| Malingering is the deliberate creation or exaggeration of physical or psychological symptoms for a primary gain (DSM-IV-TR; APA, 2000). Given the costly and time consuming nature of evaluating malingering in a forensic setting, it is important to investigate the effects of relying on a clinical interview alone to assess for malingering. Research indicates that a clinical interview, validated assessment measures, and collateral information are necessary to assess for malingering (Chesterman, Terbeck, & Vaughan, 2008; Iverson, 2007). This study investigated the effectiveness of using a clinical interview alone versus a clinical interview with collateral information when diagnosing a defendant as malingering in a criminal proceeding. One hundred and forty nine doctoral level psychologists were randomly assigned to either a case vignette with a clinical interview and collateral information or a case vignette with a clinical interview alone and were asked several questions about potential diagnoses. This study confirmed previous research, which states that the diagnosis of malingering is most effective when a clinical interview is coupled with collateral information. Since potentially serious consequences can arise from inaccurate diagnoses in a forensic setting, it is imperative for clinicians to use both a clinical interview and collateral information when assessing malingering.;Keywords: Malingering, psychological evaluations, collateral information, assessment, forensic evaluations. |
