Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Quaderni di Psicoterapia Cognitiva - Open Access

Studies and researches

No. 50 (2022)

Malingering: diagnosi differenziale e valutazione testistica nel contesto forense penale

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3280/qpc50-2022oa14086
Submitted
luglio 11, 2022
Published
2022-07-28

Abstract

Il “malingering” è la simulazione o l’esagerazione intenzionale di una patologia fisica o mentale, messa in atto allo scopo di ottenere benefici tangibili quali il ricevimento di un risarcimento economico o la mitigazione di una sentenza criminale. In questo articolo si prende in esame il fenomeno con un’enfasi particolare sulla diagnosi differenziale e sulle sue implicazioni all’interno del contesto forense penale. Si evidenziano inoltre le ripercussioni che il malingering può avere sulla valutazione della capacità d’intendere e di volere. Non è raro, infatti, che nei contesti peritali alcuni rei cerchino di avvalersi di determinati articoli del Codice penale e tentino di simulare una perdita dell’esame di realtà. Conoscere una cospicua batteria di test sull’argomento è ormai fondamentale per il perito, al fine di rispondere al quesito giuridico. Si è dunque posto uno sguardo sul panorama testistico e sugli strumenti innovativi introdotti in letteratura negli ultimi anni. L’inclusione dell’Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29), un symptom-validity test (SVT), e dell’Inventory of Problems-Memory (IOP-M), un performance-validity test (PVT), nell’assesment psicologico risulta essere un potente ausilio nella discriminazione dei simulatori dai soggetti effettivamente affetti da una psicopatologia, come evidenziato nei vari studi presentati in questo articolo.

References

  1. Allen L.M. & Green P. (2001). Declining CARB failure rates over 6 years of testing: what’s wrong with this picture? Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 16(8): 846-856. DOI: 10.1093/arclin/16.8.846.
  2. American Psychiatric Association (1980). DSM-III. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd edition). American Psychiatric Association.
  3. American Psychiatric Association (2000). DSM-IV-TR. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th Edition). Washington: American Psychiatric Association.
  4. American Psychiatric Association (2013). DSM-5. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th edition). Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing.
  5. Anselmi N. & Savoja V. (2004). Mental illness malingering in prison. Rivista di Psichiatria, 39: 208-212. DOI: 10.1708/69.732.
  6. Banovic I., Filippi F., Viglione D.J., Scrima F., Zennaro A., Zappalà A. & Giromini L. (2021). Detecting coached feigning of schizophrenia with the inventory of problems-29 (IOP-29) and its memory module (IOP-M): A simulation study on a French community sample. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 1-17. DOI: 10.1080/14999013.2021.1906798.
  7. Beaber R.J., Marston A., Michelli J. & Mills M.J. (1985). A brief test for measuring malingering in schizophrenic individuals. The American Journal of Psychiatry. DOI: 10.1176/ajp.142.12.1478.
  8. Ben-Porath Y.S. & Tellegen A. (2008). MMPI-2-RF, Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form: Manual for Administration, Scoring and Interpretation. University of Minnesota Press.
  9. Ben-Porath Y.S. & Tellegen A. (2020). MMPI-3: Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-3 Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation. University of Minnesota Press.
  10. Butcher J.N., Dahlstrom W.G., Graham J.R., Tellegen A. & Kaemmer B. (1989). Manual for the administration and scoring of the MMPI-2.
  11. Carvalho L.D.F., Reis A., Colombarolli M.S., Pasian S.R., Miguel F.K., Erdodi L.A., … & Giromini L. (2021). Discriminating feigned from credible PTSD symptoms: A validation of a Brazilian version of the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29). Psychological Injury and Law, 14(1): 58-70. DOI: 10.1007/s12207-021-09406-0.
  12. Chafetz M. & Underhill J. (2013). Estimated costs of malingered disability. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 28(7): 633-639. DOI: 10.1093/arclin/act038.
  13. Cornell D.G. & Hawk G.L. (1989). Clinical presentation of malingerers diagnosed by experienced forensic psychologists. Law and Human Behavior, 13(4): 375-383. DOI: 10.1007/BF01056409.
  14. Davis J.J. (2014). Further consideration of advanced clinical solutions word choice: Comparison to the recognition memory test – Words and classification accuracy on a clinical sample. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 28(8): 1278-1294. DOI: 10.1080/13854046.2014.975844.
  15. Edens J.F., Guy L.S., Otto R.K., Buffington J.K., Tomicic T.L. & Poythress N.G. (2001). Factors differentiating successful versus unsuccessful malingerers. Journal of personality Assessment, 77(2): 333-338. DOI: 10.1207/S15327752JPA7702_13.
  16. Folstein M.F., Folstein S.E. & McHugh P.R. (1975). “Mini-mental state”: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of psychiatric research, 12(3): 189-198.
  17. Gegner J., Erdodi L.A., Giromini L., Viglione D.J., Bosi J. & Brusadelli E. (2020). An Australian study on feigned mTBI using the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29), its Memory Module (IOP-M), and the Rey Fifteen Item Test (FIT). Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 1-10. DOI: 10.1080/23279095.2020.1864375.
  18. Giromini L. & Viglione D.J. (2022). Assessing Negative Response Bias with the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29): a Quantitative Literature Review. Psychological Injury and Law, 1-15. DOI: 10.1007/s12207-021-09437-7.
  19. Giromini L., Barbosa F., Coga G., Azeredo A., Viglione D.J. & Zennaro A. (2020). Using the inventory of problems-29 (IOP-29) with the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) in symptom validity assessment: A study with a Portuguese sample of experimental feigners. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 27(6): 504-516. DOI: 10.1080/23279095.2019.1570929.
  20. Giromini L., Viglione D. J., Pignolo C. & Zennaro A. (2018). A clinical comparison, simulation study testing the validity of SIMS and IOP-29 with an Italian sample. Psychological Injury and Law, 11(4): 340-350. DOI: 10.1007/s12207-018-9314-1.
  21. Giromini L., Viglione D.J., Zennaro A., Maffei A. & Erdodi L.A. (2020). SVT meets PVT: Development and initial validation of the Inventory of Problems-Memory (IOP-M). Psychological Injury and Law, 13(3): 261-274. DOI: 10.1007/s12207-020-09385-8.
  22. Gunduz-Bruce H., McMeniman M., Robinson D.G., Woerner M.G., Kane J.M., Schooler N.R. & Lieberman J.A. (2005). Duration of untreated psychosis and time to treatment response for delusions and hallucinations. American Journal of Psychiatry, 162(10): 1966-1969. DOI: 10.1176/appi.ajp.162.10.1966.
  23. Jaffe M.E. & Sharma K.K. (1998). Malingering uncommon psychiatric symptoms among defendants charged under California’s “Three Strikes and You’re Out” law. Journal of Forensic Science, 43(3): 549-555. DOI: 10.1520/JFS16181J.
  24. Jones A.B., Llewellyn L.J. & Beaumont W.M. (1917). Malingering; Oppure, The Simulation of Disease (No. 15588-15596). P. Blakiston’s Son.
  25. Larrabee G.J. (2008). Aggregation across multiple indicators improves the detection of malingering: Relationship to likelihood ratios. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 22(4): 666-679. DOI: 10.1080/13854040701494987.
  26. Miller H.A. (2001). Miller forensic assessment of symptoms test: M-fast; professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
  27. Morey L.C. (1991). Personality assessment inventory (PAI). Odessa (FL): Psychological Assessment Resources.
  28. Powell M.R., Gfeller J.D., Hendricks B.L. & Sharland M. (2004). Detecting symptom-and test-coached simulators with the Test of Memory Malingering. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19(5): 693-702. DOI: 10.1016/j.acn.2004.04.001.
  29. Resnick P.J. (1984). The detection of malingered mental illness. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 2(1): 21-38. DOI: 10.1002/bsl.2370020104.
  30. Resnick P.J., & Knoll J.L. IV (2018). Malingered psychosis. In Rogers R.& Bender S.D. (eds.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (pp. 98-121). New York: Guilford Press.
  31. Ritson B. & Forest A. (1970). The simulation of psychosis: A contemporary presentation. British Journal of Psychology, 43(1): 31-37.
  32. Rogers R., Bagby R.M. & Dickens S.E. (1992). The SIRS test manual. Tampla: Psychological Assessment Resources.
  33. Rogers R. (2008). Detection strategies for malingering and defensiveness. Clinical assessment of malingering and deception, 3: 14-35.
  34. Rogers R., Sewell K.W. & Gillard N.D. (2010). Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS-2). Professional Manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources. doi: 10, 9780470479216.
  35. Rogers R. & Bender S.D. (2013). Evaluation of malingering and deception. In: Weiner I.B. & Otto R.K. (eds.). Handbook of psychology, vol. 11: Forensic psychology (2nd ed.) (pp. 517-540). Hoboken: Wiley.
  36. Roma P., Giromini L., Burla F., Ferracuti S., Viglione D.J. & Mazza C. (2019). Ecological validity of the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29): an Italian study of court-ordered, psychological injury evaluations using the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS) as criterion variable. Psychological Injury and Law, 13: 57-65. DOI: 10.1007/s12207-019-09368-4.
  37. Rossi L. & Zappalà A. (2005). Personalità e Crimine, elementi di psicologia criminale. Milano: FrancoAngeli.
  38. Sahoo S., Kumar R. & Oomer F. (2020). Concepts and controversies of malingering: A re-look. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 50: 101952. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajp.2020.101952.
  39. Šömen M.M., Lesjak S., Majaron T., Lavopa L., Giromini L., Viglione D. & Podlesek A. (2021). Using the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29) with the Inventory of Problems Memory (IOP-M) in Malingering-Related Assessments: a Study with a Slovenian Sample of Experimental Feigners. Psychological Injury and Law, 14(2): 104-113. DOI: 10.1007/s12207-021-09412-2.
  40. Spitzer R.L., Endicott J., Robins E., Kuriansky J. & Gurland B. (1975). Preliminary report of the reliability of Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) applied to psychiatric case records. Prediction in Psychopharmacology. New York, Raven Press, to be published.
  41. Suhr J.A. & Gunstad J. (2007). Coaching and malingering: A review. Assessment of malingered neuropsychological deficits, 287-311.
  42. Sweet J.J., Heilbronner R.L., Morgan J.E., Larrabee G.J., Rohling M.L., Boone K.B., … & Conference Participants (2021). American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN) 2021 consensus statement on validity assessment: Update of the 2009 AACN consensus conference statement on neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 35(6): 1053-1106. DOI: 0.1080/13854046.2021.1896036.
  43. Tombaugh T.N. (1996). Test of memory malingering: TOMM. Multy-Health Systems.
  44. Turner M. (1997). Malingering. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 171(5): 409-411. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.171.5.409.
  45. Viglione D.J., Giromini L. & Landis P. (2017). The development of the Inventory of Problems-29: A brief self-administered measure for discriminating bona fide from feigned psychiatric and cognitive complaints. Journal of Personality Assessment, 99(5); 534-544. DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2016.1233882.
  46. Viglione D.J. & Giromini L. (2020). Inventory of Problems-29: Professional manual. IOP-Test, LLC.
  47. Widows M.R. & Smith G.P. (2005). SIMS: Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology. Odessa (FL): Psychological Assessment Resources.
  48. Winters C.L., Giromini L., Crawford T.J., Ales F., Viglione D.J. & Warmelink L. (2020). An Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29) study investigating feigned schizophrenia and random responding in a British community sample. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 1-20. DOI: 10.1080/13218719.2020.1767720.
  49. Young G., Foote W.E., Kerig P.K., Mailis A., Brovko J., Kohutis E.A., McCall S., Hapidou E.G., Fokas K.F. & Goodman-Delahunty J. (2020). Introducing psychological injury and law. Psychological Injury and Law, 13: 452-463. DOI: 10.1007/s12207-020-09396-5.
  50. Zapf P.A. & Grisso T. (2012). Use and misuse of forensic assessment instruments. DOI: 10.1093/med:psych/9780195174113.003.0020.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...