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.

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.

Different psychosocial factors influence the experience and adaptation to pain. Previous cluster analytic studies using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2nd edition described psychologically different subgroups of pain patients that had been shown valuable in determining outcome. However, these studies had limited applicability to medico-legal pain populations because they did not use newly developed scales or describe important medico-legal factors that have large effects on symptom endorsement. Using three methods of clustering, the current investigation explored the subgroups that resulted when using all the MMPI-2 and the newly developed MMPI-2-RF (Restructured Form) scales on a large and well-described population of medico-legal spine pain patients. Result demonstrated that the best solution for the current sample was the two-cluster solution when a traditional method was used. However, the best solution was the three-cluster solution when all MMPI-2 scales and a method that used all MMPI-2-RF scales were used. Thus, the three-cluster solution was considered the most adequate solution to differentiate patients in medico-legal settings. Moreover, results demonstrated that subgroup membership was not conditioned to spine related organic factors. Instead, malingering, education, ethnic background and legal status differentiated pain subgroups. Lastly, results demonstrated a dose-response relationship between perceived outcome and subgroup profile elevation. The current results are relevant for understanding the circumstances that can influence spine pain recovery and for informing decisions regarding possible interventions.

Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by antisocial deviance in the context of interpersonal and emotional detachment. The study of psychopathy in non-forensic samples is an area of growing interest, but one that is limited by the fact that most large-scale epidemiological studies, which collect a wealth of data that could further elucidate the phenotypic correlates, constructs, assessments, and etiologic mechanisms in psychopathy, typically do not include direct assessment of psychopathy construct or measurements. However, if facets of psychopathy could be predicted from other measures, such as broadband inventories of normal personality that are often administered in large-scale investigations, data from college epidemiological studies could be brought to bear light on the study of psychopathy. This study is two-fold in the investigation of psychopathy. First, the present study replicated the work of Sellbom and colleagues (2012) three-psychopathy scales derived from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF). These scales were developed to assess psychopathy as conceptualized in the PPI-R and include Global Psychopathy (Py-T), Impulsive-Antisociality (Py-IA) and Fearless-Dominance (Py-FD). Second, the present study built upon the three-psychopathy scales by investigating psychopathy’s construct in relation to Cooke and Michie’s (2001) three-facto model. A sample of 151 participants from a Midwestern university were administrated the PPI-R and MMPI-2-RF. The MMPI-2-RF three scales and construct of psychopathy were evaluated using bivariate correlations. Results support previous studies, regarding the Py-T, Py-IA, and Py-FD scales and the three-factor model of psychopathy.

abstract: The use of bias indicators in psychological measurement has been contentious, with some researchers questioning whether they actually suppress or moderate the ability of substantive psychological indictors to discriminate (McGrath, Mitchell, Kim, & Hough, 2010). Bias indicators on the MMPI-2-RF (F-r, Fs, FBS-r, K-r, and L-r) were tested for suppression or moderation of the ability of the RC1 and NUC scales to discriminate between Epileptic Seizures (ES) and Non-epileptic Seizures (NES, a conversion disorder that is often misdiagnosed as ES). RC1 and NUC had previously been found to be the best scales on the MMPI-2-RF to differentiate between ES and NES, with optimal cut scores occurring at a cut score of 65 for RC1 (classification rate of 68%) and 85 for NUC (classification rate of 64%; Locke et al., 2010). The MMPI-2-RF was completed by 429 inpatients on the Epilepsy Monitoring Unit (EMU) at the Scottsdale Mayo Clinic Hospital, all of whom had confirmed diagnoses of ES or NES. Moderated logistic regression was used to test for moderation and logistic regression was used to test for suppression. Classification rates of RC1 and NUC were calculated at different bias level indicators to evaluate clinical utility for diagnosticians. No moderation was found. Suppression was found for F-r, Fs, K-r, and L-r with RC1, and for all variables with NUC. For F-r and Fs, the optimal RC1 and NUC cut scores increased at higher levels of bias, but tended to decrease at higher levels of K-r, L-r, and FBS-r. K-r provided the greatest suppression for RC1, as well as the greatest increases in classification rates at optimal cut scores, given different levels of bias. It was concluded that, consistent with expectations, taking account of bias indicator suppression on the MMPI-2-RF can improve discrimination of ES and NES. At higher levels of negative impression management, higher cut scores on substantive scales are needed to attain optimal discrimination, whereas at higher levels of positive impression management and FBS-r, lower cut scores are needed. Using these new cut scores resulted in modest improvements in accuracy in discrimination. These findings are consistent with prior research in showing the efficacy of bias indicators, and extend the findings to a psycho-medical context. / Dissertation/Thesis / Ph.D. Psychology 2013

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.