The accurate evaluation of response style, particularly with respect to overreporting, is imperative in forensic settings wherein an external incentive to feign exists. Given the high cost of false positive errors in this context, as well as the associated cost of false negative errors, evaluators need to ensure that overreporting methods are effective with the unique patient populations with whom they work. Complicating this issue is that forensic samples often differ in predictable ways from the normative samples upon which typical psychological assessment instruments were normed. The purpose of the present investigation was to evaluate the specificity of the overreporting indices on the Personality Assessment Inventory, one of the most commonly used personality inventories, in a forensic sample with no ostensible incentive to feign. Although item endorsement and configural elevations on the Negative Impression Management (NIM) scale and the Malingering Index (MAL) were associated with genuine psychopathology, results indicated that the overall specificity estimates across groups were generally adequate. Further, and consistent with prior research, Rogers Discriminant Function (RDF) performed poorly in this sample.

在存在假装的外部诱因的法医环境中，必须准确评估反应风格，尤其是在过度报告方面。鉴于在这种情况下假阳性错误的高成本，以及假阴性错误的相关成本，评估人员需要确保高报方法对他们工作的独特患者群体有效。使这个问题复杂化的是，法医样本通常以可预测的方式不同于典型的心理评估工具所依据的规范样本。本调查的目的是评估人格评估量表（最常用的人格量表之一）在没有表面上的伪装动机的法医样本中多报指数的特异性。尽管负面印象管理 (NIM) 量表和伪装指数 (MAL) 上的项目背书和配置提升与真正的精神病理学有关，但结果表明各组的总体特异性估计通常是足够的。此外，与先前的研究一致，罗杰斯判别函数 (RDF) 在该样本中表现不佳。