Development and Validation of the False Disorder Score: The Focal Scale of the Inventory of Problems.

This article introduces the Inventory of Problems (IOP)-a new, computerized, 181-item tool designed to discriminate bona fide from feigned mental illness and cognitive impairment-and presents the development and validation of its focal, feigning scale, the False Disorder Score (IOP-FDS). The initial sample included (a) 211 patients and 64 offenders who took the IOP under standard conditions, and (b) 210 community volunteers and 64 offenders who feigned mental illness. We split this sample into three subsamples. The first (n = 301) was used to select the variables to generate the IOP-FDS; the second (n = 148) scaled the IOP-FDS into a probability score; and the third (n = 100) tested its validity with an independent data set. In this third subsample, the IOP-FDS had sensitivity = .90, specificity = .80, and a greater area under the curve (AUC = .95) than the IOP-29 (.91). For 40 participants, the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) was available, too. Within this subgroup, the IOP-FDS outperformed the selected PAI validity scales (AUC = .99 vs. AUC ≤ .85).

Introducing a Bayesian Approach to Determining Degree of Fit With Existing Rorschach Norms.

This article offers a new methodological approach to investigate the degree of fit between an independent sample and 2 existing sets of norms. Specifically, with a new adaptation of a Bayesian method, we developed a user-friendly procedure to compare the mean values of a given sample to those of 2 different sets of Rorschach norms. To illustrate our technique, we used a small, U.S. community sample of 80 adults and tested whether it resembled more closely the standard Comprehensive System norms (CS 600; Exner, 2003), or a recently introduced, internationally based set of Rorschach norms (Meyer, Erdberg, & Shaffer, 2007 ). Strengths and limitations of this new statistical technique are discussed.

Do women who choose to become surrogate mothers have different psychological profiles compared to a normative female sample?

BACKGROUND: Surrogate mothers are routinely assessed for their suitability to function in the role of surrogacy. Such assessments often include psychological testing including the Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory-revised (MMPI-2). There has been a paucity of research detailing the personality structures of these women, especially with the MMPI-2. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: The current study examined the validity and clinical profiles of surrogate mothers (N=43) compared to a non-patient, normative reference sample of women (N=40) using their MMPI-2 results. METHOD: This study examined between group differences among the 68 scales of the MMPI-2. Independent-sample t-tests were conducted for each of the scales, with those violating homogeneity of variance assessed with a non-parametric, Mann-Whitney U test. FINDINGS: The findings demonstrated that surrogate mothers produce profiles with lower values than normative samples across several MMPI-2 scales. For this unique group, elevations were observed on scales that assess profile validity, views on traditional gender roles, repression, ego strength, social obligation and duties, and contained hostility, relative to the normative group. CONCLUSION: The findings provide an initial examination of the profiles of surrogate mothers on the MMPI-2. The findings revealed that the psychological suitability of surrogate mother candidates appear to be a composite of being both tough-minded and sensitive, sufficiently resilient to manage the role of surrogacy, and aware of the importance of emotional boundary-setting related to pre-natal attachment.