China 
Africa 
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Deception and Psychosis
Published in Harold V. Hall, Joseph G. Poirier, Detecting Malingering and Deception, 2020
Harold V. Hall, Joseph G. Poirier
PAI (Personality Assessment Inventory) (Morey, 1997; Hopwood, Morey, Rogers, & Sewell, 2007). The PAI was developed by Leslie Morey. It is a self-report 344-item personality test that assesses a respondent’s personality and psychopathology. Each item is a statement about the respondent that the respondent rates with a 4-point scale (1-“Not true at all,” “False,” 2-“Slightly true,” 3-“Mainly true,” and 4-“Very true”). It is used in various contexts, including psychotherapy, crisis/evaluation, forensic, personnel selection, pain/medical, and child custody assessment. The test construction strategy for the PAI was primarily deductive and rational. It has shown good convergent validity with other personality tests, such as the MMPI.
The Benefits and Challenges of Clinical Psychology Internships in Psychiatric Inpatient Settings
Published in Meidan Turel, Michael Siglag, Alexander Grinshpoon, Clinical Psychology in the Mental Health Inpatient Setting, 2019
Interns may arrive at their internship sites with strong backgrounds in some theoretical orientations and with little exposure to other approaches. For example, they may be trained in cognitive behavioral therapy, but not psychodynamic methods. Likewise, some interns are exposed to certain assessment methods and not others. For example, they may be trained to use the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, second edition (MMPI-2) and not the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) or any projective measures, such as the Rorschach Inkblot Test. Furthermore, their individual comfort level working with patients, particularly those with severe and persistent mental illness, varies based on interns’ past experience and opportunities. Such variation in pre-internship training leads to numerous challenges when selecting didactic experiences to provide intern classes, in matching interns with supervisors, and in providing individualized education and supervision.
Psychology and Human Development EMIs
Published in Michael Reilly, Bangaru Raju, Extended Matching Items for the MRCPsych Part 1, 2018
Comrey personality scales (CPS).Eysenck personality questionnaire (EPQ).Figure Drawing Test.Holtzman Inkblot Technique (HIT).Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 2 (MMPI-2).Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI).Rorschach Test.Sentence Completion Test.16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (16 PF).Thematic Apperception Test (TAT).
Factor analysis of the Personality Assessment Inventory in service members with traumatic brain injury
Published in Brain Injury, 2022
Brick Johnstone, Catherine Butt, Hind Baydoun, Jillian Schneider, Brittany Camp
Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI). The PAI (1,2) is comprised of 344 items that measure psychopathological syndromes/symptoms. It includes 22 non-overlapping scales most relevant to broad-based assessment of mental disorders, including 4 validity scales, 11 clinical scales, 5 treatment scales, and 2 interpersonal scales. Participant rate each of the items on a scale from 0 (false) to 3 (very true). The current study focused on the 11 clinical scales of the PAI (i.e., Somatic Complaints, Anxiety, Anxiety-Related Disorders, Depression, Mania, Paranoia, Schizophrenia, Borderline Features, Antisocial Features, Alcohol Problems, Drug Problems). Individual raw scores and scaled profiles were collected. Descriptive characteristics of the 11 PAI clinical scales are listed in Table 2.
Understanding At-Risk Youths: Average PAI-A Scores and Their Associations with Impulsivity-Related Constructs
Published in Journal of Personality Assessment, 2021
Nora E. Charles, Margaret R. Bullerjahn, Christopher T. Barry
The PAI-A is an objective personality and psychopathology measure designed to assess adolescents ages 12–18 years old in a manner comparable to its parent instrument for adults, the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991). The PAI-A, as an extension of the adult PAI, was developed through careful theoretical and empirical methods in a top-down fashion (Morey, 1991; 2007), and it features validity scales that can detect and measure inconsistent, atypical, or distorted patterns of responding. These scales allow clinicians to screen their results in order to quickly determine the presence of problematic response styles, and their utility is supported by the initial validation studies described in the PAI-A manual (Morey, 2007). Scores on the PAI-A are presented as T scores, which allow for straightforward comparisons across studies and samples. Several advantages set the PAI-A apart from similar measures. For example, the PAI-A measures factors that may be relevant for treatment planning or risk assessment (e.g., the respondent’s resistance to treatment or their suicidal ideation). Moreover, the reading level of the PAI-A is estimated as fourth grade (Morey, 2007), which is lower than many comparable instruments. This consideration is important when working with at-risk or juvenile justice-involved youths because these individuals often have lower school achievement than do same-aged community youths. Finally, owing to the similarities between the PAI and the PAI-A, psychologists seeking to use the PAI-A in research or clinical practice benefit from the large body of research that has been produced on the PAI (Krishnamurthy, 2010). Despite these strengths, research using the PAI-A is lacking. An online database (Google Scholar) search of articles citing the PAI-A manual resulted in fewer than 20 peer-reviewed papers in English. Findings reported in these articles include support for construct validity of the PAI-A, with associations found between the PAI-A and other anxiety (rs = .38–.53) and depression (rs = .19–.82) measures in a clinical sample of adolescents (Vanwoerden et al., 2018), evidence that the Antisocial Features and Borderline Features scales relate to misconduct (sr = .19) among youths in a residential setting (Charles, Floyd, Cole, & Barry, 2019), indications that the Antisocial Features scale predicts recidivism (r = .27) in juvenile justice-involved youths (Salekin, 2008), and small (OR = 1.11) positive associations between the Borderline Features scale and lifetime history of suicide attempts (Glenn, Bagge, & Osman, 2013). Although these studies are all informative in their own right, it is notable that they focus on specific aspects of the PAI-A and do not provide overall profiles for their sample. Accordingly, there have recently been calls for more empirical evaluations of the PAI-A using a variety of adolescent samples (e.g., Vanwoerden et al., 2018). Therefore, the current study fulfills an identified need in the literature and can inform clinicians and researchers working with individuals in this age range.