The empirical short-form literature has been characterized by overly optimistic views of the transfer of validity from parent form to short form and by the weak application of psychometric principles in validating short forms. Reviewers have thus opposed constructing short forms altogether, implying researchers are succumbing to an inappropriate temptation by trying to abbreviate measures. The authors disagree. The authors do not oppose the development of short forms, but they do assert that the validity standards for short forms should be quite high. The authors identify 2 general and 9 specific methodological sins characterizing short-form construction and offer methodological suggestions for the sound development of short forms. They recommend a set of 6 a priori steps researchers should consider and 9 methodological procedures researchers can use to develop valid abbreviated forms of clinical-assessment procedures.

The ability to make precise distinctions among related personality constructs helps clarify theory and increases the utility of clinical assessment. In three studies, the authors evaluated the validity of distinctions among four impulsivity-like traits: sensation seeking, lack of planning, lack of persistence, and urgency (acting rashly when distressed). Factor analyses indicated that lack of planning and lack of persistence are two distinct facets of one broader trait, whereas urgency and sensation seeking are both very modestly related to each other and to the planning/persistence measures. The authors developed interview assessments of each, and multitrait, multimethod matrix results indicated clear convergent and discriminant validity among the constructs. The distinctions among them were useful: The traits accounted for different aspects of risky behaviors. Sensation seeking appeared to relate to the frequency of engaging in risky behaviors, and urgency appeared to relate to problem levels of involvement in those behaviors.

Researchers have found that, compared to European Americans, African Americans report later initiation of drinking, lower rates of use, and lower levels of use across almost all age groups. Nevertheless, African Americans also have higher levels of alcohol problems than European Americans. After reviewing current data regarding these trends, we provide a theory to understand this apparent paradox as well as to understand variability in risk among African Americans. Certain factors appear to operate as both protective factors against heavy use and risk factors for negative consequences from use. For example, African American culture is characterized by norms against heavy alcohol use or intoxication, which protects against heavy use but which also provides within group social disapproval when use does occur. African Americans are more likely to encounter legal problems from drinking than European Americans, even at the same levels of consumption, perhaps thus resulting in reduced consumption but more problems from consumption. There appears to be one particular group of African Americans, low-income African American men, who are at the highest risk for alcoholism and related problems. We theorize that this effect is due to the complex interaction of residential discrimination, racism, age of drinking, and lack of available standard life reinforcers (e.g., stable employment and financial stability). Further empirical research will be needed to test our theories and otherwise move this important field forward. A focus on within group variation in drinking patterns and problems is necessary. We suggest several new avenues of inquiry.

Aberrant salience is the unusual or incorrect assignment of salience, significance, or importance to otherwise innocuous stimuli and has been hypothesized to be important for psychosis and psychotic disorders such as schizophrenia. Despite the importance of this concept in psychosis research, no questionnaire measures are available to assess aberrant salience. The current research describes 4 studies designed to develop and validate the Aberrant Salience Inventory (ASI) as a measure of aberrant salience. In Study 1, an overinclusive item pool was subjected to an exploratory factor analysis, and items were kept or discarded based on factor loadings. In Study 2, the 5-factor structure of the ASI was confirmed with a confirmatory factor analysis, and a 2nd-order factor analysis found evidence consistent with a single higher order factor. Study 2 also provided support for the scale score's convergent validity as the ASI was strongly associated with psychosis-proneness measures and dissociation measures and moderately correlated with measures associated with levels of dopamine. This study also provided support for its discriminant validity as the ASI was only weakly associated with social anhedonia. Study 3 found that participants with elevated psychosis proneness had increased ASI scores, but in contrast, participants with elevated social anhedonia had similar scores to comparison participants. Finally, Study 4 found that participants with a history of psychosis had elevated ASI scores compared to a psychiatric comparison group. Overall, the ASI demonstrated sound psychometric properties and may be useful for measuring aberrant salience and psychosis proneness in clinical and nonclinical samples.

No abstract