Open AccessAnother Perspective of the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test – Part I: A Narrative Review
Author(s) -
David Detullio
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
european journal of medical and health sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2593-8339
DOI - 10.24018/ejmed.2021.3.6.1142
Subject(s) - malingering , perspective (graphical) , narrative , narrative review , psychology , interpretation (philosophy) , test (biology) , miller , strengths and weaknesses , psychiatry , applied psychology , clinical psychology , computer science , social psychology , psychotherapist , artificial intelligence , linguistics , philosophy , paleontology , ecology , biology , programming language
Reference [1] presented a skewed perspective of the M-FAST literature base and provided the flawed conclusion that the M-FAST should no longer be used in practice. In an attempt to correct the many issues with [1], this article provides a narrative review of the strengths and weaknesses of research findings for the M-FAST interpretation as well as reviews methodological concepts underlying feigning research.The M-FAST was designed to screen for potential feigning of psychiatric symptoms. It was not designed to conclude that an examinee is feigning or malingering psychiatric symptoms. A positive result on the M-FAST only indicates that additional data needs to be collected to make the aforementioned conclusions. Applying the M-FAST in any other way is a serious error on the part of the user.The research literature thus far generally supports the use of the M-FAST cut-off as a screening measure for possible feigning of psychiatric symptoms. However, there are scenarios when the M-FAST may not operate as efficiently, and these scenarios are discussed. Reference [1] misrepresented the purpose of the M-FAST as well as research findings on the M-FAST. Therefore, [1] should be read with great caution.