Award Date

1-1-2003

Degree Type

Thesis

Degree Name

Master of Arts (MA)

Department

Psychology

First Committee Member

Daniel N. Allen

Number of Pages

221

Abstract

Individuals undergoing neuropsychological evaluation are often involved in litigation for compensation. Consequently, much incentive to perform poorly on neuropsychological assessments exists. Thus, sophisticated detection methods are desirable. One promising approach may be to utilize qualitative scoring that provides information regarding the test taking strategy. Many current methods use a single quantitative score to discriminate people who malinger cognitive deficits, which may overlook sensitive information and be less accurate. This study developed and applied qualitative scoring procedures for the WMS-III and evaluated them using four experimental groups: sophisticated malingerer, naive malingerer, normal control, and brain damage. Results were mixed. When added to quantitative methods, qualitative variables were able to improve the classification rate when discriminating all experimental groups, but were ineffective toward improving classification rates when discriminating two groups (simulated malingerers and brain injured participants). Implications of these findings and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Keywords

Detection; Edition; Malingering; Memory; Procedures; Qualitative; Scale; Scoring; Third; Wechsler

Controlled Subject

Clinical psychology; Psychology--Research--Methodology

File Format

pdf

File Size

8335.36 KB

Degree Grantor

University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Language

English

Permissions

If you are the rightful copyright holder of this dissertation or thesis and wish to have the full text removed from Digital Scholarship@UNLV, please submit a request to digitalscholarship@unlv.edu and include clear identification of the work, preferably with URL.

Identifier

https://doi.org/10.25669/ck6w-mj2u


Share

COinS