Divergent/Discriminant
Discriminant validity evidence is reported in Rogers et al. (2010) .
Construct Validity
Confirmatory factor analysis has been used to examine the underlying factor structure, which tends to yield
two dimensions labeled: Spurious Presentations and Plausible Presentations (see Rogers et al., 2010 ). To a large
extent, the SIRS has defined the construct of malingering in terms of the many ways in which individuals can
malinger and serves as a reference in many other studies of malingering and feigning (e.g., Kucharski, Toomey,
Fila, & Duncan, 2007 ).
Criterion/Predictive
Validity data for the SIRS-2 classification rules are also provided, and the manual reports sensitivity of .80 and
specificity of .98, with an overall correct classification of 91% for a validation sample.
Location
Rogers, R., Sewell, K.W., & Gillard, N.D. (2010). SIRS-2: Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms Professional
manual . (2nd ed.) Lutz, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Results and Comments
The SIRS-2 has established new standards for the assessment of distorted responding, without getting into the
unproductive debate over conscious versus unconscious faking. Based on the theoretical analysis of ways in
which individuals can distort their presentation, the SIRS-2 also has extensive empirical evidence for its validity.
Evidence for the ability of the SIRS-2 to differentiate at an individual level is extraordinary.
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF)
(Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008 ).
The MMPI-2-RF is a major development for this venerable measure whose previous revision failed to over-
come many of the original version’s weaknesses ( Helmes & Reddon, 1993 ). It is based upon the MMPI-2, but
uses only 338 items of the original 567 MMPI-2 items ( Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008 ). The main change is the use
of the Restructured Clinical scales ( Tellegen et al., 2003 ) in place of the traditional clinical scales. For basic clinical
use, a reduction in the number of scales that are scored to 50 means interpretation will be more straightforward
than with the parent MMPI-2. The strength of the original MMPI in its validity scales has been continued, with
no fewer than eight on the MMPI-2-RF. Because of the common item core, the norms for the MMPI-2-RF are
those for the MMPI-2 with an additional comparative study done to ensure the continued comparability of the
norms. In order to make comparisons easier, the validity measures of the MMPI-2-RF will be discussed in the rel-
evant individual sections. For information on the literature on malingering and faking with the MMPI-2, Greene
(2008) provides a recent summary.
MEASURES OF UNDER-REPORTING
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2-RF L-rScale)
(Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008 ).
Variable
The original Lscale and its later forms are designed to detect those who present themselves in an overly favor-
able light through the denial of the minor faults and shortcomings that are common in most individuals.
Description
The revised L-rscale consists of 14 items (down from 15 on the previous form) and is also referred to as
Uncommon Virtues , which is the unifying theme of the various items. The logic is that even individuals with tradi-
tional values as part of their makeup will not achieve very high scores on this scale. High scores can also occur
due to inconsistent responding, which should be checked through the use of the VRIN and TRIN response28 2. RESPONSE BIAS, MALINGERING, AND IMPRESSION MANAGEMENT
I. INTRODUCTION: CORE ISSUES IN ASSESSMENT