Lionel L. Hudson appeals the district court’s 1 order affirming the termination of disability insurance benefits and supple *936 mental security income after a continuing-disability review. Having carefully reviewed the record, see Ellis v. Barnhart, 392 F.3d 988, 993 (8th Cir. 2005) (standard of review), we affirm.

We reject Hudson’s challenge to the administrative law judge’s (ALJ’s) credibility determination, because the ALJ gave multiple valid reasons for finding Hudson’s subjective complaints not credible. See Guilliams v. Barnhart, 393 F.3d 798, 801 (8th Cir. 2005) (deference warranted where ALJ’s credibility determination is supported by good reasons and substantial evidence). We also reject Hudson’s assertion that the ALJ should have adopted the mental residual-functional-capacity (RFC) findings of psychologist Vann Smith, who conducted a one-time evaluation of Hudson. The ALJ gave good reasons for his resolution of the conflict between the mental RFC opinion of Dr. Smith versus those of consulting psychologist Paul lies and the agency reviewing psychologists. See Pearsall v. Massanari, 274 F.3d 1211, 1219 (8th Cir. 2001) (it is ALJ’s function to resolve conflicts among opinions of various treating and examining physicians; ALJ may reject conclusions of any medical expert if they are inconsistent with record as whole). Hudson’s remaining arguments 2 provide no basis for reversal.

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.