Hawes Samuel W, Boccaccini Marcus T
Department of Psychology, Sam Houston State University, USA.
Psychol Assess. 2009 Mar;21(1):112-24. doi: 10.1037/a0015036.
The Personality Assessment Inventory (L. C. Morey, 1991) includes 3 measures for identifying overreporting of psychopathology: the Negative Impression scale (NIM), Malingering Index (MAL), and Rogers Discriminant Function (RDF). Meta-analysis revealed that each measure was a strong predictor of uncoached (NIM, d = 1.48, k = 23; MAL, d = 1.15, k = 19; RDF, d = 1.13, k = 15) and coached malingering (NIM, d = 1.59, k = 8; MAL, d = 1.00, k = 6; RDF, d = 1.65, k = 3). For uncoached malingering, effects were larger in simulation than criterion groups studies, for identifying feigning of severe mental disorders than mood/anxiety disorders, and when feigners were compared to unimpaired honest respondents as opposed to patients. Cut scores of NIM > or = 81 and MAL > or = 3 resulted in the highest overall classification rates for identifying feigning. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved).
人格评估量表（L.C.莫雷，1991年）包含3种用于识别心理病理学过度报告的测量方法：负面印象量表（NIM）、诈病指数（MAL）和罗杰斯判别函数（RDF）。元分析表明，每种测量方法都是未受指导的诈病（NIM，d = 1.48，k = 23；MAL，d = 1.15，k = 19；RDF，d = 1.13，k = 15）和受指导诈病（NIM，d = 1.59，k = 8；MAL，d = 1.00，k = 6；RDF，d = 1.65，k = 3）的有力预测指标。对于未受指导的诈病，在模拟研究中比在标准组研究中的效应更大，在识别严重精神障碍的诈病方面比在情绪/焦虑障碍方面的效应更大，并且当将诈病者与未受损的诚实应答者而非患者进行比较时效应更大。NIM≥81和MAL≥3的划界分数在识别诈病方面导致了最高的总体分类率。（《心理学文摘数据库记录》（c）2009年美国心理学会，保留所有权利）
