Guilty Adjustment Response trends on the SVT

Conference proceedings / talk
Symptom Validity Test
Shaw, D. (2013). Guilty Adjustment Response trends on the SVT. Paper presented at the iIIRG 2013, Maastricht, NL.
Summary / Abstract: 

Notes: SVT - Symptom Validity Test (used to measure whether individuals are underperforming in a certain situation - usable for example in crime amnesia cases). The SVT is 29 ITEMS - 2 outcome questions (one is "true" the other "false" - for example what color was the bag that was snatched? a) Black b) Beige) The interesting anlytical twist is that we measure how many of the answers were inaccurate. For example in validation of SVT, the bank robber who claimed not remember robbing a bank answered 7 questions correctly out 29. If he answered by chance instead of avoiding "guilty knowledge", they would have been more accurate (there is a 5 promile chance of this distribution occuring by chance).

They applied this to a different condition. They basically confirmed things that are already known:

- Liars / perpetrators avoid guilty knowledge and on purpose answer inaccurately to avoid being associated with a problematic event.

- in the second half the test liars tend to answer more accurately than in the 1st half - to "even the odds". But that trend is also measurable.

Small sample, partial SVT. No mention of reliability.

Look for:

Bianchini, K.J., Mathias, C.W., Greve, K. W. (2001). Symptom validity testing: a critical review, The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 15(1), 19-45.

Merkelbach, H., Hauer B., & Rassin, E. (2002). Symptom validity testing of feigned dissociative amnesia: a simulation study. Psychology. Crime & Law. 8. pp311-318.


Author: Dominic Shaw, University of Portsmouth

Guilty Adjustment Response trends on the SVT