Cramer K M
Psychology Department, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada.
J Clin Psychol. 1995 Nov;51(6):831-40. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(199511)51:6<831::aid-jclp2270510616>3.0.co;2-o.
Simulation research indicates that the MMPI-2 validity scales easily detect faked-bad profiles that follow vague, but not specific, instructions. The present study compared the fake-bad validity scales (i.e., F, F-Back, F-K, Fake-Bad Scale, critical items, and O-S scales) for differences among one authentic and four simulation (fake-bad) groups. The simulation groups differed according to the type of disorder simulated (neurotic or psychotic) and the clarity of the behavioral descriptions they received (clear or unclear descriptions). Results indicated that the validity scales together could discriminate (a) clear from unclear description profiles; (b) neurotic from psychotic simulation profiles; and (c) authentic from simulated profiles. Actuarial analyses indicated that participants given clear character descriptions were more likely to escape detection than were participants given unclear character descriptions. Future research on incentive and punishment is considered.
模拟研究表明，明尼苏达多相人格问卷第二版（MMPI - 2）效度量表能够轻易检测出遵循模糊而非具体指令伪造的不良档案。本研究比较了真实组与四个模拟（伪造不良）组之间的伪造不良效度量表（即F、F - 反向、F - K、伪造不良量表、关键项目和O - S量表）的差异。模拟组根据模拟的障碍类型（神经症或精神病）以及他们收到的行为描述的清晰度（清晰或不清晰描述）而有所不同。结果表明，效度量表共同能够区分：（a）清晰描述档案与不清晰描述档案；（b）神经症模拟档案与精神病模拟档案；以及（c）真实档案与模拟档案。精算分析表明，获得清晰性格描述的参与者比获得不清晰性格描述的参与者更有可能逃避检测。文中考虑了关于激励和惩罚的未来研究。
