Suppr超能文献

在军事样本中对人格评估量表(PAI)认知偏差量表(CB-SOS)的虚报指标进行交叉验证。

Cross validation of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) Cognitive Bias Scale of Scales (CB-SOS) over-reporting indicators in a military sample.

机构信息

Department of Psychological Sciences, Texas Tech University, Lubbock, Texas, USA.

Dwight D. Eisenhower Veteran Affairs Medical Center, Eastern Kansas Veteran Healthcare System, Leavenworth, Kansas, USA.

出版信息

Mil Psychol. 2024 Mar-Apr;36(2):192-202. doi: 10.1080/08995605.2022.2160151. Epub 2023 Jan 5.

Abstract

Following the development of the Cognitive Bias Scale (CBS), three other cognitive over-reporting indicators were created. This study cross-validates these new Cognitive Bias Scale of Scales (CB-SOS) measurements in a military sample and contrasts their performance to the CBS. We analyzed data from 288 active-duty soldiers who underwent neuropsychological evaluation. Groups were established based on performance validity testing (PVT) failure. Medium effects (d = .71 to .74) were observed between those passing and failing PVTs. The CB-SOS scales have high specificity (≥.90) but low sensitivity across the suggested cut scores. While all CB-SOS were able to achieve .90, lower scores were typically needed. CBS demonstrated incremental validity beyond CB-SOS-1 and CB-SOS-3; only CB-SOS-2 was incremental beyond CBS. In a military sample, the CB-SOS scales have more limited sensitivity than in its original validation, indicating an area of limited utility despite easier calculation. The CBS performs comparably, if not better, than CB-SOS scales. CB-SOS-2's differences in performance in this study and its initial validation suggest that its psychometric properties may be sample dependent. Given their ease of calculation and relatively high specificity, our study supports the interpretation of elevated CB-SOS scores indicating those who are likely to fail concurrent PVTs.

摘要

继认知偏差量表(CBS)的发展之后,又创建了另外三个认知过度报告指标。本研究在军事样本中对这些新的认知偏差量表综合评估(CB-SOS)测量进行了交叉验证,并将其与 CBS 的性能进行了对比。我们分析了 288 名接受神经心理评估的现役士兵的数据。根据表现有效性测试(PVT)的失败,建立了小组。通过 PVT 失败和通过的人之间观察到中等效果(d=0.71 到 0.74)。在建议的截断分数上,CB-SOS 量表具有高特异性(≥0.90)但低敏感性。虽然所有 CB-SOS 都能够达到 0.90,但通常需要更低的分数。CBS 表现出比 CB-SOS-1 和 CB-SOS-3 更高的增量有效性;只有 CB-SOS-2 在 CBS 之外具有增量有效性。在军事样本中,CB-SOS 量表的敏感性比原始验证中更有限,尽管计算更简单,但表明其应用范围有限。CBS 的性能与 CB-SOS 量表相当,如果不是更好的话。在这项研究和最初的验证中,CB-SOS-2 的表现差异表明其心理测量特性可能取决于样本。鉴于其计算简便和相对较高的特异性,我们的研究支持了这样的解释,即升高的 CB-SOS 分数表明那些很可能会同时失败 PVT 的人。

相似文献

3
Replication and cross-validation of the personality assessment inventory (PAI) cognitive bias scale (CBS) in a mixed clinical sample.
Clin Neuropsychol. 2022 Oct;36(7):1860-1877. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2021.1889681. Epub 2021 Feb 22.
4
Validation of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) scale of scales in a mixed clinical sample.
Clin Neuropsychol. 2022 Oct;36(7):1844-1859. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2021.1900400. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
5
Personality Assessment Inventory Cognitive Bias Scale: Validation in a Military Sample.
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2020 Oct 8;35(7):1154–1161. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acaa049. Epub 2020 Jul 31.
6
Comparison of the Memory Complaints Inventory and the PAI Cognitive Bias Scale in a Military Sample.
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2023 Feb 18;38(2):270-275. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acac079.
7
The construction and the initial validation of the Cognitive Bias Scale for the Personality Assessment Inventory.
Clin Neuropsychol. 2019 Nov;33(8):1467-1484. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2019.1612947. Epub 2019 May 16.
10
Evaluating the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) over-reporting scales in a military neuropsychology clinic.
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2020 Apr;42(3):263-273. doi: 10.1080/13803395.2019.1708271. Epub 2020 Jan 3.

引用本文的文献

1
Psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the Personality Assessment Inventory: normative data and reliability.
Front Psychol. 2024 May 30;15:1359793. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1359793. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

3
Preliminary findings from reevaluating the MMPI Response Bias Scale items in veterans undergoing neuropsychological evaluation.
Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2024 Sep-Oct;31(5):1016-1023. doi: 10.1080/23279095.2022.2106571. Epub 2022 Aug 2.
4
Military traumatic brain injury: a challenge straddling neurology and psychiatry.
Mil Med Res. 2022 Jan 6;9(1):2. doi: 10.1186/s40779-021-00363-y.
6
Testing in Psychological Injury and Law.
Psychol Inj Law. 2021;14(1):1. doi: 10.1007/s12207-021-09405-1. Epub 2021 Mar 19.
7
Validation of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) scale of scales in a mixed clinical sample.
Clin Neuropsychol. 2022 Oct;36(7):1844-1859. doi: 10.1080/13854046.2021.1900400. Epub 2021 Mar 17.
8
A Decade of mTBI Experience: What Have We Learned? A Summary of Proceedings From a NATO Lecture Series on Military mTBI.
Front Neurol. 2020 Aug 25;11:836. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2020.00836. eCollection 2020.
9
Personality Assessment Inventory Cognitive Bias Scale: Validation in a Military Sample.
Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2020 Oct 8;35(7):1154–1161. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acaa049. Epub 2020 Jul 31.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验