This study addressed the relationship between Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) validity indicators and cognitive effort measures on the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM). Significant correlations were found between TOMM and some PAI validity scales. Factor analysis results found separate cognitive and personality components, but the Negative Impression Management (NIM) scale, a measure of response bias, had factor loadings on both the cognitive and the personality components. Follow-up hierarchical multiple regression and t-test analysis generally confirmed this result, and found that NIM and the Infrequency (INF) scale have significant relationships with the TOMM. The results indicate that individuals with elevations on the PAI's INF and NIM scales often display decreased cognitive effort on the TOMM. The current results support the hypothesis that personality assessment validity indicators have a modest but significant relationship with poor cognitive effort.

Objective: Suicidality and depression are disproportionately prevalent among veterinarians. Researchers for this study sought to explore the lived experiences of veterinarians in order to better identify the factors that contribute to this phenomenon. Method: Using a qualitative descriptive phenomenological approach, small animal veterinarians in the greater Seattle area were interviewed and provided their respective occupational experiences as they related to depression, suicidality, and coping. Results: Analysis of the interviews revealed attachment loss and trauma to be primary factors contributing to veterinary depression and suicidality. Conclusions: These findings provide the basis for future research and traumainformed interventions to reduce distress and suicidality in this population. Clinical Impact StatementVeterinarians are a unique, vulnerable, and underserved population. Their mental health experiences include traumatic occupational events that require attention. There exists an opportunity to deploy trauma-informed interventions to decrease distress, depression, and instances of death by suicide. Because the workplace stress is unlikely to change, psychologists are well situated to provide critical support to address role strain, significant mental health concerns, and instillation of strategies for processing and coping with occupational trauma.

The current study was designed to advance general research investigating the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), by examining whether the psychometric properties of the PAI would generalize to a sample differing from the original standardization sample. Specifically, the reliability and factor structure of the PAI were examined in a mixed neuropsychological sample. Reliability full scale coefficients ranged from .72 to .94, and subscale coefficients ranged from .60 to .90. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted to test Morey's original four-factor model (for all 22 PAI scales) and three-factor model (for the 11 clinical scales). CFA results indicated that Morey's original factor solutions were not a good fit. Thus, following Morey's original methodology, principal components analyses (PCA) were conducted on all 22 PAI scales and on the 11 PAI clinical scales and the results indicated evidence for a five-component solution (for all 22 PAI scales) and a two-component solution (for the 11 clinical scales). Overall, while results indicated some relatively subtle differences between the original standardization sample and the current sample, they still supported the notion that the PAI is a reliable and valid measure when used in a neuropsychological sample. This study expands upon the existing literature related to the clinical utility of the PAI in specialized samples.

Little research has examined the relationship between the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) and cognitive effort. The current study extends the research on personality assessment and suboptimal cognitive effort by evaluating the relationship between the PAI clinical scales and the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) in a neuropsychological population. Utilizing corrections for multiple comparisons, rank-order correlations with the TOMM Trial 2 (T2) and the PAI clinical scales indicated a significant relationship with the SOM (rho = -.26, p <.001), with additional scales (SCZ, ANX, and DEP) trending toward significance. Analysis of SOM subscales indicated a significant relationship between SOM-C and T2 as well. To further explore the relationship between SOM and the TOMM, ANOVA results indicated that individuals scoring within normal limits on the SOM had higher mean TOMM scores than those with extremely elevated SOM. Additional analyses indicated that utilizing the cut-off for extreme responding on the SOM scale (T > 87) had adequate sensitivity (93%) and specificity (76%) in predicting TOMM performance, with a positive predictive power of 54% and a negative predictive power of 97%, resulting in a 91% correct classification rate. Thus, the evidence suggests that extreme scores on SOM should prompt careful evaluation for suboptimal cognitive effort.

No abstract