Van Gorp W G, Meyer R G
J Clin Psychol. 1986 Sep;42(5):742-7. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(198609)42:5<742::aid-jclp2270420510>3.0.co;2-3.
This study investigated the effects of a variety of faking strategies on the Weight Factor correction scores (designed to detect malingering) of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory, a relatively new personality questionnaire. Subjects (both psychiatric patients [N = 95] and general medical/surgical controls [N = 90]) were asked to take the MCMI according to one of the following instructional sets: traditional faking-good; traditional faking-bad; role faking-positive; role faking-negative; role faking-neutral; and honest. The results indicated that neutral social role faking resulted in no significant differences in weight factor correction from subjects in the honest condition and that directionally role faked profiles did not differ in correction from those in the traditional "best" and "worst" conditions. Finally, only the Weight Factor corrections in the protocols from the fake bad conditions (whether in traditional "worst" or negative social role conditions) differed significantly from those in the honest conditions for both subject groups. Implications for the practicing clinician are discussed.
本研究调查了多种伪装策略对米隆临床多轴问卷（一种相对较新的人格问卷）的权重因子校正分数（旨在检测诈病）的影响。研究对象（包括精神科患者 [N = 95] 和普通内科/外科对照组 [N = 90]）被要求根据以下其中一种指导方式来完成米隆临床多轴问卷：传统的伪装良好；传统的伪装不良；角色伪装积极；角色伪装消极；角色伪装中立；以及如实作答。结果表明，中立的社会角色伪装与如实作答的受试者在权重因子校正方面没有显著差异，并且定向的角色伪装剖面图在校正方面与传统的“最佳”和“最差”条件下的剖面图没有差异。最后，对于两个受试组而言，只有来自伪装不良条件（无论是传统的“最差”条件还是消极社会角色条件）的问卷中的权重因子校正与如实作答条件下的校正存在显著差异。文中讨论了对临床执业医师的启示。
