• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

Differentiation of organics from functional psychiatric patients across various IQ ranges using the Bender-Gestalt and Hutt Scoring System.

作者信息

Hellkamp D T, Hogan M E

出版信息

J Clin Psychol. 1985 Mar;41(2):259-64. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(198503)41:2<259::aid-jclp2270410221>3.0.co;2-n.

DOI:10.1002/1097-4679(198503)41:2<259::aid-jclp2270410221>3.0.co;2-n
PMID:3980750
Abstract

This study investigated the effectiveness of the Hutt Scoring System (Hutt, 1977) in differentiating organic from functional psychiatric patients, the relationship of IQ to Bender-Gestalt errors as measured by this scoring system, and examined the discriminative power of this scoring system for various IQ ranges. One hundred eighty patients were utilized, 90 of whom had been classified as organics and matched with the remaining 90 subjects on the basis of age, education, and IQ range. In addition, the organic subjects' secondary diagnosis was matched with the primary diagnosis of the nonorganic patients. Results between WAIS IQ and Hutt error scores for organic subjects yielded an r = -.34 (p less than .01); between WAIS IQ and Hutt error scores for the nonorganic subjects, r = -.61 (p less than .001). No significant results were obtained for organics and nonorganics simultaneously within the same IQ cells.

摘要

相似文献

1
Differentiation of organics from functional psychiatric patients across various IQ ranges using the Bender-Gestalt and Hutt Scoring System.
J Clin Psychol. 1985 Mar;41(2):259-64. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(198503)41:2<259::aid-jclp2270410221>3.0.co;2-n.
2
A comparison of the Lacks and Pascal-Suttell Bender-Gestalt scoring methods for diagnosing brain damage in an outpatient sample.
J Clin Psychol. 1990 Nov;46(6):868-77. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(199011)46:6<868::aid-jclp2270460629>3.0.co;2-4.
3
A process approach to the Bender-Gestalt test and its use in differentiating schizophrenic, brain-damaged, and medical patients.一种针对本德尔格式塔测验的过程方法及其在区分精神分裂症患者、脑损伤患者和内科患者方面的应用。
J Clin Psychol. 1983 Mar;39(2):173-82. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(198303)39:2<173::aid-jclp2270390205>3.0.co;2-p.
4
Bender-Gestalt test and background interference procedure in discernment of organic brain damage.
Percept Mot Skills. 1975 Feb;40(1):103-9. doi: 10.2466/pms.1975.40.1.103.
5
Predicting Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised (WAIS-R) IQ scores from the Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery (Form I).从鲁利亚-内布拉斯加神经心理成套测验(第一版)预测韦氏成人智力量表修订版(WAIS-R)的智商分数。
J Clin Psychol. 1993 Mar;49(2):225-33. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(199303)49:2<225::aid-jclp2270490216>3.0.co;2-c.
6
Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale and Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised in a neurologically impaired population.韦氏成人智力量表和修订版韦氏成人智力量表在神经功能受损人群中的应用。
J Clin Psychol. 1984 May;40(3):788-91. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(198405)40:3<788::aid-jclp2270400326>3.0.co;2-t.
7
The relationship between intelligence, brain damage, and Hutt-Briskin errors on the Bender-Gestalt.智力、脑损伤与本德尔格式塔测验中的哈特-布里斯金错误之间的关系。
J Clin Psychol. 1971 Jan;27(1):84-5. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(197101)27:1<84::aid-jclp2270270118>3.0.co;2-q.
8
Redundancy in the Pascal-Suttell Bender-Gestalt scoring system: discriminating organicity with only one design.
J Clin Psychol. 1991 Mar;47(2):261-3. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(199103)47:2<261::aid-jclp2270470211>3.0.co;2-c.
9
Relationships between measures of brain functions and general intelligence.脑功能测量指标与一般智力之间的关系。
J Clin Psychol. 1985 Mar;41(2):245-53. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(198503)41:2<245::aid-jclp2270410219>3.0.co;2-d.
10
An evaluation of three Bender-Gestalt scoring systems as indicators of psychopathology.对三种本德尔格式塔计分系统作为精神病理学指标的评估。
J Clin Psychol. 1982 Oct;38(4):838-42. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(198210)38:4<838::aid-jclp2270380425>3.0.co;2-n.