Brand Bethany L, Webermann Aliya R, Frankel A Steven
Psychology Department, Towson University, Towson, MD, United States.
Psychology Department, University of Southern California, Lafayette, CA, United States.
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2016 Nov-Dec;49(Pt B):197-204. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2016.10.006. Epub 2016 Oct 29.
Few assessors receive training in assessing dissociation and complex dissociative disorders (DDs). Potential differential diagnoses include anxiety, mood, psychotic, substance use, and personality disorders, as well as exaggeration and malingering. Individuals with DDs typically elevate on many clinical and validity scales on psychological tests, yet research indicates that they can be distinguished from DD simulators. Becoming informed about the testing profiles of DD individuals and DD simulators can improve the accuracy of differential diagnoses in forensic settings. In this paper, we first review the testing profiles of individuals with complex DDs and contrast them with DD simulators on assessment measures used in forensic contexts, including the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2), Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), and the Structured Inventory of Reported Symptoms (SIRS), as well as dissociation-specific measures such as the Dissociative Experiences Scale (DES) and Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV Dissociative Disorders (SCID-D-R). We then provide recommendations for assessing complex trauma and dissociation through the aforementioned assessments.
很少有评估者接受过评估分离性障碍和复杂分离性障碍（DDs）的培训。潜在的鉴别诊断包括焦虑症、心境障碍、精神病性障碍、物质使用障碍和人格障碍，以及夸大症状和诈病。患有分离性障碍的个体在心理测试的许多临床和效度量表上得分通常较高，但研究表明，他们可以与伪装分离性障碍的人区分开来。了解分离性障碍个体和伪装者的测试概况可以提高法医环境中鉴别诊断的准确性。在本文中，我们首先回顾复杂分离性障碍个体的测试概况，并将其与法医环境中使用的评估量表上伪装分离性障碍的人进行对比，这些量表包括明尼苏达多相人格问卷第二版（MMPI-2）、人格评估问卷（PAI）和报告症状结构化问卷（SIRS），以及特定的分离性测量工具，如分离体验量表（DES）和DSM-IV分离性障碍结构化临床访谈（SCID-D-R）。然后，我们通过上述评估为评估复杂创伤和分离性障碍提供建议。
