Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Self-Report Symptom Inventory

  • Published:
Psychological Injury and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI) was developed to expand the toolbox of self-report instruments available to detect symptom overreporting. Such instruments, today known as symptom validity tests, play a crucial role in both forensic evaluations and in a range of clinical referral questions. The SRSI was originally designed in the German language; items were selected from a larger pool on the basis of empirical results. Scores on the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology served as external criterion for the item selection procedure and empirical cut-score determination (gold standard). The SRSI is composed of five subscales describing potentially genuine symptoms and five pseudosymptoms subscales. Ten different language test versions have been developed so far. The article describes the background of the construction of the scale, the main empirical results with the SRSI, the conditions of use, and the limits of applicability. With research ongoing in several countries and with a variety of language versions, a larger body of empirical evidence can be expected to accumulate in the coming years.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Both for copyright issues and for test security, the FBS and SRSI items formulated in this paragraph are not real, but made-up items to illustrate their nature.

References

  • Anstey, E. (1966). Psychological tests. Nelson.

  • Beaber, R. J., Marston, A. M., Michelli, J., & Mills, M. J. (1985). A brief test for measuring malingering in schizophrenic individuals. American Journal of Psychiatry, 142(2), 1478–1481. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.142.12.1478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. K. (1996). Beck Depression Inventory-Second Edition. The Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben Porath, Y. S., & Tellegen, A. (2008). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form. MMPI-2-RF. Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. University of Minnesota Press.

  • Bianchini, K. J., Greve, K. W., & Glynn, G. (2005). On the diagnosis of malingered pain-related disability: Lessons from cognitive malingering research. Spine Journal, 5(4), 404–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SPINEE.2004.11.016

  • Boskovic, I., Dibbets, P., Bogaard, G., Hope, L., Jelicic, M., & Orthey, R. (2019). Verify the scene, report the symptoms: Testing the verifiability approach and SRSI in the detection of fabricated PTSD claims. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 24, 241–257. https://doi.org/10.1111/lcrp.12149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boskovic, I., Merten, T., & Merckelbach, H. (2021). How plausible is the implausible? Students’ plausibility and prevalence ratings of the Self-Report Symptom Inventory. Psychological Injury and Law, 14(2), 127–133. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-021-09409-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boskovic, I., Merckelbach, H., Merten, T., Hope, L., & Jelicic, M. (2020). The Self-Report Symptom Inventory as an instrument for detecting over-reporting: An explorative study with instructed simulators. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 36(5), 730–739. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000547

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bush, S. S., Heilbronner, R. L., & Ruff, R. M. (2014). Psychological assessment of symptom and performance validity, response bias, and malingering: Official position of the Association for Scientific Advancement in Psychological Injury and Law. Psychological Injury and Law, 7(3), 197–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-014-9198-7

  • Butcher, J. N., Graham, J. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Tellegen, A., & Dahlstrom, W. G. (1989). MMPI-2: Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2. University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carone, D. A., & Bush, S. S. (2018). Validity assessment in rehabilitation psychology and settings. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, M. (2013). To tell the truth and nothing but the truth: The role of high and low stakes in the decision to malinger. Master’s thesis. Maastricht University, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience.

  • Cima, M., Hollnack, S., Kremer, K., Knauer, E., Schellbach-Matties, R., Klein, B., & Merckelbach, H. (2003). "Strukturierter Fragebogen Simulierter Symptome". Die deutsche Version des "Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology: SIMS" [The German version of the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology]. Nervenarzt, 74(11), 977–986. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00115-002-1438-5

  • Czornik, M., Merten, T., & Lehrner, J. (2021). Symptom and performance validation in patients with subjective cognitive decline and mild cognitive impairment. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 28(3), 269–281. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2019.1628761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dandachi-FitzGerald, B., Ponds, R. W. H. M., Peters, M. J. V., & Merckelbach, H. (2011). Cognitive underperformance and symptom over-reporting in a mixed psychiatric sample. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 25(5), 812–828. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2011.583280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egeland, J., Anderson, S., Sundseth, O. O., & Schanke, A. K. (2015). Two types of malingering? A confirmatory factor analysis of performance and symptom validity tests. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 22(3), 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2014.910212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geurten, M., Meulemans, T., & Seron, X. (2018). Detecting over-reporting of symptoms: The French version of the Self-Report Symptom Inventory. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 32(Suppl. 1), 164–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2018.1524027

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Giger, P., & Merten, T. (2013). Swiss population-based reference data for six symptom validity tests. Clínica y Salud, 24(3), 153–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1130-5274(13)70016-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giger, P., & Merten, T. (2019). Equivalence of the German and the French versions of the Self-Report Symptom Inventory. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 78(1), 5–13. https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0185/a000218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Göbber, J., Petermann, F., Piegza, M., & Kobelt, A. (2012). Beschwerdevalidierung bei Rehabilitanden mit Migrationshintergrund in der Psychosomatik [Symptom validation in patients with migration background in psychosomatic medicine]. Rehabilitation, 51(5), 356–364. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1323669

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, P. (2003). Green's Word Memory Test. User's Manual. Green's Publishing.

  • Helmstadter, G. C. (1966). Principles of psychological measurement. Methuen & Co.

  • Kaminski, A., Merten, T., & Kobelt-Pönicke, A. (2020). Der Vergleich von drei Beschwerdenvalidierungstests in der stationären psychosomatischen Rehabilitation [Comparison of three symptom validity tests in a sample of psychosomatic inpatients]. Zeitschrift für Psychiatrie, Psychologie und Psychotherapie, 68(2), 96–105. https://doi.org/10.1024/1661-4747/a000408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lautenschlager, G. J., & Flaherty, V. L. (1990). Computer administration of questions: More desirable or more social desirability? Journal of Applied Psychology, 75(3), 310–314. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.75.3.310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lees-Haley, P. R., English, L. T., & Glenn, W. J. (1991). A Fake Bad Scale on the MMPI-2 for personal injury claimants. Psychological Reports, 68(1), 208–210. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1991.68.1.203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lilienfeld, S. O., Thames, A. D., & Watts, A. L. (2013). Symptom validity testing: Unresolved questions, future directions. Journal of Experimental Psychopathology, 4(1), 78–87. https://doi.org/10.5127/jep.028312

  • McWhirter, L., Ritchie, C. W., Stone, J., & Carson, A. (2020). Performance validity test failure in clinical populations – A systematic review. Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery Psychiatry, 91(9), 945–952. https://doi.org/10.1136/jnnp-2020-323776

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merckelbach, H., Merten, T., Dandachi-FitzGerald, B., & Boskovic, I. (2018). De Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI): En instrument voor klachtenoverdrijving [The Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI): An instrument to measure symptom overreporting]. De Psycholoog, 53(3), 32–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merten, T. (2006). An analysis of the VOSP Silhouettes test with neurological patients. Psychology Science, 48(4), 451–462.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merten, T., Friedel, E., & Stevens, A. (2007). Die Authentizität der Beschwerdenschilderung in der neurologisch-psychiatrischen Begutachtung: Eine Untersuchung mit dem Strukturierten Fragebogen Simulierter Symptome [Authenticity of symptom report in independent neurological and psychiatric examinations: A study with the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology]. Praxis der Rechtspsychologie, 17(1), 140–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merten, T., Giger, P., Merckelbach, H., & Stevens, A. (2019). Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI) – deutsche Version. Manual [German version of the Self-Report Symptom Inventory. Manual]. Hogrefe.

  • Merten, T., Kaminski, A., & Pfeiffer, W. (2020). Prevalence of overreporting on symptom validity tests in a large sample of psychosomatic rehabilitation inpatients. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 34(5), 1004–1024. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2019.1694073

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Merten, T., Lorenz, R., & Schlatow, S. (2010). Posttraumatic stress disorder can easily be faked, but faking can be detected in most cases. German Journal of Psychiatry, 13(3), 140–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Merten, T., Merckelbach, H., Giger, P., & Stevens, A. (2016). The Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI): A new instrument for the assessment of distorted symptom endorsement. Psychological Injury and Law, 9(2), 102–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-016-9257-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merten, T., & Ruch, W. (1996). A comparison of computerized and conventional administration of the German versions of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire and the Carroll Rating Scale for Depression. Personality and Individual Differences, 20(3), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(95)00185-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Millon, T. (1987). Manual for the Millon Clinical Multitaxial Inventory–II (MCMI-II) (2nd ed.). National Computer Systems.

  • Morey, L. C. (2007). The Personality Assessment Inventory professional manual (2nd ed.). Psychological Assessment Resources.

  • Nijdam-Jones, A., & Rosenfeld, B. (2017). Cross-cultural feigning assessment: A systematic review of feigning instruments used with linguistically, ethnically, and culturally diverse samples. Psychological Assessment, 29(11), 131–1336. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ord, A. S., Shura, R. D., Sansone, A. R., Martindale, S. L., Taber, K. H., & Rowland, J. A. (2021). Performance validity and symptom validity tests: Are they measuring different constructs? Neuropsychology, 35(3), 241–251. https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0000722

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pienkohs, S. (2021). Equivalence of the Dutch and German Self-Report Symptom Inventory. Unpublished master thesis. Maastricht University.

  • Plomin, R. (1986). Development, genetics, and psychology. Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reece, V. J. (2017). Validation of the symptoms of Post-concussion Syndrome Questionnaire as a self-report symptom validity test: A simulation study. Doctoral dissertation, Staffordshire and Keele Universities, UK. https://eprints.staffs.ac.uk/4469/

  • Schmand, B., & Lindeboom, J. (2005). Amsterdam Short-Term Memory Test. Amsterdamer Kurzzeitgedächtnistest. Manual, Handanweisung. PITS.

  • Schretlen, D., Wilkins, S., van Gorp, W., & Bobholz, J. (1992). Cross-validation of a psychological test battery to detect faked insanity. Psychological Assessment, 4(1), 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.4.1.77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, E. M. S., Slick, D. J., & Iverson, G. L. (2020). Multidimensional malingering criteria for neuropsychological assessment: A 20-year update of the malingered neuropsychological dysfunction criteria. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 35(6), 735–764. https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acaa019

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, G. P., & Burger, G. K. (1997). Detection of malingering: Validation of the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS). Journal of the American Academy on Psychiatry and Law, 25(2), 180–183.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, A., Schmidt, D., & Hautzinger, M. (2018). Major depression – A study on the validity of clinicians‘ diagnoses in medicolegal assessment. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 29(5), 794–809. https://doi.org/10.1080/14789949.2018.1477974

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweet, J. J., Heilbronnner, R. L., Morgan, J. E., Larrabee, G. J., Rohling, M. L., Boone, K. B., Kirkwood, M. W., Schroeder, R. W., Suhr, J. A., & Conference Participants. (2021). American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology (AACN) 2021 consensus statement on validity assessment: Update of the 2009 AACN consensus conference statement on neuropsychological assessment of effort, response bias, and malingering. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 35(6), 1053-1106. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2021.1896036

  • Tombaugh, T. N. (1996). Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM). Multi-Health Systems.

  • van der Heide, D., Boskovic, I., & Merckelbach, H. (2017). Standard symptom inventories for asylum seekers in a psychiatric hospital: Limited utility due to poor symptom validity. Psychological Injury and Law, 10(4), 358–367. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-017-9302-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Dyke, S. A., Millis, S. R., Axelrod, B. N., & Hanks, R. A. (2013). Assessing effort: Differentiating performance and symptom validity. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 27(8), 1234–1246. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2013.835447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Helvoort, D., Merckelbach, H., & Merten, T. (2019). The Self-Report Symptom Inventory (SRSI) is sensitive to instructed feigning, but not to genuine psychopathology in male forensic inpatients: An initial study. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 33(6), 1069–1082. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2018.1559359

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Impelen, A., Merckelbach, H., Jelicic, M., & Merten, T. (2014). The Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS): A systematic review and meta-analysis. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 28(8), 1336–1365. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2014.984763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Viglione, D. J., & Giromini, L. (2020). Inventory of Problems–29. Professional Manual. IOP-Test, LLC.

  • Viglione, D. J., Giromini, L., & Landis, P. (2017). The development of the Inventory of Problems–29: A brief self-administered measure for discriminating bona fide from feigned psychiatric and cognitive complaints. Journal of Personality Assessment, 99(5), 534–544. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2016.1233882

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walter, F., Petermann, F., & Kobelt, A. (2016). Erfassung von negativen Antwortverzerrungen – Entwicklung und Validierung des Beschwerdenvalidierungstests BEVA [Assessment of negative response bias: Development and validation of the BEVA]. Rehabilitation, 55(3), 182–190. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-105939

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webster, J., & Compeau, D. (1996). Computer-assisted versus paper-and-pencil administration of questionnaires. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 28(4), 567–576. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Widows, M. R., & Smith, G. P. (2005). SIMS – Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology. Professional Manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurology, Vivantes Klinikum im Friedrichshain, Landsberger Allee 49, 10249, Berlin, Germany

    Thomas Merten

  2. Forensic Psychology Section, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    Brechje Dandachi-FitzGerald & Harald Merckelbach

  3. Department of Psychology, Erasmus University, Education & Child Studies, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

    Irena Boskovic

  4. Applied Psychology Service, University of Murcia, Murcia, Spain

    Esteban Puente-López

Authors
  1. Thomas Merten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Brechje Dandachi-FitzGerald
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Irena Boskovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Esteban Puente-López
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Harald Merckelbach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas Merten.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Harald Merckelbach and Thomas Merten are two of the authors of the Self-Report Symptom Inventory, which is commercially distributed by Hogrefe Publishers, Göttingen, Germany.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Merten, T., Dandachi-FitzGerald, B., Boskovic, I. et al. The Self-Report Symptom Inventory. Psychol. Inj. and Law 15, 94–103 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-021-09434-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-021-09434-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation