Malingering research typically uses analog simulation design or differential prevalence design among "real" patients. Both have been criticized for methodological limitations in external and internal validity, respectively. Samples of simulated malingerers were compared to suspected malingerers to examine generalizability of analog findings. Overall results support the use of simulation designs. Furthermore, it was demonstrated that stringent selection of suspected malingerers maintains internal validity of the differential prevalence design. A second focus, to determine if demographic matching of simulated malingerers is necessary, showed that matching on age and race is not necessary.