ABSTRACT
In contrast to Meyer and Deitsch's suggestion to broaden the use of the concept of malingering, Rogers (1997a) presents more narrow definitions. Malingering and defensiveness are reserved for cases in which there is unequivocal evidence of deliberate dissimulation. The determination of malingering is a multimethod assessment which incorporates and integrates data from unstructured interviews, psychological tests, and collateral sources. Whenever an examiner presents data showing a near-certainty that a person's self-report is unreliable, the examiner must clearly communicate that this does not equate to a near-certainty that the person is malingering. The parallel here is that, using the best assessment techniques, there is potential for evaluators to say with a specifiable level of certainty that a person is feigning psychopathology, but whether or not the person is malingering requires interpretation of the meaning of the facts.
