the presence of a clear source of motivation for the distortion of responses. In contrast, individuals who fake bad
on a measure of psychological adjustment may wish to make their distress very clear to the professional staff.
Analog studies of motivational/response distortion have difficulty in establishing realistic incentives comparable
to those found in real life.
The validity scales in multiscale inventories often include measures of faking bad, such as the MMPI F scale
and the PAI Negative Impression Management scale. Here we review one of the few explicit malingering mea-
sures, the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS; Rogers et al., 2010 ).
Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms, 2nd edition (SIRS-2)
(Rogers et al., 2010 ).
Variable
The SIRS-2 was designed to assess eight forms of feigned psychological disorders, including rare symptoms,
symptom combinations, improbable symptoms, indiscriminate symptom endorsement, symptom severity, obvi-
ous symptoms, common or subtle psychological problems, and reported versus observed symptoms.
Description
The SIRS-2 is updated and slightly modified from the 1992 version (Rogers, Bagby. & Dickens, 1992). The orig-
inal Symptom Onset scale was dropped, while a new scale, Rare Symptoms and two new index scores were
added, as well as the Improbable Failure scale. The 16-page Interview Booklet has 156 unique item stems, some
of which have supplementary questions or have sub-questions. Items 87 to 102 are repeated in order to determine
response consistency. Scoring the SIRS requires substantial familiarity with both the literature on malingering
and also structured interviewing. The front page of the interview booklet provides a profile for the eight Primary
Scales as well as classification scales and six Supplementary Scales.
Sample
The comparison data set comprised 2298 protocols, of which 167 were administered under simulation instruc-
tions. Subsamples included general clinical and clinical forensic samples, a larger correctional sample, and 217
community/college cases. Samples of individuals undergoing competency evaluations and insanity evaluations
are also reported in the manual ( Rogers et al., 2010 ). Reasonably good descriptions of the comparison data sets
are provided in the manual.
Reliability
Internal Consistency
Cronbach alpha coefficients have been reported by Rogers et al. (2010) for six of the eight scales ranging from
.77 to .92 for the original 1992 version ( N5211), while 100 cases were used for the SIRS-2, with alpha coefficients
ranging from .77 to .93.
Test/C0Retest
Repeated administration of the SIRS over a period of 7 to 13 days resulted in test /C0retest reliability coefficients
ranging from .24 to .91. Some of the scale scores were affected by floor effects, notably the one with the lowest
reliability.
Inter-Rater
Rogers et al. (2010) reported higher inter-rater reliability coefficients than for the original (1992) SIRS, ranging
from .95 to .99.
Validity
Convergent/Concurrent
Convergent validity of the eight Primary Scale scores is reported with MMPI/MMPI-2 validity scale scores as
well as with Personality Assessment Inventory ( Morey, 1991 ), SIMS ( Widows & Smith, 2005 ), and M-FAST
(Miller, 2001 ) scale scores.27 MALINGERING
I. INTRODUCTION: CORE ISSUES IN ASSESSMENT