1999
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1097-4679(199912)55:12<1553::aid-jclp12>3.0.co;2-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Differential patterns of responding among three groups of chronic, psychotic, forensic outpatients

Abstract: Elements of response style were examined among three groups of chronic, psychotic, forensic patients: paranoid schizophrenics (N ϭ 89); undifferentiated-disorganized schizophrenics (N ϭ 38); and schizoaffective patients (N ϭ 53). Forensic patients with elevated MMPI-2 L Scales produced increased percentages of Pure Form (F %) on the Rorschach. A similar relationship occurred when the Rorschach was used as the independent measure. Schizoaffective patients reported more psychotic symptoms on the MMPI-2 and lower… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
25
0

Year Published

2003
2003
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

5
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
0
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…First, our results demonstrate the utility of projective assessment in detecting implicit needs and motives that may not otherwise be acknowledged (McClelland, Koestner, & Weinberger, 1989). Bannatyne et al (1999) and Gacono et al (2002) state that the Rorschach is especially helpful in assessing forensic patients who tend to misrepresent themselves in traditional selfreport measures. Since dependency is often unacknowledged by SHPs, NVPs, and NSOPs, and because dependent and aggressive impulses are often associated within these individuals, it appears that the ROD is a meaningful tool by which to further elucidate the psychopathology of these individuals beyond traditional self-report measures.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…First, our results demonstrate the utility of projective assessment in detecting implicit needs and motives that may not otherwise be acknowledged (McClelland, Koestner, & Weinberger, 1989). Bannatyne et al (1999) and Gacono et al (2002) state that the Rorschach is especially helpful in assessing forensic patients who tend to misrepresent themselves in traditional selfreport measures. Since dependency is often unacknowledged by SHPs, NVPs, and NSOPs, and because dependent and aggressive impulses are often associated within these individuals, it appears that the ROD is a meaningful tool by which to further elucidate the psychopathology of these individuals beyond traditional self-report measures.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 65%
“…Evaluators should also be familiar with a growing database of forensic Rorschach samples (Bannatyne, Gacono, & Greene, 1999;Cunliffe & Gacono, 2008;Gacono, Meloy, & Bridges, 2000Singer, Hoppe, Lee, Olesen, & Walters, 2008), keeping in mind how these samples differ from Exner's nonpatient and clinical norms (Exner & Erdberg, 2005). A series of studies with antisocial and psychopathic patients (Gacono, 1988(Gacono, , 1990Gacono & Meloy, 1991, 1992, 1994Gacono, Meloy, & Heaven, 1990;Meloy, Gacono, & Kenney, 1994;Young et al, 2000) have validated the use of the Rorschach as a nomothetically sensitive instrument in discriminating between psychopathic ASPD and nonpsychopathic ASPD subjects (also see Smith, Gacono, &Kaufman, 1995, andRussell, 2000, for an extension of these findings to conduct-disordered adolescents), and supported the assertion that these individuals…”
Section: The Rorschachmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since response style should be considered (Bannatyne et al, 1999;, and distortion should be assumed in all forensic evaluations (Meloy, 1989), the MMPI-2 validity scales take on special importance when assessing psychopathy. It appears that Scales L and F remain the most useful in classifying fake-bad and fake-good profiles (Timbrook, Graham, Keillor, & Watts, 1993), but attention must be paid to the relative configurations of VRIN, TRIN, Fb, Ds, and F(p).…”
Section: The Mmpi-2mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…MMPI = Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory; ICD = International Classification of Diseases; SCZI = Rorschach Schizophrenia Index (Exner, 1993); PTI = Rorschach Perceptual-Thinking Index (Exner, 2000); Sc = Russian-normed MMPI clinical scale for psychosis (Berezin, Miroshnikov, & Sokolova, 1994 Note. MMPI = Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory; Moscow School = Traditional Soviet/Russian diagnostic system (Snezhnevskii, 1983); SCZI = Rorschach Schizophrenia Index (Exner, 1993); PTI = Perceptual-Thinking Index (Exner, 2000); Sc = Russian MMPI clinical scale for psychosis (Berezin, Miroshnikov, & Sokolova, 1994 Bannatyne, Gacono, and Greene (1999;d = 0.11, n = 180). Compared to Meyer's (as cited in Jørgensen et al, 2000; n = 158) sample, there was a small effect size difference of d = -0.39.…”
Section: Notementioning
confidence: 99%