Inconsistent Responding in a Criminal Forensic Setting: An Evaluation of the VRIN-r and TRIN-r Scales of the MMPI-2-RF.

Criminal forensic evaluations are complicated by the risk that examinees will respond in an unreliable manner. Unreliable responding could occur due to lack of personal investment in the evaluation, severe mental illness, and low cognitive abilities. In this study, 31% of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF; Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008/2011) profiles were invalid due to random or fixed-responding (T score ≥ 80 on the VRIN-r or TRIN-r scales) in a sample of pretrial criminal defendants evaluated in the context of treatment for competency restoration. Hierarchical regression models showed that symptom exaggeration variables, as measured by inconsistently reported psychiatric symptoms, contributed over and above education and intellectual functioning in their prediction of both random responding and fixed responding. Psychopathology variables, as measured by mood disturbance, better predicted fixed responding after controlling for estimates of cognitive abilities, but did not improve the prediction for random responding. These findings suggest that random responding and fixed responding are not only affected by education and intellectual functioning, but also by intentional exaggeration and aspects of psychopathology. Measures of intellectual functioning and effort and response style should be considered for administration in conjunction with self-report personality measures to rule out rival hypotheses of invalid profiles.

Clinicians' perceptions of challenges and strategies of transition from assertive community treatment to less intensive services.

The study aimed to identify clinical strategies and challenges around transition from Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) to less intensive services. Six focus groups were conducted with ACT team leaders (n = 49). Themes were grouped under four intervention-focused domains: (1) client/clinical, (2) family and natural supports, (3) ACT staff and team, and (4) public mental health system. Barriers to transition included beliefs that clients and families would not want to terminate services (due to loss of relationships, fear of failure, preference for ACT model), clinical concerns that transition would not be successful (due to limited client skills, relapse without ACT support), systems challenges (clinic waiting lists, transportation barriers, eligibility restrictions, stigma against ACT clients), and staff ambivalence (loss of relationship with client, impact on caseload). Strategies to support transition included building skills for transition, engaging supports, celebrating success, enhanced coordination with new providers, and integrating and structuring transition in ACT routines.