Effectiveness of indicators in the assessment of cognitive feigning: from type of stimuli to detection strategies An updated and extended meta-analysis

The present database contains 109 entries which represent studies on the assessment of neuropsychological feigning. From each study we extracted a set of outcomes used to detect cognitive feigning in groups of normal and clinical participants. Subjects considered to be feigning were labeled mal and represented the experimental group, subjects considered to be honest were labeled hon and represented the control group. We selected 3 types of contrasts between groups: honest vs malingering (hon vs mal), malingering vs malingering (mal vs mal), and honest vs honest (hon vs hon). Two studies included an extra category of participants labeled indeterminate, which generated two new contrast possibilities: honest vs indeterminate (hon vs indeterm), and indeterminate vs malingering (indeterm vs mal). Test means and SDs were extracted for each group of participants, on each scale/indicator of included measures. Extracted data also includes: sample size of experimental and control groups, type of participants (normal/diagnoses for clinical patients), type of feigning, type of research design, type of investigated cognitive process, type of indicator used by the corresponding scale, type of detection strategy, and type of stimulus.