English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Malingering in neuropsychological assessment has been the subject of intense research for more than a decade and the detection methods arising from this work are diverse and sophisticated. However, the empirical findings are often presented in ways that limit the clinical utility of these techniques and may threaten their admissibility into legal proceedings. The purpose of this paper is to outline an approach for setting cut-offs on techniques designed to identify the presence of negative response bias. The use of this approach will result in the explicit specification of the error rate(s) of a given technique which can easily be applied by clinicians in the course of their practice and be admissible in court.

Setting empirical cut-offs on psychometric indicators of negative response bias: a methodological commentary with recommendations