Abstract
A reflection on the exchange between Larrabee et al. (2017) and Nichols (2017) is provided by a clinical psychologist who co-authored an early critique questioning the validity of the FBS as a measure of over reporting and who, based on subsequent studies demonstrating the effectiveness of the FBS in identifying non-credible report of somatic and cognitive complaints, changed his opinion regarding the utility of the FBS/FBS-r as a symptom validity measure. Given the accumulated evidence demonstrating the effectiveness of the FBS/FBS-r as a symptom validity measure, reasons for the continued debate over the validity and utility of the FBS/FBS-r are discussed.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1406-1411 |
Number of pages | 6 |
Journal | Clinical Neuropsychologist |
Volume | 31 |
Issue number | 8 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - Nov 17 2017 |
Keywords
- FBS
- commentary
- reflection
- validity