Examining the repeatable battery for the assessment of neuropsychological status validity indices in people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders

Abstract Schizophrenia is frequently a chronic and disabling disorder, characterized by heterogeneous positive and negative symptom constellations. The objective of this review was to provide information that may be useful for clinicians treating patients with negative symptoms of schizophrenia. Negative symptoms are a core component of schizophrenia that account for a large part of the long-term disability and poor functional outcomes in patients with the disorder. The term negative symptoms describes a lessening or absence of normal behaviors and functions related to motivation and interest, or verbal/emotional expression. The negative symptom domain consists of five key constructs: blunted affect, alogia (reduction in quantity of words spoken), avolition (reduced goal-directed activity due to decreased motivation), asociality, and anhedonia (reduced experience of pleasure). Negative symptoms are common in schizophrenia; up to 60% of patients may have prominent clinically relevant negative symptoms that require treatment. Negative symptoms can occur at any point in the course of illness, although they are reported as the most common first symptom of schizophrenia. Negative symptoms can be primary symptoms, which are intrinsic to the underlying pathophysiology of schizophrenia, or secondary symptoms that are related to psychiatric or medical comorbidities, adverse effects of treatment, or environmental factors. While secondary negative symptoms can improve as a consequence of treatment to improve symptoms in other domains (ie, positive symptoms, depressive symptoms or extrapyramidal symptoms), primary negative symptoms generally do not respond well to currently available antipsychotic treatment with dopamine D2 antagonists or partial D2 agonists. Since some patients may lack insight about the presence of negative symptoms, these are generally not the reason that patients seek clinical care, and clinicians should be especially vigilant for their presence. Negative symptoms clearly constitute an unmet medical need in schizophrenia, and new and effective treatments are urgently needed.

During the past two decades clinical and research efforts have led to increasingly sophisticated and effective methods and instruments designed to detect exaggeration or fabrication of neuropsychological dysfunction, as well as somatic and psychological symptom complaints. A vast literature based on relevant research has emerged and substantial portions of professional meetings attended by clinical neuropsychologists have addressed topics related to malingering (Sweet, King, Malina, Bergman, & Simmons, 2002). Yet, despite these extensive activities, understanding the need for methods of detecting problematic effort and response bias and addressing the presence or absence of malingering has proven challenging for practitioners. A consensus conference, comprised of national and international experts in clinical neuropsychology, was held at the 2008 Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN) for the purposes of refinement of critical issues in this area. This consensus statement documents the current state of knowledge and recommendations of expert clinical neuropsychologists and is intended to assist clinicians and researchers with regard to the neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering.

Over the past 10 years, widespread and concerted research efforts have led to increasingly sophisticated and efficient methods and instruments for detecting exaggeration or fabrication of cognitive dysfunction. Despite these psychometric advances, the process of diagnosing malingering remains difficult and largely idiosyncratic. This article presents a proposed set of diagnostic criteria that define psychometric, behavioral, and collateral data indicative of possible, probable, and definite malingering of cognitive dysfunction, for use in clinical practice and for defining populations for clinical research. Relevant literature is reviewed, and limitations and benefits of the proposed criteria are discussed.