Unit 4 Flashcards
Why measure PERS? Clinical and Counseling Settings
Clinical Settings:
-ID symptoms
-Diagnosis
-Treatment planning
-Comprehensive Ass.
Counseling Settings:
-Matching Styles w/ treatment
-Help marriage/couple counseling
Why measure PERS? Industrial/organized and Forensic Settings
Industrial/Organized:
-Hiring (esp. stressful jobs)
-Promotion
-Eval. of office dynamics & team building
Forensic:
-Custody eval.
-Parole Eval.
-Competency to stand trial
-Insanity defense eval.
Unstructured VS Structured Methods
Unstructured:
-Allows broad latitude in client response
-Projective techniques fit this description
Structured:
-Has rules for administration, scoring, interpretation, & reporting of results
-Self-report & bhvr rate scales follow ^ format
4 Approaches to test construct
Theory Guided: Logic/rational approach by theoretical perspective
Empirical Criterion Keying/Method of Contrasted Groups
Factor analysis
Combo of ^
Theory Guided Inventory
Logic/rational approach by theoretical perspective
-Traits (and trait anx)
-States (and state anx)
EX: State-trait ANX Inventory (STAI)
-Dev. w/ logic-rational approach
-20 Likert items ass. state anx, 20 ass. trait anx
State ANX = Now/temporary feels, I feel… (tense, nervous, worried, ect.), 1-4
Trait ANX = Stable feels
Empirical Criterion-Keyed Inventory (Method of Contrasted Groups) Example
MMPI-2 (Minnesota Multiphasic PERS. Inventory)
-Multiphasic: Broad PERS inventory addressing many disorders
-Most used and researched psych test
MMPI Background
1930s (P. 1943) U. of Minnesota by Hathaway & McKinely
-Consisted of 566 T/F Qs
-Goal: Screen for MH problems in medical patients
-Helped psy. diagnosis in treatment & rsch settings
What approach was used to develop Empirical Criterion-Keyed Inventory (Method of Contrasted Groups)? Use Steps
Statistical/atheoretical item selection
1) Start w/ Lg pool of Qs reflecting psych symptoms & PERS characteristics (>1000 Qs)
2) Criterion group w/ disorder formed
3) Control group formed w/out disorder
4) Criterion & control G answer all Qs
5) Qs Stat. differ those w/ & w/out disorder
ECK/MCG Components defined
Empirical: stat. approach to Q selection
Criterion-keyed: Qs scored (keyed) by direction answered by criterion/disorder group
Concerns about ECK/MCG Approach (4)
-Criterion group (each of 50 people) est. before DSM-I
-The only exclusion for control group was those not under medical care at the time
-Stat. Q selection approach may leave out th. relevant items
-Item overlap: Same Qs on many scales potentially incorrectly elevating scores
Basics of (10) clinical scales
Measure wide rng of syndromes & symptoms, forming val. & supplementary scales
-Clinical scores converted to t-scores (M=50, SD=10)
*70 was cutoff, MMPI-2 cutoff is 65t
-Cannot interpret scores w/out eval. val. scale
Validity Scales & Responses
Detect response val.
-Notices random, careless, or confused responses
*Overreporting/”faking bad” symptoms possibly motivated by disability, drugs, sentence play down, attnt, ect.
*Underreporting/”Faking good” symptoms possibly motivated by job or not wanting to “look crazy”
Cannot Say Score (1/4 VS)
Qs left blank or double marked (T&F)
L (Lie) Scale (2/4 VS)
Qs reflecting defensiveness/unwilling to admit to even minor short comings/flaws /fake good
-May reflect H morality
-Lying about sm short comings
F (Infrequency) Scale (3/4 VS)
Qs infrequently endorsed in the “norm” population/fake bad
-May show random response, cry for help, or severe distress
-Frequently bad
K (Correction) Scale (4/4 VS)
Clinical reflection of subtle defensiveness
-^ score “corrects”/adjusts for degree of defensiveness
-Correction degree based on criterion G
-Goal is to INC scores
-Korrection for defensiveness to INC scores
Interpreting the 10 basic clinical scales
Scale-by-scale interpretation
Configural/CODE type Interpretation: H 2-3 scales, esp those standing out
-Rsch & clinical exp. offers info abt typical characteristics of someone w/ specific code type
MMPI criticisms (6)
-Original norm sample sm & not representative of pop.
*Participants mostly 35yo, W, married, rural trade workers
-Item overlap
-Heterogenous/diverse clinical scales may be elevated
-Objectionable & outdated Qs
-Lack of Qs regarding current diagnostic criteria
-Length (566 Qs)
MMPI-2
P. 1989 to maintain STR & correct MMPI
-INC rep. of norm sample (2600 subjects ages 18-85, INC diversity)
-Dropped bad Qs
-New Qs in areas of interest
*Suicidal tendencies, drug abuse, treatment attitude, work attitude, ect.
-New Val. scale
-10 scales ~same
-567 Qs able to complete in 60-90 minutes for those at an 8TH GRADE READING LEVEL
*Sig. cutoff 65t
Instruments related to MMPI-2
MMPI-A (adolescents)
MMPI-3 (P. 2020)
-DEC length
-restructured clinical scale
-New, INC rep. norm sample
-Rsch still needed
test-retest (psychometric) for MMPI-2
H measuring “traits”, L measuring fluctuating clinical conditions
INT Consistency (psychometric) for MMPI-2
L for BCS b/c heterogenous/diverse Q content of some scales
Content Val. (psychometric) for MMPI-2
Qable b/c key diagnostic criteria possibly missing from Q pool
Projective PERS Tests (PPT) Background
Projective Hypothesis: We structure ambiguous stimuli w/ patterns of our needs, fears, desires, & conflicts
-Selected response Qs VS Constructed-response Qs
*Similar to structured VS unstructured (open-ended) interview
PPT STR (4)
-Maybe L easy to fake (is debated)
-L reliant on verbal skills, esp reading
-Taps unconscious & conscious material
*According to analytic tradition/psychoanalysis
-Rebels against obj testing benefitting uniqueness & individuality
*Consistent w/ humanistic tradition
PPT WK
Projective Paradox: Tests w/ widespread use despite concerns of psychometric properties (norms, reliability, & Val.)
Rorschach VS TAT (5)
-TAT is received by scientific community, R not
-TAT is based on Murray’s Th. of needs, R is atheoretical
-TAT is supported by conservative claims, R oversold by extreme ones
-TAT not claim to diagnose, R purported diagnosis
-TAT has clinical & non-clinical uses, R mostly clinical use
Rorschach Inkblot Test
Developed by Herman R
10 stimuli inkblot cards (5 B&W; 2 B, W, & R; 3 mutlicolor)
-Same cards shown to adults and kids
-Rich, complex clinical instrument needing H training & exp to master
R ink test scoring system history
R died before scoring system (SS) was made, other psych. made it
-John Exner integrated SS to Comprehensive Scoring System, M widely used
-2010 new administration, scoring, & interpretation system, R Performance Ass. System (R-PAS)
Classic Approach to R Administration
-Examiner sits side by side w/ client
-Client shown card 1 at a time and asked what they think shape is (Percept)
-R-PAS 2-3 responses requested no more than 4
Inquiry Phase (response clarification for R-PAS)
Examiner reminds client of responses and asks for clarification
-Where did you see that? ect
What is R test scored by?
Number of responses
-INC rng possible b/c Exner’s L structured system
-Location, content, form quality, determinants, & popular-original
R Scoring contents defined (5)
Location: Where is seen, what part forms percept?
Content: What is seen, animal-human-nature?
Form Quality: How easy/well percept matches blot features?
Determinants: What determines how it looks like that?
-Form, color, movement, shading/texture
Pop-original: Is it commonly seen?
R Qs considered about responses
Thought process issue?
-Odd/unusual responses, those bizarre
Present themes?
-Morbid or aggressive responses
R Interpretation Use
< Used to make hypothesis about client’s COG style, stress lvl, coping style, emotional functioning, reality contact, interpersonal style, ect.
Bonus Interpretation Indexes
R-Prognosis Rating Scale: Predicts potential therapy success
Thought Disorder Index: Eval disorder extent
R Psychometric Properties: Standardization sample
Norms sample
-R-PAS now including international sample norm (15 nations)
-Child norms in transition
R Psychometric Properties: Rel., test-rest VS inter-scorer
Test-retest: Some qualities effecting responses to INC stability, others transient & situational
Inter-scorer: Scoring ~consistent in those trained to interpret
R Psychometric Properties: Val. (4)
Not simple
-Clinical interpretations Qable w/ inconsistent rsch
-Relies on test purpose
-“Blue ribbon expert” claim Val. reliable w/ similar tests
-“Virtuoso” examiners report chance performance in controlled settings
Is R test worth it? (4)
-Is a sample of PS bhvr obtained in a standardized context
-May reveal info not obtained w/ self-report
-Needs extensive training
-Time consuming & expensive
PT background/Basic Types (4)
-Association technique: Use of words & inkblot
-Construction of Stories: response to pictures
-Sentence completion
-Self expression
Word Association Tests History
Sir F. Galton & Carl Jung made early versions
Jung’s task is clinically useful by key words stimulating areas of conflict
-Mix of neutral & emotionally charged stim.
-Response, reaction time, popularity, ect eval. for content
Sentence Completion Tasks
Client completes sentence stem (neutral & emotional)
-Many versions
*Adolescent, A, OA
*Different settings (therapy, individual, school, ect.)
Sentence Completion Tasks: Most common test
Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank
-HS, college, & A versions
-40 sentence stems (I like…The happiest time…)
Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank Eval.
Qual: Obsv reoccurring themes
Quant: Score assigned to each answer based on if +, neutral, or conflict
-Overall maladjustment Response: total score (short, humorous responses score H)
Rosenwig Picture Frustration Study
Qs for kids, teens, & A
-24 comic strip pictures where client fills in conversation btwn characters
Goals:
-Reaction to frustration
-Direction of aggression
*Anger on self, others, or property/object
*Shows constructive coping/PS & frustration tolerance
*Evasiveness or denial
Play therapy as PT
Play kits w/ human &/or animal figures, puppets, ect
Goal: Observe quality of characters’ interactions
-Child may project concern & IRL conflicts
-Is appealing to kids and L verbal activity
Pictures as Projective Stimuli (TAT)
Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)
-Developed 1935 at Harvard U. Clinic (Morgan & Murray)
-Based on psychoanalytic tradition
-Apperceive: Perceive items as past exp. or perceptions
-Most widely used picture/story telling PT
TAT Structure
31 B&W cards (1 all W) w/ ambiguous scenes usually w/ people in it
-Client responds to 20
TAT Administration
~Qs: Tell me a story. What led to this? What is character thinking/feeling?
TAT scoring (4-5)
Hero Assumption: Client ID w/ protagonist in story
Needs/Inner state: What motivates/influences bhvr
Press: ENV factors influencing needs satisfaction
Theme & Outcome: < Eval. common across stories
Qual & Quant analysis possible
Child Apperception Test (CAT = Kid TAT)
10 pictures for 3-10yo
-Most popular version is CAT-A(nimal)
WK of Story telling PT (4)
Is inadequate
-Standardized for administration & scoring
-Normative data (norm for subject at said time)
-Reliability (test-retest) maybe situational or transient INT states
-Validity: Attde in story match IRL bhvr?
Why is story telling PT still used if inadequate? (5)
-Tradition, longevity, inertia
-Intuitive, fun appeal
-Potential rich data source from INC talking
-Is thought of as “interview method” to obt data & themes to follow
-Best used as supplement for thorough clinical interview & objective testing
TAT WK
Dark, gloomy pictures, pulls for - & depressing stories
Picture Projective Tests (PPT)
Still B&W that is more uplifting & family oriented
-Figure = person, background = ENV
PPT Tasks (3)
-Draw a person(DAP) (of opposite gender)
-House-Tree-Person (HTP)
-Kinetic Family Drawing (KFD): Drawing of family doing something
