience memory/concentration problems. This modification may prove to be a more successful tool in forensic cases of trauma, if individuals are made aware of memory-related symptoms. Also, the results of the narrative assessment tool for both of the Malingering Groups, suggest that it may be a helpful metric for determining feigned versus authentic trauma narratives.