For Essays Guru

1. Sensorium (mental Status Exam)

Purpose

A sensorium is used for the purpose of getting a rough approximation of the patient’s degree of consciousness. It is also used for conveyance of the presence of a substantially accurate memory together with an accurate orientation for time, place, as well as the individual (Murray et al. 2000).

Uses

Within the forensic settings, a sensorium can be utilized to evaluate the degree of the client’s consciousness. Moreover, it can be utilized to understand the patient’s level of anxiety, degree of intoxication and substance abuse, as well as provision of information by others with time.

Test Development and History

A sensorium can be used to evaluate previous history of mental problems such as head injuries, idiopathic problems, anxieties, as well as disorientation, agitation and amnesia of events. This fluctuates with the level of clear sensorium in between but are normally worse at night (Murray et al. 2000).

Normative Information and Test Statistics

Sensorium is used for mental state examination. The cognitive data that are utilized in such scenarios include data that take the form of population by age and level of education. There is also an inverse association between the sensorium scoes and age, which often range from 29 to 24 years of age.

Sensoriums are used for evaluating the mental status of nearly all groups of people. They can include males, females, youths and elderly population, as well as groups of people with psychiatric disorders such as extreme anxieties (Murray et al. 2000).

Validity and Reliability

Since the validity and reliability of the mental status examination requires the client to be reasonably oriented, the mental assessment examination needs to begin by assessing the clients’ degree of sensorium orientation.

Malingering or deception

Malignering and deceptions are marked by conscious attempts to feign mental illness. Sensoriums are used for testing this by investigating the Genser’s syndrome. They are often observed when prisoners respond to questions using approximate answers such as 2+2. Subjects can also manifest dazed sensorium, hallucinations, as well as bizarre behaviors.

2. CAGE Questionnaires (Substance Abuse)

Test Purpose

They are used for asking questions with the purpose of addressing common responses to abuse. These responses may include concerns for harm, hypersensitivity, as well as perceptions of guilt in the harm that the abuse does to others. Moreover, they suggest the degree of sensitivity of clients to a given issue of substance abuse (Knight et al. 2003).

Uses, Particularly in Forensic Settings

It is used for identifying alcoholics within the forensic settings. It is also popular among many healthcare givers who are attending to people suffering from substance abuse disorders. They are used as part of the general health history of the patient to investigate possible past causes of substance use disorder.

Test Development and History

The test was developed by John Ewing and is extensively used internationally as an instrument for identification of substance abuse disorder. Today, the method is particularly popular among primary caregivers. It has also been modified into various languages (Knight et al. 2003).

Normative Information and Test Statistics

Some of the normative data that are commonly utilized when conducting the CAGE Questionnaire include the quantity alcohol taken at a particular point in time by the patient, as well as frequency of alcoholism. Furthermore, it seeks data related to heavy drinking episodes.

Applicable Populations

The CAGE Questionnaire is used to investigate the degree of substance abuse disorder that patients suffer from. These groups can include adolescents, adult population, as well as inmates who have similar problems (Knight et al. 2003).

Validity and Reliability

The CAGE questionnaire demonstrates high test-retest reliability. In addition, it has a high adequate correlation with other screening instruments. The questionnaire is also a valid instrument for the detection of alcohol abuse and dependence in medical and surgical inpatients. It has an average sensitivity of 0.71 and a specificity of 0.90.

Malingering and Deception

The CAGE questionnaire has many cases of respondents denying having alcohol or substance abuse-related problems with a score of zero. To avoid this problem, persons should not be asked about the amount and frequency of alcohol that they consume on a regular basis.

III. Kaufman Brief Intelligence Test (Cognitive Functioning)

Test Purpose

The purpose of the Kauffman Brief intelligence test is to evaluate the cognitive abilities of children, adolescents and adults aged between 4 and 90 years. This is often done in order to screen high-risk people who will need consequent in-depth assessments and intellectual status evaluation (Homack & Reynolds, 2007).

Uses

In both forensic and normal clinical situations, this test mechanism is used for obtaining vocational rehabilitation information, investigating high-risk individuals, as well as periodically investigating the intellectual statuses of individuals. This is done by investigating the knowledge levels, verbal knowledge and riddles (Homack & Reynolds, 2007).

Test Development and History

The method was developed by Kaufman and Kaufman with various objectives in mind. In particular, they sought to utilize it as mechanisms for evaluating intellectual capability, verbal knowledge and riddles among patients. Later, it was modified to enhance the positive features of the original KBIT (Homack & Reynolds, 2007).

Normative Information and Test Statistics

When using this method, normative and test statistical data regarding areas such as verbal knowledge, riddles, as well as matrices are investigated and determined. Matrices, for instance, tackle 46 items that need the examiner to point towards a picture that best goes with stimulus picture (Homack & Reynolds, 2007).

Applicable Populations

The groups of people that this method is applied on are broad. They range from younger people aged 4 years to elderly individuals aged 90 years. Moreover, applicable individuals may be males or females. It used to assess whether these groups have problems concerning verbal knowledge, reasoning, as well as verbal comprehension.

Validity and Reliability

Various studies have been carried out to investigate the validity and reliability of this method. In all of them, the results have found that they have high validity and reliability. For instance, these studies have pointed out that the concurrent validity of the K-BIT model is often a brief estimate of the general intellectual capabilities. For that reason, the K-BIT is a substantial improvement from the general intellectual capacities (Homack & Reynolds, 2007).

Malingering and Deception

Cases of malingering and deception have been found to be rampant in this method, thereby interfering with its validity and reliability. In particular, Children are fully able to willfully underperform during cognitive testing. Nonetheless, consistent with earlier studies, some scholars measure higher evidence of sensitivity than others in evaluating efforts (Homack & Reynolds, 2007).

IV. Thematic Apperception Test (Projective Personality)

Purpose

The Thematic Apperception Test is primarily used for projective examination of individuals’ personality traits. These can also be important in predicting behaviors and human relation issues. It is also used for the purpose of distinguishing various human needs, hence it helps in measuring human achievement needs.

Uses especially in Forensic Setting

In forensic testing, the thematic test is used to analyze the personality of inmates in order to determine what motivated them to commit crimes. In addition, it is also utilized in measuring the achievements of clients and their overall needs. This also includes the desire of tendency to do things.

Test Development and History

The Thematic Apperception Test was developed by Christina Morgan and Henry Murray in 1935. The model is based on Murray’s theory, which distinguishes 28 human needs, such as the needs for sex, affiliation, as well as group dominance. Presently, these needs had been comprehensively studied and thee test modified.

Normative Information and Test Statistics

The above method makes use of various normative data and test statistics in order to determine their personality and the dynamics relating to their traits. They include they level of education, level of income, social status, marital status, as well as individuals’ career.

Applicable Populations

The above test method is applicable to abroad range of people in terms of their demographic characteristics. They include: men, women, children aged above three years, as well s the elderly population. Others include teenagers and youths.

Validity and Reliability

When it comes to internal consistency, the reliability is considerably low for the above method. The test-retest reliability is highly variable for this method across different scoring techniques. Furthermore, the validity of the above method is considerably low.

Malingering or Deception

Malingering in this test often involves the intentional fabrication or exaggeration of physical or psychological symptoms. These manipulations are done with the purpose of achieving a specified goal. The prevalence of malingering for this test is normally about 16 percent in forensic examination.

V. Personality Assessment Inventory (Objective Personality)

Test Purpose

The purpose of the personality assessment inventory is to evaluate the psychopathological syndromes and offer information that is relevant for the purpose of clinical diagnoses, treatment planning, as well as screening for psychopathology. It works by using various efficient scale structures.

Uses Particularly in a forensic setting

Personality assessment inventory is used in many areas of psychology. In all these sectors, the scale is used for analyzing psychopath, narcissism, schizotypal behavior, as well as borderline personality disorders among patients who are in both clinical and forensic sections.

Test Development and History

The concepts of the personality assessment inventory gained widespread interest and popularity following the Second World War. This is because there was need for both clinical services area of personnel selection. Scholars such as Cattel started working on the factor assessments of personality and published the sixteen personality factors.

Normative Information and Test Statistics

The test makes use of over 15 personality trait scales as well as a single scale for evaluating the level of intelligence which are designed for assessing a broad range of normal personality functioning. Moreover, the PSY-5 has developed a collection of 5 subscales that provides information on scores and measures of both general personality functioning and personality pathology.

Applicable Populations

The above test method is applicable to many groups of people. They range from individuals with personality disorders, to prisons with schizophrenia. The target groups for this method are individuals who are aged 4 years to 90 years. They can be both males and females.

Validity and Reliability

The main area of concern when it comes it this method of assessment is content validity. When coming up with PAI features that set it apart from the same tools is content validity. Content validity is the extent to which item contents are relevant to and reflective of the targeted constructs.

Malingering and Deception

Malingering and deception is detected in RAI when there is low likelihoods of defensiveness. This is because interpreting PAI possibility is less likely to be confounded by defensive responding. PAI shows screening mechanisms for defensive responding, but false positives are generally too high to accurately classify defensiveness.

VI. Competency Assessment Instrument

Test Purpose

The Competency Assessment Instrument is used for the purpose of determining offender’s competency to stand trials (Grisso, 2006). It can also be used for enhancing quality of care by providing competencies in areas such s attitudes, knowledge, as well as skills that the providers require to offer high quality care. This is often done among individuals with persistent mental illnesses such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

Uses, particularly in a forensic setting

The competency assessment instrument is commonly utilized in forensic setting to asses clients’ competency to stand trial. They include psychosocial testing, which is especially important in objectively evaluating whether the displayed deficits are genuine or malingered. This method also identifies various competency impairments that may render the client unfit to stand trial (Grisso, 2006).

Test Development and History

The Competency Assessment Instrument evolved from another competency test referred to as the Evaluation of Competency to Stand Trial Revised. Thereafter, the competency assessment instrument was developed. This method focuses on the functional elements of competency to stand trial (Grisso, 2006).

Normative Information and Test Statistics

The Competency Assessment Instrument makes use of 40 items regarding an individual. The 40-item scales helps in assessing the information regarding users’ attitudes, perceptions as well as practices (Grisso, 2006).

Applicable Populations

The Competency Assessment Instruments is mainly utilized among individuals who have been held behind bars and are expected to be arraigned in court for trial. This also includes inmates whose court cases are still being heard although they are imprisoned.

Validity and Reliability

The cognitive assessment instrument has an inter-rater reliability of 84. However, the cognitive assessment test focuses more on questions and less on reliability and validity. In as much as the inter-rater reliability of the CAI can be demonstrated, its validity remains to be sufficiently established (Grisso, 2006).

Malingering and Deception

Malingering and deception can be detected when the probative evidence is significantly outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. The decision makers may show biasness when the examinee fakes a mental disorder through manipulation or lying regarding symptoms in order to avoid punishments.

VII. Violent Risk Appraisal Guide

Test Purpose

This is an actuarial method that is meant to assist in projecting the violent recidivism in convicted offenders. Recidivism is described as any new criminal charge for a violent offense, normally committed by an individual who had initially been in custody and has already been set free (Kroner et. al. 2007)

Uses, Particularly in a Forensic Setting

In forensic settings, this method serves as a psychological instrument for assessing the general violence risks among offenders. Moreover, this instrument can be used to evaluate sex offenders, as well as impulsive aggressive behaviors among the study groups (Kroner et. al. 2007)

Test Development and History

The violent risk assessment guide was derived from the variables of the historical domain of Monahan and Steadman model and the concepts of psychopath-related personality factors. The violent risk assessment guide was developed in early 19902. Since then, almost 60 replications across the world have shown its utility for the appraisal of violence risks among correctional; and psychiatric populations (Kroner et. al. 2007).

Normative Information and Test Statistics

The types of normative data and test statistics utilized for this test include the rates of recidivism of a given offender; frequency of committing violent behaviors, as well as cases of forcible kidnappings, homicide and forcible confinements (Kroner et. al. 2007)

Applicable Populations

The Risk Appraisal Guide is commonly utilized in the assessment of groups such as sex offenders, jail inmates, and people facing felony charges but are being held behind bars. Other groups of people may include rape suspects and violent robbers (Kroner et. al. 2007)

Validity and Reliability

The predictive validity of the Violence Risk Assessment Guide is high in predicting criminal recidivism. Therefore, it is effective in estimating the possibility of reoffending behaviors among the mentally ill offenders. It yields good predictive accuracy, in spite of the variations in the sample populations and the results compared with initial samples (Kroner et. al. 2007)

Malingering or Deception

Cases of malingering and deception have been found to be high among juveniles. As a result, forensic psychologists have developed necessary instruments for detecting and indicating malingering and deception. For instance, this can be detected through excessive exaggeration or suppression of traits (Kroner et. al. 2007).

VIII. Rogers Criminal Responsibility Assessment Scale

Test Purpose

This method is commonly utilized with the purpose of determining whether offenders are fully aware or conscious of the consequences of their actions. This is also a method of standardizing data for utilization in insanity evaluations. It is meant to quantify the essential psychological and situational variables at the time of crime (Fulero & Wrightsman, 2008).

Uses, Particularly in a Forensic Setting

The Rogers Criminal Responsibility Assessment Scale is commonly utilized for the purpose of structuring and quantification of the decision making procedure during the evaluation of legal insanity among offenders or suspects. It is done by way of conducting detailed evaluations such as relevant interviews and reviews of pertinent records (Fulero & Wrightsman, 2008).

Test Development and History

The above model was first developed by Rogers in 1984 as a way of seeking standardization of data for utilization in insanity evaluations. Today,. This method has undergone various modifications in ways that only allows it to be utilized by trained forensic examiners in ways that do not substitute their utilization for clinical judgments (Fulero & Wrightsman, 2008).

Normative Information and Test Statistics

There are five categories of normative data that is used by researchers when applying this model. For instance, the forensic psychologist may make use of the patient’s degree of reliability. This is derived from the reliability of patient’s self-report under voluntary controls (Fulero & Wrightsman, 2008).

Applicable Populations

The main applicable populations for this test are offenders who are set to be arraigned in court. These groups if individuals are targeted when they begin to utilize insanity as a means of defending themselves in court. The method is applicable in determining whether the offenders are being truthful.

Validity and Reliability

Validity and reliability are of critical impacts when assessing an individual’s responsibility for a particular crime. Rogers states that reliability is guaranteed when there is absence of malingering. Cognitive controls can also be used to enhance reliability. Another method of enhancing validity and reliability is putting in place behavioral controls (Fulero & Wrightsman, 2008).

Malingering or Deception

Rogers developed some reviews for indicating malingering or deception. This involved integrating case studies with the psychometric research and analogue studies of deception. For example, malingering and deception can manifest itself when there are increased instances of involuntary interferences with accurate recalls (Fulero & Wrightsman, 2008).

References

Fulero, S., & Wrightsman, L. (2008). Forensic psychology. Boston: Cengage Learning.

Grisso, T. (2006). Evaluating competencies: Forensic assessments and instruments (Vol. 16).

New York: Springer Science & Business Media.

Homack, S. R., & Reynolds, C. R. (2007). Essentials of assessment with brief intelligence tests

(Vol. 41). New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Knight, J. R., Sherritt, L., Harris, S. K., Gates, E. C., & Chang, G. (2003). Validity of brief

alcohol screening tests among adolescents: a comparison of the AUDIT, POSIT, CAGE,

and CRAFFT. Alcoholism: Clinical and experimental research, 27(1), 67-73.

Kröner, C., Stadtland, C., Eidt, M., & Nedopil, N. (2007). The validity of the Violence Risk

Appraisal Guide (VRAG) in predicting criminal recidivism. Criminal Behaviour and

Mental Health, 17(2), 89-100.

Murray, K. J., Scott, C., Zachariah, B., Michalski, J. M., Demas, W., Vora, N. L., ... & Movsas,

B. (2000). Importance of the mini-mental status examination in the treatment of patients

with brain metastases: a report from the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group protocol 91-

04. International Journal of Radiation Oncology* Biology* Physics, 48(1), 59-64.