Comment on Black's (1993) article, "Comparing genuine and simulated suicide notes: A new perspective."

Abstract

The recent article by Stephen T. Black (1993) comparing genuine suicide notes with simulated notes is examined here. This article corrected a sampling error made in the original study by E. S. Shneidman and N. Farberow (1957), but Black's design suffers from theoretical and methodological problems that render it uninterpretable: First, no theoretical background is elaborated, and no hypotheses are offered. Second, no constructs are operationalized, and no predictions are tested. In the present article, the operational design is critiqued, and then it is suggested that the study of suicide notes in this fashion should cease.

Comparing genuine and simulated suicide notes: Response to Diamond et al. (1995).

“…I was not concerned with the possibility that such a process might capitalize on random differences in the notes, because any interesting finding would be subject to cross-validation on subsequent samples of genuine and simulated suicide notes as part of an appropriately timed, theory-testing study. Diamond et al (1995) appear to agree with my suggestion that asking someone to ". .…”

“…Diagnostically important discriminations can be made on the basis of empirically observed differences in behavior; several widely respected assessments use this strategy, for instance, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory and the California Psychological Inventory (Gough, 1987;Hathaway & Mc-Kinley, 1940). Diamond et al (1995) engage in the if-then fallacy when they quote Heppner et al (1992, p. 221): ". .…”

Suicide notes: what do they tell us?

“…Various methods of content analysis have been attempted, but the results were rather fragmentary and unhelpful. Diamond et al ( 5 ) pointed out that, by asking simulators to imagine that they were going to kill themselves, the researcher would artificially increase the simulators' suicidal state of mind. Moreover, this experimentally induced state of mind might have different meanings for the study participants compared to subjects who were genuinely suicidal.…”

Martyrs’ Last Letters: Are They the Same as Suicide Notes?

“…The archive extends beyond American; however, for the U.S.‐based sample, the notes from the 1990s, 1980s, and 1970s were reviewed and 80 notes were consecutively selected on the basis of representing four age groups until each group had 20 notes, representing both sexes. The U.S. sample consisted of equal numbers ( n = 20) in adolescents (12–18), young adults (YA; 18–25), middle adults (25–55), and mature adults (>55) groups. Although there are some cautions in such selection, it should be noted that a study over various decades showed no differences in the notes from different decades (16).…”

“…The most important finding in the various samples is that comparison of note‐writers with non‐note‐writers has failed to find any consistent differences; thus, one can generalize from people who wrote suicide notes to all people who died by suicide. Only a very few studies have utilized a theoretical‐conceptual analysis (25), despite the assertion in the first formal study of suicide notes (18) and in ongoing discussion (31) that such an approach offers much promise. To address this lack, over 30 years ago, the senior author applied a logical, empirical analysis to suicide notes.…”