Psykologiske test et skematisk overblik. Psykologisk testning, eksamen 1. juni 2007 Fork. Navn Hvem, år

Transcription

1 Psykologiske test et skematisk overblik Psykologisk testning, eksamen 1 juni 2007 Fork Navn Hvem, Intelligenstests WAIS-III WISC-III WPPSI-R Wechslers Adult Intelligencs Scale Wechslers Intelligence Scale for Children Wechslers Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence ? 1989 Intelligens test for voksne Intelligens test for børn Intelligens test for småbørn: diagnosis of mental deficit in preschool : Verbal 6: Info Vocab Simil Arithm Digit span Compr (-) Perform 5: Pict compl Digit sym Block des Matrix re Pict arr (-) Total: Mean:100 SD: 15 Subtests Mean:15 SD: Som WAIS-III 3-7,3 12 Som WAIS-III IQ scores: VIQ: 6 PIQ : 5 Total IQ: 11 Index scores: VCI, Verbal Compr: 3 POI, Perceptual Organi: 3 WMI, Working Mem: 3 PSI, processing speed: 2 VC, Verbal Compr: 4 PO, Percep Org, 4 FD, Freed of distract, 2 PS, Process Speed, 2 IQ PIQ VIQ personer børn børn Split-half Test-retest IQ, VIQ, PIQ + Index: >9 Subtests: 7 Som WAIS- III Split-half IQ, VIQ, PIQ: >9 Subtests: 7 WAIS-R mm WISC-R mm WPPRI mm

2 Fork Navn Hvem, RPM CPM SPM APM MHV Kogn tests WCST mfl MMSE CAMCOG - del af CAMDEX Personlighedstests, structured Raven Progressive Matrices: - Coloured - Standard - Advanced Ravens Mill Hill Vocabulary Scale Winsconsin Card Sorting Task Minimental State Exam Cambridge Cognitive Examination 1938 Intelligence: eductive ability Intelligence: Reproductive ability? Executive functions, abstract thinking, ability to shift set? Mental status: Diagnosticere/ forudsige risiko for demens? Mental status: Diagnosticere / forudsige risiko for demens Executive functioning; Cognitive functioning Også god til screening og tidlig detection CPM: 5-11 SPM: 6- APM: for superior intellect CPM: 36 items SPM: 60 items grouped in 5 sets APM: items? g? eductive ability? g? Reproductive ability Opdateret recently, but questioned Large sample of US norms? Split-half: Adults: 0,65-0,94 Test-retest: Adults: 0,80-0,93 For Children: Much lower! Voksne 1????? Ældre 30 items, very easy 5-10 minutes Ældre 20 minutes Max score: Cutting score of 23 lofteffekt Cutting score of 80/81 or SD=4,41 ingen lofteffekt Several sources Excellent, 0,89-0,99 Much research Påvirket af: - Udd (ja) - Køn (nej) - SEM (lidt) - Location (lidt) Cutting score of 23 gives 80-90% korrekt diagnose?? Huppert: Cuttoff: 80/81: sens: 93%, spec: 87% Lolk: Individuelt cutt-off: SD=- 4, CAMCOG DART + SC + Age + Gen knowledge + Mat status n man kender alle disse faktorer, kan man vurdere om en bestemt CAMCOG score er høj eller lav, altså om der er risiko for demens

3 Fork Navn Hvem, Factor derived: NEO-PI-R SCL-90 Criterion keyed: MMPI-2 NEO Personal Inventori Revised Symptom Checklist 90- R Minnesoda Multifacet Personality Inventory Personlighedstest, baseret på 5- faktormodellen - research - klinisk diagnose: borderline, opmærksomheds forstyrr Quickly assessment of a patients type + level of symptoms Not personality Personality inventory, designed originally as aid in psychiatric diagnosis Also used for description on normal personality Nu: normalområdet, ej psykiatri! Voksne? F-form + S-form, 5 domains * 6 facets * 8 statements, 240 items, 3 additional validity Voksne 90 descr 15 min 567 items, spørgsmål, true-false, mostly selfreferential, 1-1½ hour Likert : 5-point dimensions, T-score: Mean = 50 SD = 10 Likert T-score True-false, T-score, Mean =50, SD = 15 T > 65 attension 5 domain scales: Neuroticism Extraversion Openness Agreeableness Conscientiousnes s + 6 facets/traits pr domain Factor analysis : Se efter ekstremer: <=35; >=65 9 dimentions of symptoms 3 global index T > 63 på 2 eller flere signifikant level of distress Factor analyser: cluster A og B 4 validity scales:?, L, F, K 10 clinical scales: Hs, Hypocondria D, Depression Pd, Psychopathic Mf, Mascul-Femi Pa, Paranoia Pt,Psychosthensi a Sc, Schizofreni Ma, Hypomania Si, Social introv : 405 voksne i , 329 (pc) i , 1529 Intern consistency: domain: 0,86-0,95 facet: 0,56-0,90 Validity: smln self-spouse, other tests, 5- factor model Mgl validity scale A,B,C,D High korr with Becks depr inv Low with psychoticism NB: Ved hjerneskade og SCL: her scores også højt på OCD og depri 1949: Designed by psychiatric groups (N 50) control subjects 1989: N = 2600 Int consist coef (alpha): 0,7 s - 0,8 s Also 0,3 s Test-retest: one week, coeff: 0,5 s - 09 s MMPI and MMPI-2 correlates = 0,99 Validity scales will likely maintain its status as the premiere instrument

4 Fork Navn Hvem, MCMI-III Personlighedstests, Projective approaches Association: Rorschach HIT Millon Clinical Multiaxional Inventory III The Rorschach Holtzman Inkblot Technique 1977 Psychiatric diagnosis, Scales organized to identify clinical pattern a la DSM- IV Til ej-normale; må dog ikke stå alene ved diagnosticering 1921 Derive psychiatric diagnosis, estimate prognosis for psychotherapy, obtain an index for primary process thinking, predict suicide, formulate complex personality structures, Voksne 5-up, mest voksne 175 items min 10 inkblots, many answers per blot 7 sorthvide, 3 farvede? Same as Rorschach? 2 forms A,B with 45 cards in each 1 answer per blot T-score, Mean =50, SD = 15 Location Determinan t Populærsva r Z-score Content Special Specialscen e Form Psykisk energi pr svar 27 skalaer: Clin pers 11 Sev pers 3 Clin syndr 7 Sev syndr 3 Validity 3 Base rate 0-115: >75: some features present >85: diagnosis Indexes: SCZI = Skizo DEPI = depri PTI = per th CDI = coping S-Con = suicide HVI = paranoid OBS = OCD F+ percent (ego strength) mmm EA = Stress EB = Coping 22 different variables Diagnostic groups + reference gr (diagnostic), N= 1079 Ny norm pga DSM- IV Internal consistency coefficient = 0,82-0,90 Test-retest, one week, = 0,81-0,87? Many, many studies, some say high some say low reliability Reported separately for diff groups Normal and patients N: [90;252] Inter-scorer = 095-1,00 Split-half = 0,7-0,8 Test-retest = 0,36-0,81 MCMI-III good for diagnosis of personality disorders MCMI-2 good for acute clinical syndromes Many, many studies, some say high some say low predictive validity Vigtigt for validitet: >14 svar Between HIT score and independent measures of personality Good as aid to psychodiagnosis

5 Fork Navn Hvem, HIT 25 - Recent Diagnosis of schizophrenia Completion technique: RIBS P-F Study Rotter Incomplete Sentence Blank Rosenzweig Picture Frustration Study 1950? Detecting maladjustment Personlighedsdynamik Konfliktstof Kogn stile ønsker, behov, frygt, holdning 1977? Assess the examinee s characteristic manner of frustration aggression? 25 cards, A, two answers per blot High school, college, adults Børn, unge, voksne 3 forms H,C,A, 40 sentences 3 forms B,U,V, 24 pictures +1 for normal -1 for schizo Omission:0 Conflict: 4,5,6 Positive: 2,1,0 Neutral:0 total Cut-off = 0?? Cross-validation studies would be welcome Maladjustment index Cutt-off 135 Formelle træk Kogn stil Selvopfattelse Konfliktløsningsstrategier? Directions : extraggressive intraggressive imaggressive Types : obstacledominant ego-defencive need-persistent 9 categories + Overall dir and types + Group Conformity Rating (GCR) Outdated! Good Interscorer = 0,9 s Splithalf = 0,8 s? Interscorer = 0,8-0,85 Test-retest = low-fair Because of low reliability, P-F Study should be used for research only Maladjustment cut-off at 135 Heavy drug users cut-off at 135 God til at vurdere psykoterapeutisk e muligheder Huge body validity research

6 Fork Navn Hvem, Constructio n technique: TAT T-TAT: (African American) TEMAS: (Hispanic) Ordassociationsprøven PPT Thematic Apprehensio n Test Picture Projective Test Murray 1938? 1950?? Originally designed to assess construct such as needs and press Analyse af den cognitive stil Forsvarsmekanisme r Moderne psykoanalyse I stedet for needs og press Bevidste og ubevidste konfliktområder ass temaer General-purpose instrument with improved psychometric qualities Males Females Boys Girls 30 pictures 29 situations 1 blank 20 cards for each group 10 den 1 dag + 10 næste dag 70 ordstimulus 3 faser: - sige ord - gentage - uddybe? 36 different needs and various aspects for press Kognitiv stile (DIAH)? The psychometri c adequacy is difficult to evaluate due to lack of one system Reliability: test-retest = 0,28 Lav interscore rel? 30 pictures?? Som TAT?? Research needed Validity: God n god prøve og god tolker Ej test, kun prøve 97% of users employ personalized interpretation risk of overdiagnose psychiatric disturbance Anne Thompson: Affect Maturity Scale Velegnet til at afdække regressive træk i tænkningen + især psykotiske pt og skizofrene Diagnostic validity study: compared with TAT: PPT were superior in differentiating psychotics form normal, and depressives

7 Fork Navn Hvem, Apperceptio n technique: CAT CAT-A CAT-C Expression technique: DAP DAP:SPED H-T-P Children s Apperceptio n Test Draw-A- Person :Screening Procedure for Emotional Disturbance The House- Tree-Person Test Bellak? 1991? 1949 Karen Machove r 1948 Buck Extension of TAT For små børn DAP: Assessment of personality DAP:SPED: Screening of children suspected of behaviour disorder and emotional disturbances Originally: Measure intelligence Later: Projective measure of personality 3-10 CAT-A: younger CAT-C: older children 10 pictures: animals / humans? 1) draw a person 2) draw a person of opp sex 3) tell a story? 4 papers, 2 forms, 1 form with postdrawin g No formal scoring system Synthesis of 10 varibles recorded for each story? An entirely clinical-intuitive manner, guided by a number of tentative PD based theories? 3 assumptions: House: home life and interfamilial relationship Tree: the environment Person: interpersonal relationships? No data on reliability? Not much research? Reliability: Attempts have failed No data on validity: troublesome for some Not much research, and not much empirically support Validity: Attempts have failed