Abstract
Forensic neuropsychology continues to grapple with critical determinations of response styles, including the assessment of
malingering. The development of the Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction (MND) model has been highly influential for both
feigning research and neuropsychological practice. In striving to be a comprehensive model of malingering, MND proposes complex
criteria for ascertaining possible, probable, and definite levels. In its critical review, this article suggests the possibility
of an MND bias towards the over-classification of malingering. It also examines the limits of MND research to adequately test
the MND model. The conceptual and empirical limitations of MND are discussed with reference to theory and neuropsychological
practice.
malingering. The development of the Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction (MND) model has been highly influential for both
feigning research and neuropsychological practice. In striving to be a comprehensive model of malingering, MND proposes complex
criteria for ascertaining possible, probable, and definite levels. In its critical review, this article suggests the possibility
of an MND bias towards the over-classification of malingering. It also examines the limits of MND research to adequately test
the MND model. The conceptual and empirical limitations of MND are discussed with reference to theory and neuropsychological
practice.
- Content Type Journal Article
- Pages 1-10
- DOI 10.1007/s12207-011-9107-2
- Authors
- Richard Rogers, Department of Psychology, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #311280, Denton, TX 76203-5017, USA
- Scott D. Bender, Department of Psychiatry & Neurobehavioral Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, PO Box 800793, Charlottesville, VA 22908, USA
- Stephanie F. Johnson, Department of Psychology, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #311280, Denton, TX 76203-5017, USA
- Journal Psychological Injury and Law
- Online ISSN 1938-9728
- Print ISSN 1938-971X