A simulation design with multiple contrast groups was used to test the effectiveness of two instruments, the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS) and the Georgia Court Competency Test—Mississippi State Hospital (GCCT-MSH) in detecting malingering of competency to stand trial. Thirty simulators were compared with 23 incompetent defendants, 25 competent defendants, 30 offender controls, and 7 suspected malingerers on both instruments. Results revealed that the simulators and suspected malingerers scored significantly higher on all of the SIRS primary scales and significantly lower on the GCCT-MSH than the three comparison groups. The SIRS had an overall hit rate of 97.8% using three or more primary scales as the criterion for malingering. Information concerning the simulator's strategies of deception is presented.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gothard et al. (1995) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: