Further data on interrogative suggestibility and compliance scores following instructed malingering Ingo Hansen, Tom Smeets and Marko Jelicic* Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, The Netherlands Purpose. This study examined whether people can successfully feign high levels of interrogative suggestibility and compliance as measured by the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales (GSS) and the Gudjonsson Compliance Scale (GCS) when given instructions to malinger. Methods. Participants (N ¼ 90) were randomly allocated to one of three groups that received: (1) instructions to give into leading questions in order to look vulnerable to suggestions, (2) instructions to be compliant with the examiner, or (3) the standard GSS/GCS instructions. Results. One of the two malingering instructions led to modestly elevated scores of total suggestibility, while subscales remained unaffected. In contrast, both malingering groups obtained highly elevated compliance scores. Conclusions. These findings suggest that heightened suggestibility is rather difficult to malinger, thereby confirming the reliability of the GSS. On the other hand, it might be easier to malingering compliance as measured with the self-report GCS. Forensic experts are often required to assess potential attempts at malingering in cases of alleged amnesia or post-traumatic stress disorder. The motives for individuals to malinger include the avoidance of punishment or to at least be diminished responsible for one’s criminal acts. Little is known about perpetrators who want to retract a self incriminating statement that was made during police interrogations by pretending to be vulnerable to interrogative pressure. An important term in this context is interrogative suggestibility. 1 Gudjonsson and Clark (1986, p. 84) define interrogative suggestibility as ‘The extent to which, within a closed social interaction, people come to accept messages communicated during formal questioning, as a result of which their subsequent behavioural response is affected’. During a police interrogation, * Correspondence should be addressed to Dr Marko Jelicic, Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience, Maastricht University, PO Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands (e-mail: M.Jelicic@maastrichtuniversity.nl). 1 Subsequently also referred to as suggestibility. The British Psychological Society 221 Legal and Criminological Psychology (2010), 15, 221–228 q 2010 The British Psychological Society www.bpsjournals.co.uk DOI:10.1348/135532509X447796