Abeare, K., Razvi, P., Sirianni, C. D., Giromini, L., Holcomb, M., Cutler, L., & Erdodi, L. A. (2021). Introducing alternative validity cutoffs to improve the detection of non-credible symptom report on the BRIEF. Psychological Injury and Law, 14, 2–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-021-09402-4

Article  Google Scholar 

Akca, A. Y., Tepedelen, M. S., Uysal, B., & Erdodi, L. A. (2023). The Inventory of Problems–29 is a cross-culturally valid symptom validity test: Initial validation in a Turkish community sample. Psychological Injury and Law, 16(3), 289–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-023-09483-3

Article  Google Scholar 

Banovic, I., Filippi, F., Viglione, D. J., Scrima, F., Zennaro, A., Zappalà, A., & Giromini, L. (2022). Detecting coached feigning of schizophrenia with the Inventory of Problems – 29 (IOP-29) and its Memory Module (IOP-M): A simulation study on a french community sample. International Journal of Forensic Mental Health, 21(1), 37–53. https://doi.org/10.1080/14999013.2021.1906798

Article  Google Scholar 

Biro, M. (2001). Dijagnostička procena ličnosti MMPI-202 (2nd Ed.) [Clinical Personality Assessment – MMPI 202]. Društvo psihologa Srbije.

Blavier, A., Palma, A., Viglione, D. J., Zennaro, A., & Giromini, L. (2023). A natural experiment design testing the effectiveness of the IOP-29 and IOP-M in assessing the credibility of reported PTSD symptoms in Belgium. Journal of Forensic Psychology Research and Practice, [Epub ahead of print]. https://doi.org/10.1080/24732850.2023.2203130

Bosi, J., Minassian, L., Ales, F., Akca, A. Y. E., Winters, C., Viglione, D. J., ... & Giromini, L. (2022). The sensitivity of the IOP-29 and IOP-M to coached feigning of depression and mTBI: An online simulation study in a community sample from the United Kingdom. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, [Epub ahead of print]. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2022.2115910

Boskovic, I., Akca, A. Y. E., & Giromini, L. (2022). Symptom coaching and symptom validity tests: An analog study using the structured inventory of malingered symptomatology, self-report symptom inventory, and inventory of problems-29. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult. [Epub ahead of print]. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2022.2057856

Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written material. In H.C. Triandis & J.W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol.1) (pp. 389–444). Allyn & Bacon.

Butcher, J. N., Graham, J. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Tellegen, A., Dahlstrom, W. G., & Kaemmer, B. (2001). MMPI-2 (Minnesota Multiphasic Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2). Minneapolis University of Minnesota Press.

Google Scholar 

Carvalho, L., Reis, A., Colombarolli, M. S., Pasian, S. R., Miguel, F. K., Erdodi, L. A., Viglione, D. J., & Giromini, L. (2021). Discriminating feigned from credible PTSD symptoms: A validation of a brazilian version of the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29). Psychological Injury and Law, 14, 58–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-021-09403-3

Article  Google Scholar 

Crișan, I. (2023). English versus native language administration of the IOP-29-M produces similar results in a sample of Romanian bilinguals: A brief report. Psychology & Neuroscience, 16(3), 254–260. https://doi.org/10.1037/pne0000316

Article  Google Scholar 

Erdodi, L., Calamia, M., Holcomb, M., Robinson, A., Rasmussen, L., & Bianchini, K. (2023). M is For Performance Validity: The IOP-M Provides a Cost-Effective Measure of the Credibility of Memory Deficits during Neuropsychological Evaluations. Journal of Forensic Psychology Research and Practice, 24(4), 434–450. https://doi.org/10.1080/24732850.2023.2168581

Article  Google Scholar 

Gegner, J., Erdodi, L. A., Giromini, L., Viglione, D. J., Bosi, J., & Brusadelli, E. (2022). An Australian study on feigned mTBI using the inventory of problems–29 (IOP-29), its memory module (IOP-M), and the Rey fifteen item test (FIT). Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 29(5), 1221–1230. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2020.1864375

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Geisinger, K. F. (2003). Testing and assessment in cross-cultural psychology. In J. R. Graham, J. A. Naglieri, & I. B. Weiner (Eds.), Handbook of psychology (Vol. 10). Assessment Psychology (pp. 95–118). John Wiley & Sons.

Giromini, L., & Viglione, D. J. (2022). Assessing negative response bias with the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29): A quantitative literature review. Psychological Injury and Law, 15(1), 79–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-021-09437-7

Article  Google Scholar 

Giromini, L., Barbosa, F., Coga, G., Azeredo, A., Viglione, D. J., & Zennaro, A. (2020a). Using the inventory of problems - 29 (IOP-29) with the test of memory malingering (TOMM) in symptom validity assessment: A study with a portuguese sample of experimental feigners. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 27, 504–516. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2019.1570929

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Giromini, L., Pignolo, C., Zennaro, A., & Viglione, D. J. (2018). A clinical comparison, simulation study testing the validity of SIMS and IOP-29 with an Italian Sample. Psychological Injury and Law, 11(4), 340–350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-018-9314-1

Article  Google Scholar 

Giromini, L., Viglione, D. J., Pignolo, C., & Zennaro, A. (2020b). An Inventory of Problems–29 sensitivity study investigating feigning of four different symptom presentations via malingering experimental paradigm. Journal of Personality Assessment, 102(4), 563–572. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2019.1566914

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Giromini, L., Viglione, D. J., Pignolo, C., & Zennaro, A. (2020c). An Inventory of Problems-29 study on random responding using experimental feigners, honest controls, and computer-generated data. Journal of Personality Assessment, 102(6), 731–742. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2019.1639188

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Giromini, L., Viglione, D. J., Zennaro, A., Maffei, A., & Erdodi, L. A. (2020d). SVT Meets PVT: Development and initial validation of the Inventory of Problems – Memory (IOP-M). Psychological Injury and Law, 13, 261–274. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-020-09385-8

Article  Google Scholar 

Giromini, L., Young, G., & Sellbom, M. (2022). Assessing Negative Response Bias Using Self-Report Measures: Introducing the Special Issue. Psychological Injury and Law, 15, 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-022-09444-2

Article  Google Scholar 

Grønnerød, C., Rekkedal Rolfsnes, S., & Gustavson, K. (2023). Validity of the Norwegian Version of Inventory of Problems–29 (IoP-29): A simulation study with experimental feigning of depression and a nonclinical control group. Psychology & Neuroscience, 16(2), 147–154. https://doi.org/10.1037/pne0000309

Article  Google Scholar 

Holcomb, M., Pyne, S., Cutler, L., Oikle, D. A., & Erdodi, L. A. (2023). Take Their Word for It: The Inventory of Problems Provides Valuable Information on Both Symptom and Performance Validity. Journal of Personality Assessment, 105(4), 520–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2022.2114358

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ilgunaite, G., Giromini, L., Bosi, J., Viglione, D. J., & Zennaro, A. (2022). A clinical comparison simulation study using the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29) with the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) in Lithuania. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 29(2), 155–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2020.1725518

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Puente-López, E., Pina, D., López-Nicolás, R., Iguacel, I., & Arce, R. (2023a). The Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29): A systematic review and bivariate diagnostic test accuracy meta-analysis. Psychological Assessment, 35(4), 339–352. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001209

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Puente-López, E., Pina, D., Rambaud-Quiñones, P., Ruiz-Hernández, J. A., Nieto-Cañaveras, M. D., Shura, R. D., Alcazar-Crevillén, A., & Martinez-Jarreta, B. (2023b). Classification accuracy and resistance to coaching of the Spanish version of the Inventory of Problems -29 and the Inventory of Problems - Memory: a simulation study with mTBI patients. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, [Epub ahead of print]. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2023.2249171

Rogers, R., & Gillard, N. D. (2011). Research methods for the assessment of malingering. In B. Rosenfeld & S. Penrod (Eds.), Research Methods in Forensic Psychology (pp. 174–188). Wiley.

Google Scholar 

Roma, P., Giromini, L., Burla, F., Ferracuti, S., Viglione, D. J., & Mazza, C. (2020). Ecological validity of the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29): An Italian study of court-ordered, psychological injury evaluations using the Structured Inventory of Malingered Symptomatology (SIMS) as criterion variable. Psychological Injury and Law, 13, 57–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-019-09368-4

Article  Google Scholar 

Roma, P., Giromini, L., Sellbom, M., Cardinale, A., Ferracuti, S., & Mazza, C. (2023). The ecological validity of the IOP-29: A follow-up study using the MMPI-2-RF and the SIMS as criterion variables. Psychological Assessment, 35(10), 868–879. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001273

Article  PubMed  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 

Šömen, M. M., Lesjak, S., Majaron, T., Lavopa, L., Giromini, L., Viglione, D. J., & Podlesek, A. (2021). Using the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29) with the Inventory of Problems Memory (IOP-M) in Malingering-Related Assessments: A Study with a Slovenian Sample of Experimental Feigners. Psychological Injury and Law, 14, 104–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-021-09412-2

Article  Google Scholar 

Šrubař, M., & Fňukal, M. (2010). Migration from the countries of former Yugoslovia and its impact on international relations. Acta Universitatis Palackianae Olomucensis-Geographica, 41(2), 21–36.

Google Scholar 

Sweet, J. J., Heilbronner, R. L., Morgan, J. E., Larrabee, G. J., Rohling, M. L., Boone, K. B., Kirkwood, M. W., Schroeder, R. W., Suhr, J. A., & Participants, C. (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

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Van de Vijver, F., & Hambleton, R. K. (1996). Translating tests: Some practical guidelines. European Psychologist, 1, 89–99.

Article  Google Scholar 

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 

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

Winters, C. L., Giromini, L., Crawford, T. J., Ales, F., Viglione, D. J., & Warmelink, L. (2021). An Inventory of Problems–29 (IOP–29) study investigating feigned schizophrenia and random responding in a British community sample. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 28(2), 235–254. https://doi.org/10.1080/13218719.2020.1767720

Article  Google Scholar 

Young, G. (2015). Malingering in forensic disability-related assessments: Prevalence 15 ± 15 %. Psychological Injury and Law, 8(3), 188–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-015-9232-4

Article  Google Scholar