Actual Versus Self-Reported Scholastic Achievement of Litigating Postconcussion and Severe Closed Head Injury Claimants
Psychologists typically rely on patients' self-report of premorbid status in litigated settings. The authors examined the fidelity between self-reported and actual scholastic performance in litigating head injury claimants. The data indicated late postconcussion syndrome (LPCS) and severe close...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Psychological assessment 2002-06, Vol.14 (2), p.202-208 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | Psychologists typically rely on patients' self-report of premorbid status in litigated settings. The authors examined the fidelity between self-reported and actual scholastic performance in litigating head injury claimants. The data indicated late postconcussion syndrome (LPCS) and severe closed head injury litigants retrospectively inflated scholastic performance to a greater degree than nonlitigating control groups. The LPCS group showed the highest magnitude of grade inflation, but discrepancy scores did not significantly correlate with a battery of malingering measures or with objective cerebral dysfunction. These findings support previous studies, which showed self-report is not a reliable basis for estimation of preinjury cognitive status. Retrospective inflation may represent a response shift bias shaped by an adversarial context rather than a form of malingering. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1040-3590 1939-134X |
DOI: | 10.1037/1040-3590.14.2.202 |