Comparison of the Lees-Haley fake bad scale, Henry-Heilbronner index, and restructured clinical scale 1 in identifying noncredible symptom reporting

George K. Henry, Robert L. Heilbronner, Wiley Mittenberg, Craig Enders, Shianna R. Stanczak

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

14 Scopus citations

Abstract

A known groups design investigated the comparative predictive validity of the 27-item MMPI-2 Restructured Scale 1 (RC1), the 43-item Lees-Haley Fake Bad Scale (FBS), and the 15-item Henry-Heilbronner Index (HHI) to identify noncredible symptom response sets in 63 personal injury litigants and disability claimants compared to 77 non-litigating head-injured controls. Logistic regression analyses revealed that the HHI and FBS were better predictors of group membership than the RC1. Results suggest that the FBS, HHI, and RC1 may be measuring different constructs. The HHI and FBS reflect an exaggeration of disability or illness-related behavior. Differences in scale construction are discussed. The RC1 may have greater relevance under external incentive conditions involving chronic pain patients, or clinical patients with no external incentive to exaggerate their symptom presentation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)919-929
Number of pages11
JournalClinical Neuropsychologist
Volume22
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2007

Keywords

  • Fake Bad Scale
  • Henry-Heilbronner Index
  • Noncredible symptom reporting
  • Restructured clinical scales

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparison of the Lees-Haley fake bad scale, Henry-Heilbronner index, and restructured clinical scale 1 in identifying noncredible symptom reporting'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this