Week 2 Flashcards

1
Q

methods of self-report test construction: Rational

A

very straight forward; items are written to capture understanding of what a trait is

characteristics:
tend to be face valid
susceptible to response biases (easily faked)
may be internally consistent or valid

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Methods of self-report test construction: Factorial

A

generate a bunch of items and use factor analysis to cluster each item and see which go together; items are selected on the basis of factor analysis

Characteristics:
highly internally consistent
tend to be face valid
somewhat susceptible to response bia

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Methods of self-report test construction: Empirical

A

generate a bunch of items and give to 2 groups, one group that is “fine” and one group with something you are looking at (ex depression –> so a group of folks with depression) and see which items differentiate the groups; harder to fake; items are selected on their ability to empirically distinguish one group from another

Characteristics:
often have low internal consistency
often items are not face valid
may be less susceptible to response bias

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Thinking errors

A

fundamental attribution bias
confirmation bias
distinction bias
just world phenomenon

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Clinical judgement; Dawes Faust and Meehl

A

using statistical methods to derive algorithms (i.e. MMPI)
some studies use artificial tasks that failed to tap their expertise
humans do have superior observational skills but better to enter them into decision-making algorithm

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Clinical Judgement; Paul Eckman

A

facial recognition/facial expression; no difference between different groups of professionals and the lay public in effectively knowing when someone is lying

EXCEPT: secret service

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

nature of some errors in clinical judgement (1998 APA reports)

A
  1. may only elicit info that confirms hypotheses and ignores questions/info that would disprove it
  2. may compare patient to prototype rather than systematically evaluating on specific criteria
  3. may be overconfident rather than appropriately tentative
  4. Hindsight bias; wrongly assume we could have predicted the results AFTER being told the results
  5. may not consider relative frequency of the event they are predicting (rare events are harder to predict than common ones)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Clinical decision making

A

clinical intuition is very fallible, but we tend to ignore this fact
actuarial algorithms are better than clinical judgement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

6 factor model

A
  1. extraversion
  2. conscientiousness
  3. openness to experience
  4. emotionality (rotated version of neuroticism)
  5. agreeableness
  6. honesty-humility (morality and prosociality)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Unidimensional

A

widely used for quick assessment of a specific issue

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

multidimensional

A

personality test, batteries that contain multiple scales, often include validity scales

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

unidimensional examples

A

BDI
DES-II
Y-BOC
MAST

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

problems with self report data

A

impulsivity
maturity
based on one’s theory of self (could be limiting but tells us how the person views themself)
not responsive to behavior change that can be tracked

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

types of psychometric data

A

observational data (teachers/parents)
life data (context)
self-report data
performance-based data (some folks dont respond honestly but performance data helps tease that out)
informants data (collateral)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

s data

A

self report data

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

o data

A

other report data

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

unidimensional report measures from collateral

A

Conners-3
BDI

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Multidimensional report measures from collateral

A

Child behavior checklist (CBCL)
BASC

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Shedler Weston Assessment Procedure

A

SWAP; clinical measure done by therapist about client; collateral source

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

History of MMPI

A

developed by Stark Hathaway and CS McKinley
1930-40s

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

First version of MMPI

A

published in 1943
scales 5 and 0 were added later

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Clinical scales of MMPI

A
  1. hypochondriasis
  2. depression
  3. hysteria
  4. psychopathic deviate
  5. masculinity-femininity
  6. paranoia
  7. psychasthenia (anxiety)
  8. schizophrenia
  9. hypomania
  10. social introversion
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

which scales were added later on

A

masculinity-femininity
social introversion

24
Q

Uniform T scores for MMPI

A

mean: 50 SD: 10
uniform distribution forced on the clinical scales (except 5 and 0) and content scales

25
significant T scores
38 = 8 percentile 50 = 55 percentile 65 = 92 percentile
26
General interpretive guidelines for T score
65 and above = elevated 60-65 = interpretable on validity and content scales don't pay as much attention to low scales but consider scales!
27
Administration info for MMPI
MMPI = 18 years and older MMPI-A = for adolescents 14-18 requires an 8th grade reading level if IQ is 80-85 > may not be appropriate test
28
test format
soft cover booklet hardcover booklet (institutional setting) audio recording Spanish version computerized administration (minor differences)
29
MMPI-2-RF
shorter and viable alternative
30
MMPI-3
update of the MMPI2-RF with new items and scales
31
MMPI shortened
test can be scored if the first 370 items are answered; if someone is having a problem during it they can end at those; counts but not best practice
32
ethical considerations for protecting test data
ethical responsibility to protect the integrity of the test unethical to let someone take the MMPI or other psychological tests home with them
33
Administration of MMPI
1. establish rapport 2. let them know why they are taking it, who will get results and that they will get feedback 3. check reading levels by having them read the first aloud 4. advise them to answer each question as they are now (not how they were in the past) 5. when done look over to make sure they answered all items
34
scoring methods for MMPI
handscore (inexpensive portable 20-30 minutes) computer scoring (quicker, fewer errors, generate more scales
35
validity scales check for..
"test taking attitude" distorted responding
36
different response styles
malingering social desirability claiming excessive virtue acquiescence non-acquiescence extreme responding
37
validity scales
? L F K Fb VRIN TRIN S
38
? scale
"cannot say", sum of omitted and double scored items 10 items omitted interpret with caution 30 items omitted = invalid test
39
high ? score
suggests carelessness uncooperative poor reading skills ignored specific content area, indecisive, lack of experience, severe disturbance
40
L scale
"lie scale" only rationally developed scale > collection of unlikely virtue detects naive deliberate unsophisticated attempts to be favorable 16 questions
41
high L score
claiming excessive virtue suggests that other scores show better picture than reality "want to look good" "things are better than they are"
42
F scale
"infrequency scale" very heterogeneous scale detects deviant/atypical ways of responding rare answers "not like most people" elevations are confusing and confound with psychic disturbance and distress
43
elevated F scale
reading difficulties random responding due to confusing or inattention uncooperative malingering or conscious exaggeration cry for help demands for attention true disturbance accurately reported
44
VRIN scale
use VRIN to understand elevation in F scale pairs of items that should be answered similarly raw score >13 = inconsistent responses and probable invalidity
45
High F and High VRIN
reading difficulties random responding due to confusion or inattentive willful random responding (uncooperative)
46
High F and Normal/Low VRIN
malingering or exaggeration cry for help or narcissistic demand for attention true disturbance accurately reported
47
Low F and Low VRIN
obsessive, indecisive or perfectionistic especially if scale 7 is elevated
48
K scale
social desirability subtle index of attempts to deny and down play socially undesirable traits
49
Fb Scale
"back page infrequency scale" similar to F scale but covering last part of the test (after 370) T > 80 = caution with interpreting items after 370 T >120 = items after 370 invalid if F = valid but FB = invalid the person likely quit paying attention
50
TRIN scale
True response inconsistency scale detects tendency to answer true and tendency to answer false high raw score = tendency to answer "true"; >13=invalid low raw score = tendency to answer "false" ; <5 suggests invalid not super useful
51
S scale
superlative scale detects presentation as highly virtuous, responsible, psychologically healthy highly correlated with K
52
Fp scale
infrequency psychopathology scale useful in identifying faking bad useful in forensic cases
53
Mp scale
positive malingering scale useful in detecting attempts to present in a favorable light
54
FBS scale
fake bad scale controversial T score = 80-99 > possible inconsistent responding > check VRIN if consistent responding = high FBS could reflect: credible medical problems or symptom exaggeration
55
K correction
Paul Meehl way to adjust for excessive effort to downplay problems accomplished by adding a % of K scale raw to scores