Neuropsychological test performance of successful brain injury simulators

  • DenBoer J
  • Hall S
  • 11

    Readers

    Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
  • 10

    Citations

    Citations of this article.

Abstract

This study provided an examination of the performance characteristics of successful brain injury simulators (SBIS). Coached (n = 56) and uncoached (n = 35) brain injury simulators received instructions to fake cognitive impairment; controls were asked to do their best. The Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) was administered along with standard neuropsychological measures (e.g., Wisconsin Card Sorting Test). The TOMM identified 80% of uncoached and 60% of coached brain injury simulators. SBIS were participants from the brain injury simulation groups whose TOMM performance indicated adequate effort. A total of 32% of all brain injury simulators scored above the TOMM cutoff scores for adequate effort (the SBIS group). Significantly more coached than uncoached participants composed the SBIS group (76% vs. 24%, respectively). SBIS performed significantly worse than controls and significantly better than unsuccessful brain injury simulators on select standard neuropsychological measures. The SBIS scores were lowered compared to controls; in some instances this lowered performance was at a clinically relevant level.

Author-supplied keywords

  • Dissimulation
  • Malingering
  • Successful brain injury simulators
  • Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM)

Get free article suggestions today

Mendeley saves you time finding and organizing research

Sign up here
Already have an account ?Sign in

Find this document

Authors

  • John W. DenBoer

  • Stuart Hall

Cite this document

Choose a citation style from the tabs below

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free