Malingering detection with the dot counting test

The Dot Counting Test (DCT) offers a technique for malingering detection that is less transparent than the forced-choice testing that has received so much recent attention. The present study defined six dependent variables derived from DCT responses, and examined these variables in the context of di...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Archives of clinical neuropsychology 1997, Vol.12 (1), p.41-46
Main Authors: Binks, Paul G., Gouvier, Wm.Drew, Waters, William F.
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-21e54e7de5c641e2d029e2c4c99b479dafb3ae33124ac288ba86c8f6b4508d03
cites
container_end_page 46
container_issue 1
container_start_page 41
container_title Archives of clinical neuropsychology
container_volume 12
creator Binks, Paul G.
Gouvier, Wm.Drew
Waters, William F.
description The Dot Counting Test (DCT) offers a technique for malingering detection that is less transparent than the forced-choice testing that has received so much recent attention. The present study defined six dependent variables derived from DCT responses, and examined these variables in the context of differentiating simulators from non-simulators. Four groups of subjects were studied: normal controls, neuropsychological evaluation patients, naive (uncoached) malingering simulators, and sophisticated (coached) malingering simulators. Results demonstrate that the DCT provides several different scores that significantly differ between simulators and non-simulators. The DCT appears to hold promise as an additional tool to neuropsychologists in the detection of malingering.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/S0887-6177(96)00019-4
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78764724</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0887617796000194</els_id><sourcerecordid>78764724</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-21e54e7de5c641e2d029e2c4c99b479dafb3ae33124ac288ba86c8f6b4508d03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkD1PwzAQhi0EoqXwE0CZEAwB23FsZ0Ko4ksqYqC75dgXatQmxXZA_HuctoKR5W645-7VPQidEnxFMOHXr1hKkXMixEXFLzHGpMrZHhoTKYq8lKzYR-NfZISOQnhPUEkIPUQjwkqZkGKM8LNeuvYNfCqZhQgmuq7NvlxcZHEBme1iZrq-jcM8QojH6KDRywAnuz5B8_u7-fQxn708PE1vZ7lhWMacEigZCAul4YwAtZhWQA0zVVUzUVnd1IWGoiCUaUOlrLXkRja8ZiWWFhcTdL49u_bdR59y1coFA8ulbqHrgxJScCYoS2C5BY3vQvDQqLV3K-2_FcFqMKU2ptSgQVVcbUypYe9sF9DXK7B_Wzs1CbjZApC-_HTgVTAOWgPW-WRJ2c79E_ED_rd33Q</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>78764724</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Malingering detection with the dot counting test</title><source>BACON - Elsevier - GLOBAL_SCIENCEDIRECT-OPENACCESS</source><source>Oxford Journals Online</source><creator>Binks, Paul G. ; Gouvier, Wm.Drew ; Waters, William F.</creator><creatorcontrib>Binks, Paul G. ; Gouvier, Wm.Drew ; Waters, William F.</creatorcontrib><description>The Dot Counting Test (DCT) offers a technique for malingering detection that is less transparent than the forced-choice testing that has received so much recent attention. The present study defined six dependent variables derived from DCT responses, and examined these variables in the context of differentiating simulators from non-simulators. Four groups of subjects were studied: normal controls, neuropsychological evaluation patients, naive (uncoached) malingering simulators, and sophisticated (coached) malingering simulators. Results demonstrate that the DCT provides several different scores that significantly differ between simulators and non-simulators. The DCT appears to hold promise as an additional tool to neuropsychologists in the detection of malingering.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0887-6177</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-5843</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0887-6177(96)00019-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 14588433</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><ispartof>Archives of clinical neuropsychology, 1997, Vol.12 (1), p.41-46</ispartof><rights>1997</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-21e54e7de5c641e2d029e2c4c99b479dafb3ae33124ac288ba86c8f6b4508d03</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,786,790,4043,27956,27957,27958</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14588433$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Binks, Paul G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gouvier, Wm.Drew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waters, William F.</creatorcontrib><title>Malingering detection with the dot counting test</title><title>Archives of clinical neuropsychology</title><addtitle>Arch Clin Neuropsychol</addtitle><description>The Dot Counting Test (DCT) offers a technique for malingering detection that is less transparent than the forced-choice testing that has received so much recent attention. The present study defined six dependent variables derived from DCT responses, and examined these variables in the context of differentiating simulators from non-simulators. Four groups of subjects were studied: normal controls, neuropsychological evaluation patients, naive (uncoached) malingering simulators, and sophisticated (coached) malingering simulators. Results demonstrate that the DCT provides several different scores that significantly differ between simulators and non-simulators. The DCT appears to hold promise as an additional tool to neuropsychologists in the detection of malingering.</description><issn>0887-6177</issn><issn>1873-5843</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1997</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkD1PwzAQhi0EoqXwE0CZEAwB23FsZ0Ko4ksqYqC75dgXatQmxXZA_HuctoKR5W645-7VPQidEnxFMOHXr1hKkXMixEXFLzHGpMrZHhoTKYq8lKzYR-NfZISOQnhPUEkIPUQjwkqZkGKM8LNeuvYNfCqZhQgmuq7NvlxcZHEBme1iZrq-jcM8QojH6KDRywAnuz5B8_u7-fQxn708PE1vZ7lhWMacEigZCAul4YwAtZhWQA0zVVUzUVnd1IWGoiCUaUOlrLXkRja8ZiWWFhcTdL49u_bdR59y1coFA8ulbqHrgxJScCYoS2C5BY3vQvDQqLV3K-2_FcFqMKU2ptSgQVVcbUypYe9sF9DXK7B_Wzs1CbjZApC-_HTgVTAOWgPW-WRJ2c79E_ED_rd33Q</recordid><startdate>1997</startdate><enddate>1997</enddate><creator>Binks, Paul G.</creator><creator>Gouvier, Wm.Drew</creator><creator>Waters, William F.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><scope>6I.</scope><scope>AAFTH</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>1997</creationdate><title>Malingering detection with the dot counting test</title><author>Binks, Paul G. ; Gouvier, Wm.Drew ; Waters, William F.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-21e54e7de5c641e2d029e2c4c99b479dafb3ae33124ac288ba86c8f6b4508d03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1997</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Binks, Paul G.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gouvier, Wm.Drew</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Waters, William F.</creatorcontrib><collection>ScienceDirect Open Access Titles</collection><collection>Elsevier:ScienceDirect:Open Access</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Archives of clinical neuropsychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Binks, Paul G.</au><au>Gouvier, Wm.Drew</au><au>Waters, William F.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Malingering detection with the dot counting test</atitle><jtitle>Archives of clinical neuropsychology</jtitle><addtitle>Arch Clin Neuropsychol</addtitle><date>1997</date><risdate>1997</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>41</spage><epage>46</epage><pages>41-46</pages><issn>0887-6177</issn><eissn>1873-5843</eissn><notes>ObjectType-Article-1</notes><notes>SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1</notes><notes>ObjectType-Feature-2</notes><notes>content type line 23</notes><abstract>The Dot Counting Test (DCT) offers a technique for malingering detection that is less transparent than the forced-choice testing that has received so much recent attention. The present study defined six dependent variables derived from DCT responses, and examined these variables in the context of differentiating simulators from non-simulators. Four groups of subjects were studied: normal controls, neuropsychological evaluation patients, naive (uncoached) malingering simulators, and sophisticated (coached) malingering simulators. Results demonstrate that the DCT provides several different scores that significantly differ between simulators and non-simulators. The DCT appears to hold promise as an additional tool to neuropsychologists in the detection of malingering.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>14588433</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0887-6177(96)00019-4</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0887-6177
ispartof Archives of clinical neuropsychology, 1997, Vol.12 (1), p.41-46
issn 0887-6177
1873-5843
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78764724
source BACON - Elsevier - GLOBAL_SCIENCEDIRECT-OPENACCESS; Oxford Journals Online
title Malingering detection with the dot counting test
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-09-22T19%3A12%3A05IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Malingering%20detection%20with%20the%20dot%20counting%20test&rft.jtitle=Archives%20of%20clinical%20neuropsychology&rft.au=Binks,%20Paul%20G.&rft.date=1997&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=41&rft.epage=46&rft.pages=41-46&rft.issn=0887-6177&rft.eissn=1873-5843&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0887-6177(96)00019-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E78764724%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-21e54e7de5c641e2d029e2c4c99b479dafb3ae33124ac288ba86c8f6b4508d03%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=78764724&rft_id=info:pmid/14588433&rfr_iscdi=true