Talk:Test of Memory Malingering

Can less detail be provided about the specifics of the test and scoring? I believe this should be kept confidential from the general public, as knowing this much about the test may allow someone who is exaggerating an impairment to perform adequately on this task, which would make this test not valid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.86.81.22 (talk) 02:09, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your concern. I removed some of the more detailed remarks about what is considered a malingering performance. Thanks, static shakedown ʕ •ᴥ•ʔ 11:38, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See response to comment below DenverCoder9 (talk)

Thanks for slimming it down - much appreciated! I wonder if it would be better to remove the whole 'Format' section. From what I can see, there's still enough information that a skilled test-taker (or someone training the person how to take tests so as to appear genuine) could use this information to successfully recognize and possibly pass this test. Really the only people who would need this level of information would probably be psychologists, who should have access to this information through the test publishing companies. Does that sound okay? I understand that with other tests this wouldn't be a problem so much, but releasing any information about tests like this would, over time, invalidate the test results. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.86.81.22 (talk) 02:08, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I agree with the previous post of it being better to remove the entire "format" section. Although it runs counter to general sharing of knowledge, I would be far happier if the entire test was removed from Wikipedia. As a psychologist who uses this test regularly (and finds it very useful) in determination of injury in insurance and litigation cases, I believe that the information here could completely invalidate the test results if the client were to read it prior to assessment. Test security for tests like these is essential; violating it could result in erroneous conclusions in cases worth hundreds of thousands, or even millions of dollars to litigants, not to mention the implications for treatment, rehabilitation, or even criminal responsibility. 2001:569:79E3:8700:DD80:1201:E41B:1224 (talk) 23:59, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is not how Wikipedia works: see discussion in "Rorschach Test." There are many individuals with a close connection to the source that try to influence the content on Wikipedia. This is heavily discouraged. Some background: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2009/jul/29/rorschach-answers-wikipedia DenverCoder9 (talk) 20:08, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]