A practical method for the evaluation of symptom exaggeration in minor head trauma among civil litigants

Shoba Sreenivasan, Spencer Eth, Patricia Kirkish, Thomas Garrick

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Scopus citations

Abstract

Forensic psychiatrists and psychologists are often called on to provide opinions and render testimony in which minor head trauma accompanied by persistent somatic, cognitive, and/or emotional symptoms is alleged. The frequency of persistent symptoms following such minor head injury is generally low. The forensic clinician therefore must differentiate between subtle brain dysfunction, symptom amplification, psychogenic-based causes for the presence of cognitive and other deficits, or frank malingering. The purpose of this article is twofold: first, to review critical issues related to the assessment of malingering and symptom exaggeration in mild head injury cases; and second, to offer a practical model for the assessment of amplified neuropsychological and psychiatric deficits in civil litigants in cases of minor head trauma.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)220-231
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law
Volume31
Issue number2
StatePublished - Jul 3 2003
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A practical method for the evaluation of symptom exaggeration in minor head trauma among civil litigants'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this