Detecting simulated memory impairment: Comparison of the rey fifteen-item test and the hiscock forced-choice procedure

Abstract Rey's (1964) Fifteen-Item Test (FIT) and the Hiscock Forced-Choice Procedure (HFCP; Hiscock & Hiscock, 1989) are two assessment methods that are reported to be sensitive in detecting malingered amnesia. This study compared the FIT with an abbreviated version of the Hiscock Forced-Choice Procedure (A-HFCP) in detecting simulated memory impairment by administering these two procedures to a group of nonlitigating individuals with moderate to severe brain damage (n=20), depressed psychiatric inpatients (n=20), and a group of normals asked to fake believable memory impairment as a result of brain damage (n=20). On the FIT, the brain-damaged group recalled significantly fewer items than the remaining two groups and fewer rows than the psychiatric patients. Using a cutoff of seven or less items correct, 40% of the braindamaged group and 20% of the psychiatric group would have been classified as possible malingerers. In contrast, only 5% of the simulators fell in the "malingering" range. When comparisons were made on the A-HFCP, simulators performed significantly worse than did the remaining two groups. Using a cutoff of 90% or less correct as suggestive of malingering, all of the brain-damaged subjects and all but 15% of the simulators were correctly classified. Results indicate that compared with the A-HFCP, the FIT is overly sensitive to genuine memory impairment and not sensitive enough to identify individuals asked to fake brain damage. Thus, the A-HFCP appears to be superior to the FIT as a malingering detection procedure within neuropsychological assessment.