Objective: Assess the utility and correlates of overlearned material in the detection of poor effort and malingering. Most SVTs rely primarily on a concept of effort as a marker for invalid results (that can occur for a variety of reasons) but may be insufficient by themselves to support a diagnosis of “malingering” in which deliberate efforts are presumed to negatively bias results. We believe SVTs using overlearned stimuli require less “effort” than traditional measures, and therefore can provide more support for diagnosing malingering. Method: A sample of 155 patients assessed for compensation-related claims were given comprehensive assessments including CARB and TOMM to assess effort, along with Psycho Assistant which is based on recognition of well known (overlearned) versus unknown objects to gauge suppression and fabrication of overlearned memory of iconic stimuli. Utilizing quasi-experimental designs, we compared performance on these two types of SVTs for their ability to predict poor performance on the tests measuring established knowledge and skills (WAIS-III Information, Vocabulary, Picture Completion, WRAT-IV, Reading and Spelling), as contrasted with measures assessing memory, learning, concentration and speed of performance. Results: Failure on all SVTs was associated with lower performance on most ability measures. Although Psycho Assistant was slightly less sensitive than CARB and TOMM, poorer performance was associated with lower scores on tests assessing crystallized knowledge. Conclusion: Consistent with previous studies, Psycho Assistant demonstrates utility in assessing suboptimal performance. This study provides additional support for its conceptual underpinnings.