Abstract
This editorial article introduces the second special issue of Psychology & Neuroscience devoted to performance and symptom validity testing. The reason for including the second special issue is that we received an unusually large number of high-quality submissions that could not fit into a single volume. The articles included in this second part offer practical, immediately actionable knowledge to assessors while simultaneously advancing the methodology for calibrating instruments designed to evaluate the credibility of a given clinical presentation. In this introduction, we briefly summarize each article and reflect on an emerging epistemological question about the interpretation of noncredible results in the context of a clinical research study: If a relatively large proportion of clinical patients fail a validity test without any apparent external incentives to appear impaired, should this be interpreted as a possible vulnerability of that validity test to false-positive classifications or as evidence that noncredible responding is relatively common outside of medicolegal/forensic assessments? Themethodological implications of symptom and performance validity research are discussed.
Author supplied keywords
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Giromini, L., & Erdodi, L. A. (2023). Assessing the Credibility of Clinical Presentations Using Performance and Symptom Validity Tests: Current Trends and Future Directions—Part II. Psychology and Neuroscience, 16(3), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1037/pne0000325
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.