Catálogo de publicaciones - revistas
Assessment
Resumen/Descripción – provisto por la editorial en inglés
Assessment (ASM) focuses on applied clinical assessment, with an emphasis on information relevant to the use of assessment measures, including test development, validation, and interpretation practices. Articles cover the assessment of cognitive and neuropsychological functioning, personality, and psychopathology, as well as empirical assessment of clinically relevant phenomena, such as behaviors, personality characteristics, and diagnoses.Palabras clave – provistas por la editorial
No disponibles.
Disponibilidad
Institución detectada | Período | Navegá | Descargá | Solicitá |
---|---|---|---|---|
No detectada | desde mar. 1999 / hasta dic. 2023 | SAGE Journals |
Información
Tipo de recurso:
revistas
ISSN impreso
1073-1911
ISSN electrónico
1552-3489
Editor responsable
SAGE Publishing (SAGE)
País de edición
Estados Unidos
Fecha de publicación
1994-
Cobertura temática
Tabla de contenidos
The Convergent Structure of DSM-5 Personality Trait Facets and Five-Factor Model Trait Domains
Katherine M. Thomas; Matthew M. Yalch; Robert F. Krueger; Aidan G. C. Wright; Kristian E. Markon; Christopher J. Hopwood
Pp. 308-311
Integrating Normal and Pathological Personality
David Watson; Sara M. Stasik; Eunyoe Ro; Lee Anna Clark
Palabras clave: Applied Psychology; Clinical Psychology.
Pp. 312-326
Convergent and Discriminant Validity of the Five Factor Form and the Sliderbar Inventory
Stephanie L. Rojas; Thomas A. Widiger
<jats:p> Existing measures of the five factor model (FFM) of personality are generally, if not exclusively, unipolar in their assessment of maladaptive variants of the FFM domains. However, two recently developed measures, the Five Factor Form (FFF) and the Sliderbar Inventory (SI), include items that assess for maladaptive variants at both poles of each item. This structure is unique among existing measures of personality and personality disorder, although there is a historical, infrequently used Stone Personality Trait Schema (SPTS) that had also included this item structure. To facilitate an exploration of their convergent and discriminant validity, the SI and SPTS items were reorganized into FFM scales. The convergent and discriminant validity of the FFF, SI-FFM, and SPTS-FFM scales was considered in a sample of 450 adults with current or a history of mental health treatment. The FFF, SI-FFM, and SPTS-FFM were also compared with respect to their relationship with FFM domains. Finally, the FFF items and SI-FFM scales were tested with respect to their relationship with measures of maladaptive variants of both high and low agreeableness and conscientiousness. The implications of the results are discussed with respect to the assessment of maladaptive personality functioning, and suggestions for future research are provided. </jats:p>
Palabras clave: Applied Psychology; Clinical Psychology.
Pp. 222-234
Univariate and Multivariate Base Rates of Score Elevations, Reliable Change, and Inter-Rater Discrepancies in the BRIEF-A Standardization Samples
Stephen L. Aita; Grant G. Moncrief; Jennifer Greene; Sue Trujillo; Alicia Carrillo; Sierra Iwanicki; Carrie Champ Morera; Gerard A. Gioia; Peter K. Isquith; Robert M. Roth
<jats:p> The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function–Adult Version (BRIEF-A) is a standardized rating scale of subjective executive functioning. We provide univariate and multivariate base rates (BRs) for scale/index scores in the clinical range ( T scores ≥65), reliable change, and inter-rater information not included in the Professional Manual. Participants were adults (ages = 18–90 years) from the BRIEF-A self-report ( N = 1,050) and informant report ( N = 1,200) standardization samples, as well as test–retest ( n = 50 for self, n = 44 for informant) and inter-rater ( n = 180) samples. Univariate BRs of elevated T scores were low (self-report = 3.3%–15.4%, informant report = 4.5%–16.3%). Multivariate BRs revealed the common occurrence of obtaining at least one elevated T-score across scales (self-report = 26.5%–37.3%, informant report = 22.7%–30.3%), whereas virtually none had elevated scores on all scales. Test–retest scores were highly correlated (self = .82–.94; informant = .91–.96). Inter-rater correlations ranged from .44 to .68. Significant ( p < .05) test–retest T-score differences ranged from 7 to 12 for self-report, from 6 to 8 for informant report, and from 16 to 21 points for inter-rater T-score differences. Applications of these findings are discussed. </jats:p>
Pp. 390-401