Detection of malingering: psychometric evaluation of the Chinese version of the structured interview of reported symptoms-2

BMC Psychiatry

Zhimin Xue¹  Yu Wang³  Aimin Hu¹  Longlong Cao¹  Tumbewene E Mwansisya¹  Guowei Wu¹  Peng Wang¹  Huiran Zhang¹  Tam Wai-Cheong Carl⁴  Helen FK Chiu²  Zhening Liu¹  Chang Liu¹ 

[1] Mental Health Institute of The Second Xiangya Hospital, Key Laboratory of Psychiatry and Mental Health of Hunan Province, Central South University, Changsha, 410011, Hunan, China;Department of Psychiatry, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China;Department of Psychiatry, The Second Affiliated Hospital, Xin Jiang Medical University, Urumqi 830061, China;Department of Psychology, Chung Yuan Christian University Chung Li, Taiwan 32023, China

关键词: Validity;    Reliability;    The Chinese version of the structured interview of reported symptoms-2;    Malingering;   

Others  :  1123940
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-244X-13-254

 received in 2013-02-27, accepted in 2013-07-05,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Malingering detection has emerged as an important issue in clinical and forensic settings. The Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms-2 (SIRS-2) was designed to assess the feigned symptoms in both clinical and non-clinical subjects. The aim of the study was to examine the reliability and validity of the Chinese version of this scale.

Methods

Two studies were conducted to evaluate the reliability and validity of the Chinese Version of SIRS-2. In Study one, with a simulation design, the subjects included a. 40 students asked to simulate symptoms of mental illness; b. 40 general psychiatric inpatients and c. 40 students asked to reply to questions honestly. Scales scores for feigning symptoms among three groups were carried out for discriminant validity of the Chinese Version of SIRS-2. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2(MMPI-2) was administered in 80 undergraduate students. In Study two, with a known-groups comparison design, scales scores for feigning symptoms were compared between 20 suspected malingerers and 80 psychiatric outpatients from two forensic centers using the Chinese Version of SIRS-2.

Results

The Chinese Version of SIRS-2 demonstrated satisfactory internal consistency in both study one and two. In study one, criterion validity of this scale was supported by its significantly positive correlation with the MMPI-2 (r = 0.282 ~ 0.481 for Infrequency), and by its significantly negative correlation with the MMPI-2 (r = -0.255 ~ -0.519 for Lie and -0.205 ~ 0.391 for Correction). Scores of 10 out of 13 subscales of the Chinese Version of SIRS-2 for simulators were significantly higher than scores of honest students and general psychiatric patients. In study two, the mean scores of the Chinese Version of 13 subscales for suspected malingerers were significantly higher than those of psychiatric outpatients. For discriminant validity, it yielded a large effect size (d = 1.80) for the comparison of the participant groups in study one and two. Moreover, the sensitivity (proportion of malingerers accurately identified by the measure) and specificity (proportion of people accurately classified as responding honestly) of the Chinese version of SIRS-2 in the detection of malingering in these two studies are acceptable.

Conclusions

The Chinese version of the SIRS-2 has good psychometric properties and is a valid and reliable tool for detection of malingering in Chinese populations.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Liu et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 5.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Langleben DD: Detection of deception with fMRI: are we there yet? Leg Criminol Psychol 2008, 13:1-9.
• [2]Chiang YC, Tseng DS, Chow PCK, Chang C, Pan CC, Lu T: Characteristics of the draftees with suspected malingering. Taiwan J Psychiat 2006, 20(2):145-154.
• [3]American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 4th edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000:739-742.
• [4]Rogers R, Vitacco MJ: Forensic assessment of malingering and related response styles. In Forensic psychology: from classroom to courtroom. Edited by Van dorsten B. New York, NY: Kulwer Academic Press; 2002.
• [5]Boyd AR, McLearen AM, Meyer RG, Denney RL: Detection of deception. Sarasota: FL Professional Resource Press; 2007.
• [6]Rogers R, Correa AA: Determinations of malingering: evolution from case-based methods to detection strategies. Psychiatr Psychol Law 2008, 15:73-86.
• [7]Liu Q: Methods for assessment of malingering. J Med Forum 2003, 24:27-29.
• [8]Yang DS: Malingering. Nerv Dis Ment Health 2003, 3:411-414.
• [9]Rogers R, Sewell KW, Gillard ND: Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms-2 (SIRS-2) and Professional Manual. Resources: Psychological Assessment; 2010.
• [10]Lally SJ: What tests are acceptable for use in forensic evaluations? a study of experts. Prof Psychol Res Pr 2003, 34(6):491-498.
• [11]Rogers R, Payne JW, Berry DT, Gillard ND, Ross CA: A study of the SIRS with severely traumatized patients. J Pers Assess 2009, 91:429-438.
• [12]Brand BL, McNary SW, Loewenstein RJ, Kolos AC, Barr SR: Assessment of genuine and simulated dissociative identity disorder on the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms. J Trauma Dissociation 2006, 7:63-85.
• [13]Wynkoop TF, Frederick RI, Hoy M: Improving the clinical utility of the SIRS cognitive items: preliminary reliability, validity, and normative data in pretrial and clinical samples. Arch Clin Neuropsychol 2006, 21:651-656.
• [14]Rogers R, Sewell KW, Gillard ND (Eds): Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms-2 (SIRS-2) and Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 2010:76-77.
• [15]Rogers R, Sewell KW, Gillard ND (Eds): Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms-2 (SIRS-2) and Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 2010:78.
• [16]Rogers R, Payne JW, Berry DT: Use of the SIRS in compensation cases: an examination of its validity and generalizability. Law Hum Behav 2009, 33(3):213-224.
• [17]Archer RP, Buffington-Vollum JK, Handel RW: A survey of psychological test use patterns among forensic psychologists. J Pers Assess 2006, 87(7):84-94.
• [18]Rogers R: Clinical assessment of malingering and deception. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2008:85.
• [19]Rogers R, Sewell KW, Gillard ND (Eds): Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms-2 (SIRS-2) and Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 2010:38-43.
• [20]Chang FM, Zhang J, Song W: Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory-2 (Chinese language edition) and manual. Sha Tin, HK: The Chinese University of Hong Kong Press; 2003.
• [21]Li SC, Wang XY, Wang XM: Personality traits of malingerers and schizophrenic patients with and without violent offences. Chinese J Drug Depen 2007, 16(4):307-310.
• [22]Tam W, Chiang SK: The reliability and validity of the Chinese MMPI-2 in a Taiwan sample. The 5th Chinese Psychologist Conference, Suzhou, China 2005, 7.
• [23]McCusker PJ, Moran MJ, Serfass L, Peterson KH: Comparability of the MMPI-2 F (p) and F scales and the SIRS in clinical use with suspected malingerers. Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol 2003, 47:585-596.
• [24]Rogers R, Bagby RM, Dickens SE: Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS) and Professional Manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1992:11-13.
• [25]Rogers R: Clinical assessment of malingering and deception. 2nd edition. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 1997.
• [26]Rogers R, Correa AA: Determinations of malingering: evolution from case-based methods to detection strategies. Psychiat, Psychol Law 2008, 15:213-223.
• [27]Rogers R: Clinical assessment of malingering and deception. 3rd edition. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2008.
• [28]Graue LO, Berry DTR, Clark JA, Sollman MJ, Cardi M, Hopkins J: Identification of feigned mental retardation using the new generation of malingering detection instruments: preliminary findings. Clin Neuropsychol 2007, 21:929-942.
• [29]Hall HV, Thompson JS, Poirier JG: Detecting deception in neuropsychological cases: toward an applied model. Forensic Examiner 2007, 16:7-15.
• [30]Walters GD, Rogers R, Berry DTR: Malingering as a categorical or dimensional construct: the latent structure of feigned psychopathology as measured by the SIRS and MMPI-2. Psychol Assess 2008, 20:238-247.