Actual versus self-reported scholastic achievement of litigating postconcussion and severe closed head injury claimants

M. Frank Greiffenstein, W. John Baker, Douglas Johnson-Greene

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Scopus citations

Abstract

Psychologists typically rely on patients' self-report of premorbid status in litigated settings. The authors examined the fidelity between self-reported and actual scholastic performance in litigating head injury claimants. The data indicated late postconcussion syndrome (LPCS) and severe closed head injury litigants retrospectively inflated scholastic performance to a greater degree than nonlitigating control groups. The LPCS group showed the highest magnitude of grade inflation, but discrepancy scores did not significantly correlate with a battery of malingering measures or with objective cerebral dysfunction. These findings support previous studies, which showed self-report is not a reliable basis for estimation of preinjury cognitive status. Retrospective inflation may represent a response shift bias shaped by an adversarial context rather than a form of malingering.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)202-208
Number of pages7
JournalPsychological Assessment
Volume14
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 1 2002
Externally publishedYes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Actual versus self-reported scholastic achievement of litigating postconcussion and severe closed head injury claimants'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this