CLINICAL ASSESSMENT IN A PROFESSIONAL SETTING: ARE THERE IMPLICATIONS FOR SELF-REPORTS OF PSYCHOPATHOLOGY?

Bárbara Gonzalez, R. Novo, Maria João Afonso
{"title":"CLINICAL ASSESSMENT IN A PROFESSIONAL SETTING: ARE THERE IMPLICATIONS FOR SELF-REPORTS OF PSYCHOPATHOLOGY?","authors":"Bárbara Gonzalez, R. Novo, Maria João Afonso","doi":"10.36315/2022inpact049","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\"In the field of psychological assessment, response biases pose a great problem, and can lead to misleading decisions, with negative impact regardless of the context. Both the underreport of personality characteristics and psychopathological symptoms and the overreport of problems and symptoms are current threats to this field. The clinical context is one on which both response attitudes occur. The clinical-organizational context (where clinical psychology services are provided in the individuals´ professional setting) is very specific, with particularities that have hardly been studied, so little is known about underreporting and overreporting in this type of clinical assessment. This study intends to explore and compare two contexts, clinical and clinical-organizational, in response attitudes and their potential implications on the report of psychopathology. Specifically, this study has three aims: to identify if there are differences between individuals of the two contexts in higher order psychopathology indicators and specific clinical problems; if these differences would be due to response attitudes (i.e., tendency to overreporting and to underreporting), and which are the best scales to differentiate individuals doing overreporting and underreporting in both samples. A total of 516 participants, grouped in two samples, Clinical (n = 277; Mage 41.50, SD 11.54), and Clinical-Organizational (n = 239; Mage 42.92, SD 9.16) were assessed with the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 - Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) Validity, Higher-Order and Restructured Clinical scales. The MANOVAS showed significant differences between the two samples in the composite of underreport scales, overreport scales, Higher-Order scales, and Clinical scales, with the clinical-organizational sample having higher underreport levels than the clinical sample, and lower overreport levels, as well as lower symptomology and clinical problems. The correlations pattern between the different sets of scales supports the conclusion that the response attitudes significantly impact the report of psychopathology. The F-r and Fp-r overreport scales, and the K-r underreport scale are the best ones in differentiating the two samples. The results suggest that the professional setting may influence the disclosure of psychological difficulties and problems, thus having impact on psychological assessment.\"","PeriodicalId":120251,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Applications and Trends","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Applications and Trends","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36315/2022inpact049","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

"In the field of psychological assessment, response biases pose a great problem, and can lead to misleading decisions, with negative impact regardless of the context. Both the underreport of personality characteristics and psychopathological symptoms and the overreport of problems and symptoms are current threats to this field. The clinical context is one on which both response attitudes occur. The clinical-organizational context (where clinical psychology services are provided in the individuals´ professional setting) is very specific, with particularities that have hardly been studied, so little is known about underreporting and overreporting in this type of clinical assessment. This study intends to explore and compare two contexts, clinical and clinical-organizational, in response attitudes and their potential implications on the report of psychopathology. Specifically, this study has three aims: to identify if there are differences between individuals of the two contexts in higher order psychopathology indicators and specific clinical problems; if these differences would be due to response attitudes (i.e., tendency to overreporting and to underreporting), and which are the best scales to differentiate individuals doing overreporting and underreporting in both samples. A total of 516 participants, grouped in two samples, Clinical (n = 277; Mage 41.50, SD 11.54), and Clinical-Organizational (n = 239; Mage 42.92, SD 9.16) were assessed with the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 - Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) Validity, Higher-Order and Restructured Clinical scales. The MANOVAS showed significant differences between the two samples in the composite of underreport scales, overreport scales, Higher-Order scales, and Clinical scales, with the clinical-organizational sample having higher underreport levels than the clinical sample, and lower overreport levels, as well as lower symptomology and clinical problems. The correlations pattern between the different sets of scales supports the conclusion that the response attitudes significantly impact the report of psychopathology. The F-r and Fp-r overreport scales, and the K-r underreport scale are the best ones in differentiating the two samples. The results suggest that the professional setting may influence the disclosure of psychological difficulties and problems, thus having impact on psychological assessment."
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
专业环境下的临床评估:对精神病理自我报告有影响吗?
“在心理评估领域,反应偏差是一个很大的问题,它可能导致误导性的决定,无论背景如何,都会产生负面影响。”人格特征和精神病理症状的低报和问题和症状的高报都是当前对这一领域的威胁。临床环境是两种反应态度发生的环境。临床-组织环境(在个人专业环境中提供临床心理学服务)是非常具体的,其特殊性几乎没有被研究过,因此在这种类型的临床评估中,人们对少报和多报知之甚少。本研究旨在探讨和比较临床和临床组织两种情境下的回应态度及其对精神病理报告的潜在影响。具体而言,本研究有三个目的:确定两种情况下的个体在高阶精神病理指标和特定临床问题上是否存在差异;如果这些差异是由于反应态度(即,倾向于多报和少报),这是区分两个样本中多报和少报的个体的最佳尺度。共有516名参与者,分为两个样本:临床(n = 277;图像41.50,SD 11.54),临床-组织(n = 239;采用明尼苏达多相人格量表-2-重构形式(MMPI-2-RF)效度、高阶和重构临床量表进行评估。MANOVAS在少报量表、多报量表、高阶量表和临床量表的组合方面显示两种样本之间存在显著差异,临床-组织样本的少报水平高于临床样本,多报水平较低,症状和临床问题也较低。不同量表间的相关模式支持反应态度显著影响精神病理报告的结论。F-r和Fp-r多报量表以及K-r少报量表是区分两个样本的最佳量表。结果表明,职业环境可能影响心理困难和问题的披露,从而对心理评估产生影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
LINKING MODAL AND AMODAL REPRESENTATIONS THROUGH LANGUAGE COMPUTATIONAL MODELS CLINICAL ASSESSMENT IN A PROFESSIONAL SETTING: ARE THERE IMPLICATIONS FOR SELF-REPORTS OF PSYCHOPATHOLOGY? MALADAPTIVE COGNITIONS AND EMOTIONAL REGULATION IN PTSD DOES VACCINE SCARCITY INFLUENCE THE EFFECT OF CONSPIRACY BELIEFS ON INTENTION TO VACCINATE AGAINST COVID-19? SOURCES OF TRANSITION-TO-WORK SELF-EFFICACY: CAREER EXPLORATION AND SOCIAL SUPPORT
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1