Suppr超能文献

人格评估量表中心理病理学过度报告的检测:一项元分析综述

Detection of overreporting of psychopathology on the Personality Assessment Inventory: a meta-analytic review.

作者信息

Hawes Samuel W, Boccaccini Marcus T

机构信息

Department of Psychology, Sam Houston State University, USA.

出版信息

Psychol Assess. 2009 Mar;21(1):112-24. doi: 10.1037/a0015036.

Abstract

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).

摘要

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)

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验