American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology Consensus Conference Statement on the Neuropsychological Assessment of Effort, Response Bias, and Malingering
Open accessAbstract
During the past two decades clinical and research efforts have led to increasingly sophisticated and effective methods and instruments designed to detect exaggeration or fabrication of neuropsychological dysfunction, as well as somatic and psychological symptom complaints. A vast literature based on relevant research has emerged and substantial portions of professional meetings attended by clinical neuropsychologists have addressed topics related to malingering (Sweet, King, Malina, Bergman, & Simmons, 2002). Yet, despite these extensive activities, understanding the need for methods of detecting problematic effort and response bias and addressing the presence or absence of malingering has proven challenging for practitioners. A consensus conference, comprised of national and international experts in clinical neuropsychology, was held at the 2008 Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN) for the purposes of refinement of critical issues in this area. This consensus statement documents the current state of knowledge and recommendations of expert clinical neuropsychologists and is intended to assist clinicians and researchers with regard to the neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Of critical importance in clinical and research settings evaluating individuals with TBI is need to identify invalid responses.
“Of critical importance in clinical and research settings evaluting individuals with TBI is the need to identify invalid responses (Heilbronner et al., 2009; Larrabee, 2012).”
From Using the NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB) in individuals with traumatic brain injury. (2017) · cites this paper as Heilbronner et al., 2009
Cites
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-3338 · Cited by 35,305 · see citing works
Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2000) · doi:10.1002/0471722146 · Cited by 20,302 · see citing works
Towards complete and accurate reporting of studies of diagnostic accuracy: the STARD initiative
Bossuyt, P. M., Reitsma, J. B., Bruns, D. E., Gatsonis, C. A., Glasziou, P. P., Irwig, L. M., Lijmer, J. G., Moher, D., Rennie, D., & de Vet, H. C. W. (2003) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7379.41 · Cited by 3,215
Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations.
Wilkinson, L., & Task Force on Statistical Inference (1999) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.54.8.594 · Cited by 2,791 · see citing works
Evaluation of diagnostic tests when there is no gold standard. A review of methods
Rutjes, A., Reitsma, J., Coomarasamy, A., Khan, K., & Bossuyt, P. (2007) · Health Technology Assessment · doi:10.3310/hta11500 · Cited by 524 · see citing works
Psychogenic nonepileptic seizures: review and update
Reuber, M., & Elger, C. E. (2003) · Epilepsy & Behavior · doi:10.1016/s1525-5050(03)00104-5 · Cited by 404 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A quantitative meta-analysis of neurocognitive functioning in posttraumatic stress disorder.
Scott, J. C., Matt, G. E., Wrocklage, K. M., Crnich, C., Jordan, J., Southwick, S. M., Krystal, J. H., & Schweinsburg, B. C. (2015) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0038039 · Cited by 513 · see citing works
The C factor: cognitive dysfunction as a transdiagnostic dimension in psychopathology
Abramovitch, A., Short, T., & Schweiger, A. (2021) · Clinical Psychology Review · doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2021.102007 · Cited by 269 · see citing works
Heilbronner, R. L., Sweet, J. J., Attix, D. K., Krull, K. R., Henry, G. K., & Hart, R. P. (2010) · The Clinical Neuropsychologist · doi:10.1080/13854046.2010.526785 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
Self-citationHartman, S. J., Nelson, S. H., Myers, E., Natarajan, L., Sears, D. D., Palmer, B. W., Weiner, L. S., Parker, B. A., & Patterson, R. E. (2018) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.30987 · Cited by 188 · see citing works
Bauer, R. M., Iverson, G. L., Cernich, A. N., Binder, L. M., Ruff, R. M., & Naugle, R. I. (2012) · The Clinical Neuropsychologist · doi:10.1080/13854046.2012.663001 · Cited by 154 · see citing works
Neuropsychological Sequelae of PTSD and TBI Following War Deployment among OEF/OIF Veterans
Dolan, S., Martindale, S., Robinson, J., Kimbrel, N. A., Meyer, E. C., Kruse, M. I., Morissette, S. B., Young, K. A., & Gulliver, S. B. (2012) · Neuropsychology Review · doi:10.1007/s11065-012-9190-5 · Cited by 126 · see citing works
Functional (Psychogenic) Cognitive Disorders: A Perspective from the Neurology Clinic
Stone, J., Pal, S., Blackburn, D., Reuber, M., Thekkumpurath, P., & Carson, A. (2015) · Journal of Alzheimer's Disease · doi:10.3233/jad-150430 · Cited by 107 · see citing works
DeRight, J., & Jorgensen, R. S. (2015) · The Clinical Neuropsychologist · doi:10.1080/13854046.2014.989267 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Using the NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery (NIHTB-CB) in individuals with traumatic brain injury.
Tulsky, D. S., Carlozzi, N. E., Holdnack, J., Heaton, R. K., Wong, A., Goldsmith, A., & Heinemann, A. W. (2017) · Rehabilitation Psychology · doi:10.1037/rep0000174 · Cited by 67 · see citing works
Functional cognitive disorder: what is it and what to do about it?
Pennington, C., Newson, M., Hayre, A., & Coulthard, E. (2015) · Practical Neurology · doi:10.1136/practneurol-2015-001127 · Cited by 49 · see citing works
Pinto, J. O., Dores, A. R., Peixoto, B., & Barbosa, F. (2025) · Applied Neuropsychology: Adult · doi:10.1080/23279095.2023.2170800 · Cited by 28 · see citing works
- Authors
- Heilbronner, R. L., Sweet, J. J., Morgan, J. E., Larrabee, G. J., Millis, S. R., & Participants1, C.
- Corresponding author
- Sweet, Jerry J.
- Venue
- The Clinical Neuropsychologist
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2009-10
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1093-1129
- ISSN
- 0920-1637 (ISSN-L)
- 1385-4046
- 1744-4144
- OpenAlex
- W2036128670
- Cited by
- 869
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 79 · 2019: 74 · 2018: 61 · 2017: 77 · 2016: 62 · 2015: 47 · 2014: 57 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 62
- FWCI
- 63.91
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- The Clinical Neuropsychologist (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UST Research Online (University of St. Thomas - Minnesota) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Deception detection and forensic psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Historical and Modern Theater Studies
- Keywords
- malingering, effort detection, response bias, neuropsychological assessment, symptom exaggeration
- MeSH terms
- Cognition Disorders, Humans, Deception, Malingering, Medical History Taking, Neuropsychological Tests, Personality Inventory, Psychometrics
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
