Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 9, 2026

Holistic Facial Composite Creation and Subsequent Video Line-up Eyewitness Identification Paradigm
Published on: December 24, 2015
The PAI and feigning: A cautionary note on its use in forensic-correctional settings
R Rogers1, K W Sewell, K R Cruise
1University of North Texas, Denton 76203-1280, USA.
Abstract:
Indicators of feigned PAI profiles were derived from comparisons of simulators instructed to feign and genuine patient groups. Concerns are raised regarding whether these indicators are applicable to forensic and correctional populations and can be cross-validated with a known-groups comparison. Compiling data on 57 malingerers and 58 genuine patients from two forensic and correctional sites, three primary indicators of feigning, Negative Impression (NIM) scale, Malingering Index, and the Rogers Discriminant Function (RDF) were investigated. Results suggested that the RDF was not applicable to forensic referrals. However, NIM 77T appeared to be a useful screen for forensic samples. In addition, convergent evidence of feigning was found across designs (simulation and known-groups) and samples (non-forensic and forensic) for extreme elevations on NIM (>/=110T) and Malingering Index (>/=5).
Related Concept Videos
Ethics in Research
The Stanford Prison Experiment
Eyewitness Memory
One such error is memory distortion, which occurs because human memory does not function like a...
False Memories
One primary source of false memories is misattribution, where individuals incorrectly associate external information with...
Impression Management Techniques III: Aligning Actions
Impression Management Techniques IV: Altercasting

