No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

À l’aide du modèle de recherche de la simulation connu sous le nom de « comparaison de groupes connus » (known-groups studies / criterion- groups validation studies), la présente étude visait à vérifier l’efficacité de quatre échelles de validité du MMPI-2-RF (Fs, FBS-r, RBS et HHI-r) à détecter la simulation de l’invalidité découlant de la douleur (SIDD) auprès d’une population rapportant de la douleur chronique ayant subi une évaluation psychologique. Les données provenant de patients rapportant une condition de douleur chronique (n=111) ont été recueillies à partir de dossiers archivés d’une clinique indépendante spécialisée dans l’évaluation et le traitement de cas de douleur chronique et de troubles somatoformes. Une fois sélectionnés, les sujets ont été répartis dans l’un des deux groupes connus à l’aide de critères externes prédisant la simulation de l’invalidité découlant de la douleur : les simulateurs (SIDD Probable et Certaine) et les non-simulateurs (Non SIDD). Tel que stipulé dans la littérature actuelle existant sur l’évaluation de la simulation de l’invalidité de la douleur, les résultats indiquent que les quatre échelles à l’étude sont efficaces lorsqu’on cherche à différentier les sujets simulateurs des non- simulateurs. Dans la présente étude, l’échelle RBS a été la plus efficace à différencier les deux groupes, suivie de près par l’échelle HHI-r. Les implications de ces résultats sont discutées dans la perceptive de leur utilité clinique et psycho-légale.

Childhood sexual abuse (CSA) has been linked to a number of adult psychological maladies. The MMPI-2 has shown specific patterns such as an inverted V in the validity scales, a floating profile, and a 4-5-6 configuration to be present more often in adults who have experienced childhood trauma. Both children and adults who have experienced trauma have shown a number of neurophysiological differences when compared to non-traumatized individuals. However, little research has looked at differences in quantitative electroencephalography (QEEG) patterns in these individuals. The purpose of this study is to determine differences seen in the MMPI-2 and the QEEG when comparing adults who report CSA to adults who deny any history of childhood abuse. Differences between the two groups in MMPI-2 basic scales and supplementary scales PK and PS were determined. This study also examined the ability to correctly classify individuals into the two groups using three patterns seen in the MMPI-2 basic scale profiles (inverted V, floating profile, and 4-5-6 configuration). In addition, this research included exploratory analyses to develop predictor models for CSA group membership. Predictors in the models were derived from MMPI-2 scales, alpha relative power at each of the 19 sites in the International 10/20 electrode placement system, as well as alpha/delta, alpha/theta, and alpha/beta ratios at each of the 19 sites. A total of 46 participants were included in this study, 24 from archived files and 22 newly recruited individuals. Each participant received a MMPI-2 and a QEEG. Significant differences were found between the MMPI-2 scores of the two groups, but MMPI-2 patterns were unable to correctly classify individuals. Models were found which were clinically relevant and statistically significant. The models were based on depression and social maladjustment. The depression models included scales F and 2 of the MMPI-2 and alpha relative power at left frontal sites. The social maladjustment models included scales 4 and 8 of the MMPI-2 and alpha relative power at temporal sites. These findings support previous research showing higher levels of pathology in MMPI-2 profiles and evidence for temporal and left-frontal differences in adults who report CSA.

This study is a comparison of the verification sales of a self-rating sentence completion method for evaluating marital difficulties and the MMPI validity scales.

The following experimental study was conducted to test these hypotheses. The subjects used in the study were twenty-five males and twenty-five females from undergraduate courses in psychology at the freshman and sophomore levels. Procedure.--Each subject was administered the Rorschach test, in the manner described by Beck (1961), except that the subject was seated facing the test administrator. Each subject was also administered the MMPI, using,.Form R.

Research indicates that some college students may be strongly motivated to feign AHDD symptoms for desired external incentives, such as stimulant medication or academic accommodations. To date, literature examining feigned ADHD has been primarily focused on ADHD specific self-report measures (e.g., CAARS) and continuous performance tests (e.g., CPTs); however, little attention has been devoted to the use of multi-scale inventories in detecting feigned ADHD. For CPT measures, virtually no literature exists on the effectiveness of the TOVA to identify feigned ADHD, despite its frequent clinical use for establishing this diagnosis. The current study utilized a between-subjects simulation design to validate feigning cut scores on ADHD-specific measures using 66 feigners and 51 confirmed ADHD cases. As prior literature suggested, the results convincingly demonstrated that face-valid ADHD assessment measures were easily faked. Across both TOVA modalities (e.g., Auditory and Visual), the ADHD simulators performed significantly poorer than those diagnosed with ADHD. As an innovative approach, a Dissimulation-ADHD (Ds-ADHD) scale was developed and initially validated. The Ds-ADHD is composed of ten MMPI-2-RF items mistakenly believed to be clinical characteristics associated with ADHD. Requiring cross-validation, Ds-ADHD optimized cut scores and classification of ADHD feigners appears promising. They were clearly distinguishable from ADHD client, as well as those feigning general psychopathology. Recommendations for the utilization of the Ds-ADHD scale, and future directions for research are discussed.

Mémoire numérisé par la Division de la gestion de documents et des archives de l'Université de Montréal.