Green, P., Iverson, G. L., & Allen, L. (1999). Detecting malingering in head injury litigation with the Word Memory Test. Brain Injury, 13(10), 813-819.
Examined the performance of a large sample of patients involved in head injury litigation on the Word Memory Test (P. Green at al, 1996; WMT) measures of biased responding (i.e., malingering). The construction of the WMT makes it difficult to simulate memory deficits. The Ss were 298 patients (mean age, 38-39 yrs) with head injuries, 64 of them moderate or severe cases. Administered tests in addition to WMT included the Glasgow Coma Scale (G. Teasdale and B. Jennett, 1974), the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale~~Revised (WAIS~~R), and the Computerized Assessment of Response Bias (L. M. Allen et al, 1997; CARB). Results show that Ss with moderate and severe head injury scored higher on the WMT than those with minimal injuries. Analysis of WMT and CARB scores can attribute this apparent contradiction to incomplete effort given by minimally injured Ss. When suspected cases of low effort were removed, there were no significant score differences. It is concluded that the WMT is a valid method for evaluating the veracity of patients' overall neurological testing data. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2002 APA, all rights reserved)Author's email address