![Sample our Law journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5942/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Law.jpg"})
Abstract
A sample of 56 disability seekers were administered the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS), the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS), and the Assessment of Depression Inventory (ADI). Individuals were classified as honest or suspected malingerers based on their SIRS scores. Additionally, 60 individuals from the community completed the SIMS and the ADI honestly or as if they were malingering depression. Both malingering groups had significantly higher mean scores on the SIMS total and ADI feigning scales than both honest groups. The scores of the malingering groups did not significantly differ. The utility of various cut-off scores on these scales is presented and discussed. In the clinical sample, previously recommended SIMS total cut-off scores (>14 or >16) had excellent sensitivity, but low specificity. Conversely, the recommended ADI feigning cut-off score (>13) had excellent specificity, but low sensitivity. Increasing the SIMS total cut-off score to >19 and decreasing the ADI feigning cut-off score to >9 may improve their utility in screening for malingering among outpatients seeking to claim disability.