Much of what we know about malingering of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been learned from the performance of analog malingerers, typically first-year psychology students given credit for study participation. It is not clear, however, whether their performance is similar to that found in actual clinical settings. Indeed, past research suggests that analog malingerers may overexaggerate deficits relative to real-world malingerers, making them easier to identify in controlled studies. The purpose of the current study was, therefore, to compare the performance of analog malingers to post-secondary students strongly suspected of malingering ADHD on a self-report measure of ADHD symptoms. Their scores were, in turn, compared to those returned by students with genuine ADHD and clinical controls. Results demonstrated that, apart from analog subjects overexaggerating symptoms of hyperactivity, few differences exist between the scores returned by analog malingerers relative to clinical malingerers. While newly devised symptom validity measures show promise in identifying malingered ADHD, neither the analog nor the clinical malingers consistently failed these symptom validity scales. Furthermore, a good portion in both malingering groups failed to endorse high levels of ADHD symptoms in general. Clinical implications are discussed.

我们对注意力缺陷多动障碍 (ADHD) 的伪装了解的大部分内容都是从模拟伪装者的表现中了解到的，这些伪装者通常是一年级心理学学生，因为他们参与了学习。然而，尚不清楚它们的性能是否与实际临床环境中的性能相似。事实上，过去的研究表明，模拟装病者可能会过度夸大现实世界中的装病者的缺陷，使他们在对照研究中更容易识别。因此，本研究的目的是比较模拟伪装者与强烈怀疑伪装 ADHD 的大专学生在 ADHD 症状的自我报告测量中的表现。反过来，他们的分数与患有真正多动症和临床对照的学生返回的分数进行比较。结果表明，除了模拟对象过度夸大多动症的症状外，模拟伪装者返回的分数与临床伪装者之间几乎没有差异。虽然新设计的症状效度测量在识别装病的 ADHD 方面显示出前景，但模拟和临床装病者都没有始终未能通过这些症状效度量表。此外，两个装病群体中的很大一部分总体上都没有认可高水平的 ADHD 症状。讨论了临床意义。无论是模拟还是临床装病者，都始终未能通过这些症状效度量表。此外，两个装病群体中的很大一部分总体上都没有认可高水平的 ADHD 症状。讨论了临床意义。无论是模拟还是临床装病者，都始终未能通过这些症状效度量表。此外，两个装病群体中的很大一部分总体上都没有认可高水平的 ADHD 症状。讨论了临床意义。