Objectives:
• To understand the use of personality inventories for the assessment of risk and personality disorders in forensic settings.
• To understand the use of projective tests for the assessment of risk and personality disorders in forensic settings.
• To get an insight about the draw backs of using personality inventories and projective tests from legal and psychological point of view.
• To understand the use of benefits and draw backs of the use of check lists for assessment.
Assessment of Personality disorders is another task for which court can ask a Forensic psychologist to provide expertise. How a Forensic Psychologists do assesses personality disorder? How do they assess the risk that a mentally retarded/ learning disabled will commit a crime in a specific situation.
Reasons for referral
While assessing Reason for referral is usually the most crucial clue. for instance if the source is claiming that the person is very violent and have no regard for other’s right a forensic psychologist is more likely to administer psychological tests measuring ASPD. But if the source is saying that individual is suicidal then psychological tests measuring Borderline Personality Disorder will be used. And if source states that person is very troublesome and thinks he/she is the president of Pakistan and mistrustful about the meals. More likely assessment would be using psychological tests targeting paranoid personality disorder.
Personality Inventories
Personality Inventories are quite often used to make assessments and usually found in booklets with hundreds of questions. An individual taking that test is required to answer all those questions in order to make judgments. But for making assessments one essential thing is that the person endorse all items with honesty and tell truths. When working with pathological liars we can not assume that they will tell truth. So, results do not depict the real and desired picture. Few tests can tell whether the test taker is telling lie or not but that is not enough because then we would not be able to diagnose the personality disorder.
1. Minnesota Multiphase Personality Inventory (MMPI)
2. MCMI ( Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory)
3. PAI (Personal Assessment Inventory)
4. CPI (California Personality Inventory)
MMPI
The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is one of the most frequently used personality tests personality assessment but it is very long and has some very old scales, Although it can measure whether the person is telling lie or not.
MCMI ( Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory)
The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory is relatively new instrument that is a self-report instrument designed to help the clinician assess DSM-IV-related personality disorders.
PAI (Personal Assessment Inventory)
It assesses a broad range of psychological conditions, including personality disorders, anxiety, depression, mania and schizophrenia. It encompasses 344 items although while compared to the MMPI however, it is about 40% shorter.
CPI (California Personality Inventory)
It was created in a similar manner to the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), but unlike the MMPI, it is not concerned with maladjustment or clinical diagnosis, but concerned itself with more "normal" aspects of personality.
Personality inventory may not be suitable though these are still widely used
All these tests are self report inventories, even though widely used but a person who is involved in multiple tedious crimes; we can not expect truth from him. So in my opinion personality inventories are absolutely unreliable in crime settings. If Personality Inventories are not suitable then how to assess. In selecting psychological tests, the forensic evaluator should seek tests that are appropriate for legal decision making, thereby avoiding tests that are unreliable. Similarly, an evaluator should use only tests for which the evaluator has adequate training in administration and interpretation. Because psychological tests are best used as a source of potential hypotheses, they are best administered early in the assessment. Tests can then be scored and used to provide direction for the assessment process. This practice necessitates either seeing the plaintiff on multiple days and/or having the ability to score the tests quickly. Actuarially constructed tests like the MMPI should be given in this way, as they provide only possible hypothesis and cannot be purported as proof of anything.
• To understand the use of projective tests for the assessment of risk and personality disorders in forensic settings.
• To get an insight about the draw backs of using personality inventories and projective tests from legal and psychological point of view.
• To understand the use of benefits and draw backs of the use of check lists for assessment.
Assessment of Personality disorders is another task for which court can ask a Forensic psychologist to provide expertise. How a Forensic Psychologists do assesses personality disorder? How do they assess the risk that a mentally retarded/ learning disabled will commit a crime in a specific situation.
Reasons for referral
While assessing Reason for referral is usually the most crucial clue. for instance if the source is claiming that the person is very violent and have no regard for other’s right a forensic psychologist is more likely to administer psychological tests measuring ASPD. But if the source is saying that individual is suicidal then psychological tests measuring Borderline Personality Disorder will be used. And if source states that person is very troublesome and thinks he/she is the president of Pakistan and mistrustful about the meals. More likely assessment would be using psychological tests targeting paranoid personality disorder.
Personality Inventories
Personality Inventories are quite often used to make assessments and usually found in booklets with hundreds of questions. An individual taking that test is required to answer all those questions in order to make judgments. But for making assessments one essential thing is that the person endorse all items with honesty and tell truths. When working with pathological liars we can not assume that they will tell truth. So, results do not depict the real and desired picture. Few tests can tell whether the test taker is telling lie or not but that is not enough because then we would not be able to diagnose the personality disorder.
1. Minnesota Multiphase Personality Inventory (MMPI)
2. MCMI ( Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory)
3. PAI (Personal Assessment Inventory)
4. CPI (California Personality Inventory)
MMPI
The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is one of the most frequently used personality tests personality assessment but it is very long and has some very old scales, Although it can measure whether the person is telling lie or not.
MCMI ( Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory)
The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory is relatively new instrument that is a self-report instrument designed to help the clinician assess DSM-IV-related personality disorders.
PAI (Personal Assessment Inventory)
It assesses a broad range of psychological conditions, including personality disorders, anxiety, depression, mania and schizophrenia. It encompasses 344 items although while compared to the MMPI however, it is about 40% shorter.
CPI (California Personality Inventory)
It was created in a similar manner to the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), but unlike the MMPI, it is not concerned with maladjustment or clinical diagnosis, but concerned itself with more "normal" aspects of personality.
Personality inventory may not be suitable though these are still widely used
All these tests are self report inventories, even though widely used but a person who is involved in multiple tedious crimes; we can not expect truth from him. So in my opinion personality inventories are absolutely unreliable in crime settings. If Personality Inventories are not suitable then how to assess. In selecting psychological tests, the forensic evaluator should seek tests that are appropriate for legal decision making, thereby avoiding tests that are unreliable. Similarly, an evaluator should use only tests for which the evaluator has adequate training in administration and interpretation. Because psychological tests are best used as a source of potential hypotheses, they are best administered early in the assessment. Tests can then be scored and used to provide direction for the assessment process. This practice necessitates either seeing the plaintiff on multiple days and/or having the ability to score the tests quickly. Actuarially constructed tests like the MMPI should be given in this way, as they provide only possible hypothesis and cannot be purported as proof of anything.
