The detection of feigned mental disorders on specific competency measures

Area of Science:

• Forensic Psychology
• Clinical Psychology
• Legal Psychology

Background:

• Standardized competency-to-stand-trial (CST) assessments are crucial in legal proceedings.
• Existing research on CST measures has overlooked the impact of feigned mental disorders.
• Detecting malingering is essential for accurate CST evaluations.

Purpose of the Study:

• To systematically examine how feigned mental disorders affect CST assessments.
• To identify which scales are effective in detecting feigned mental disorders in CST evaluations.
• To evaluate the vulnerability of current CST measures to malingering.

Main Methods:

• Comparison of bona fide patients (n=65) with suspected malingerers (n=22).
• Utilized three CST measures: Georgia Court Competency Test (GCCT), MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool--Criminal Adjudication, and Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial--Revised (ECST-R).
• Developed and tested specialized scales for GCCT and ECST-R to identify feigning.

Main Results:

• Standard CST measures demonstrated vulnerability to feigning.
• Feigned mental disorders significantly impacted performance on CST assessments.
• Specialized GCCT and ECST-R scales showed moderate effectiveness in screening for feigned cases.

Conclusions:

• Current CST measures are susceptible to malingering, potentially compromising trial competency evaluations.
• The developed specialized scales for GCCT and ECST-R offer a promising approach to identify feigned mental disorders.
• Further research is needed to enhance the detection of malingering in competency evaluations.