The validity of risk assessment instruments for transition-age youth.
TEST ASSESSMENT 2
Mental Status Exam
The mental status examination (MSE) is vital in both psychiatric as well as neurologic evaluations. The purpose of the mental status examination is to evaluate a range of behaviors and mental functions qualitatively and quantitatively. In addition to that, the MSE offers information for identification of a disorder and the patient’s response to treatment. The interviewer takes note of the observations made to be able to assess the mood and behavior of the patient.
In a medical-legal setting, MSE is used in cases where one’s mental state may be a factor when being questioned legally. In this case, MSE is used to evaluate the current state of the interviewee and does not put into consideration the past behaviors. Comparisons are however made between the ongoing exam and the previous ones to check for variations.
Formerly mental status examinations started with simple approximations of a patients’ reactions to their surroundings. Speech in the mental status exam is assessed as the patient answers various questions. The interviewer can discern a lot from the spontaneous utterance of a patient by observing how the statement is produced. When assessing speech, the interviewer will look out for the volume of speech. Is the patient loud or soft? While still looking at the intensity of capacity, the assessor will also consider the audibility of the patient, and in addition to that, he or she should take note if the patient is yelling.
The rate of speech is also noted if it is whether slow, rapid or ordinary. How the statement flows during the interview is assessed be it hesitant, stuttering rambling or with long pauses. The clarity of the expression of the patient is noted as well be it clear, mumbling or incoherent. The quantity of speech is also assessed where the repetitiveness of the patient is determined as well as how much information is given and, in this case, checking to see if the patient only responds to the question or provide additional information.
Substance Abuse Subtle Screening Inventory (SASSI)
The substance abuse subtle screening inventory (SASSI) is a brief and straightforward one-page questionnaire that is used to identify individuals who have a high chance of having a substance dependence disorder. This test has an accuracy of 93 percent. The SASSI can be administered quickly and can take less than 15 minutes to individuals or groups. The test can be scored and interpreted there and there within a few minutes. The SASSI does not require a great deal of reading abilities making it easier to administer. The SASSI is used in correctional facilities as well as in the juvenile setting. It is mainly applied in probation and parole. Before the development of SASSI by Miller the traditional methods used had unstructured accounts and they include the Michigan Alcoholism Screening Test (MAST) and the Drug Alcohol Screening Test (DAST). These methods relied on the honesty of the patients. Diagnostic interviews were also used. Although SASSI is typically used it only provides preliminary results and should, therefore, be used hand in hand with laboratory procedure of detecting substance abuse such as urinalysis. The accuracy of the test is not affected by factors such as gender, ethnicity or even marital status and has a 93 percent accuracy of detecting the substance abuse disorder as well as identifying those who do not have the disorder with the same level of accuracy. The SASSI test can be applied in both adult and adolescent populations. For the two groups, both substance abuse and addiction will be detected. The reliability of SASSI according to recent research shows that it is best to review the questions in cases where there is a dual diagnosis to avoid anonymities in patients’ answers. SASSI-3 is dominant for evaluating the patient’s problems and is also a viable tool in psychiatry.
Rogers Criminal Responsibility Assessment Scales
The Rogers Criminal Responsibility Assessment Scales (R-CRAS) is a tool that enables the evaluation of criminal responsibility based on psychological and behavioral variables that stand out in the assessment of insanity at the time of the crime. It is done as required by the American Law Institute concerning the insanity standard. The behavioral variable is quantified by forensic psychiatrists and is used to evaluate the state of mind of a patient. It is done in various parts where the first part seeks to determine the level of impairment on psychological variables and behavioral variables necessary when determining insanity. The second part involves giving the correct opinion based on legal standards concerning the criminal responsibility of the offender. The R-CRAS evaluates responsibility based on five scales namely; patient reliability, organicity, cognitive control, behavioral control, and psychopathology.
Forensic psychologists and psychiatrists developed the R-CRAS as the first measure of criminal responsibility that is standardized. Studies, however, have shown that some other three factors are not under the five scales. These factors are high activity as well as anxiety and strange behavior.
To validate the reliability of the R-CRAS various extensive analyses should be done. The rigorous test yielded positive feedback since the reliability was found to be ranging from 85 percent to 100 percent. Although it is difficult to quantify the relationship between a criminal and a precise symptom the R-CRAS still provides better results as compared to the mental state exam. The reliability and viability of the R-CRAS are thus superior when compared to other assessment methods.
I/Q Cognitive Functioning.
The test purpose of California verbal test being one of the most critical neuropsychological testings north America is the access test of human capability memory and episodic verbal learning Which at the one-time measure and experiments a sensitivity range of clinical diseases and failures.
California IQ verbal test is used for forensic settings in this possible avenue in the case where we are trying to get whether defendant or claimant is faking their mental illness. Also, situation whether the claimant or defendant is faking a head injury to gain benefits of their ignorance and wants the court of law to treat them special who an excuse of them not being mentally stable.
CVLT-C California Verbal Learning Test for Children and also for adults has proven reliable as an impact to detect and access the medical illness or patients with different neuropsychological impairments. This test is safe for both adults and children. The California verbal test id has proven valid and dependable in detecting adverse conditions called Alzheimer’s diseases at initial early stages. The test is also accurate of population groups of male since they possess an advantage of a continent lower than women that links back to their chemistry of estrogen thus more likelihood of verbal memory loss. Over the decade California Verbal test has been g using but administrative, investigative departments in identifying the situation of mental health in case of accidents or traumatic brain injuries.
Project personality assessment based on subject reactions reveals a lot about showing the psychology of a character. This test purposefully is going to major on the Rorschach inkblot type of tests.
· Test purpose
The test Rorschach psychodiagnostics test is majorly recognized as that which projects the psychological. Initially, it wasn’t intended to be a projective measure of personality but instead produce a profile of people with schizophrenia. The inkblot test means measurement for any psychological analysis and is based on the interpretation of irregular figures. The condition was connected to mental disorders that could be found in individuals who came for the test. The frequencies than was so high. Rorschach himself doubted if his test worked out as a protective measure.
The test is a technique that is projective to test on personality assessment and is based on the test taker’s reactions to a series f ten inkblot pictures. Its, primary use is to perform a projective psychological test. During personality assessment, the structure and emotions are identified to associate it with mental disorders and emotional problems.
On the history side of this test, it began way before 1939. It is then that it was used as a projective test for personality. Its development leads to an analysis of tools that could test for the schizophrenia diagnostic mechanisms. Rorschach was a psychologist whose way of reasoning was when a person sees an ambiguous image, he or she works so hard t give meaning to the image. The thinking gave him reason to develop a test for schizophrenia thus the projective profile.
Statistically, the test is designed to actualize the internal conflicts and the hidden emotions through the individual’s responses to an ambiguous stimulus. The objectivity gives the personality thus being projective for analysis.
Its methodology requires a psychologist to check on the individual’s perceptions of the inkblots which are then recorded and further analyzed using different forms of psychological interpretations or use the complex algorithm to test for the same. Both mechanisms can be used to perform the same test. The result gives the characteristics and emotional functioning.
The test is most applicable to therapeutic settings and is subjective to scoring projective tests, and so the interpretations of the answers can vary from one examiner to the next and can be dramatic. This means that there are no standardized grading scales thus tend to lack reliability and validity.
The deception behind this test is the fact that everything is hypothetical and comic in the sense that the psychologist can be a vigilante whose mission can be to enforce justice at any cost and can spend a duration of a moment to bring up a reality that will connect the individual to the purported story.
The test in this scenario seems fit to use however since it gauges the personality thus measures the emotional stability. Such tests can testify in civil matters and even clinical settings since it requires a more specific type of objectives to give a personality check. Most psychologist according to statistics vary their prompts analysis by a range of about 80-100% variance. A comprehensive and standardized system
The actual personality is an assessment done to check the psychopathological syndromes and to further give provision for clinical treatment and diagnosis.
Personality assessment inventory (PAI)
The personality assessment inventory is a test that provides information that gives relevance to clinical diagnosis and treatment planning and screening for psychopathy. This kind of test issues covers on constructs thus more relevant to wide-based assessment for mental disorders. The assessment scheme comprises of 344 items and the period of administration runs through 50-60 minutes.
Its test purpose is to check for any psychopathy and give a lead to clinical diagnosis and therapy. According to Lesley Morey, (1991), the personality test ensures the provision of information on the individual’s level of personality and their psychopathology.
Its significant use clinically brings about its primary objective which is to evaluate the extent as to which it is confounded by symptoms that are transdiagnostic and to also asses the individuals, mostly adults, psychopathology. The test can be available and is fit for persons between the ages of 18-89 years.
Across ages, the PAI has applied its psychometric features clinically and is argued statistically that it is superior n significant grounds. Forensically, the diagnostic tool compares itself with the screening instruments which is actively considered as a predictor of the DSM-IV diagnoses. It can be comparable to another device for describing specific forensics which can be related to offenders and psychopathic individuals. Currently, the PAI instrument offers the psychologist comprehensive and intelligent clinical information.
Under normative instances, specialists tend to find the traits of every individual to measure their psychopathy objectively and relate them further to their specific socially significant behavior aspects. Personalities tests are significantly a measure of distinctive features using the scientific approach. Each measurement statistically proves a specific qualitative term that gauges the traits of a human being.
The Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory is an upgrade for the PAI. It is used to screen for any form of psychosocial disorders in adults. It can test for any neuropsychological test to evaluate the cognitive functions of an individual. The validity of this kind of technique is that it requires surveillance of the biological structure of an individual. The anatomical structure involves factors such as hereditary factors, genetic factors, the rate of mutation, physique and physical appearance.
Reliability is based on the understanding one can establish on the patient. I consider it more reliable since it does not require just the information found on psychological thinking but also based on the information received from the scanners.
Competency to Stand Trial
This is a test category issued during criminal adjudication to asses and conceptualize the competency of a criminal to stand a trial at that instance. The skill to stand trial has been used to asses individuals over a reasonable period. MacArthur uses this kind of test category to perform his evaluations during a criminal adjudication.
MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool-Criminal.
MacArthur Competence Assessment Tool criminal (MacCAT-CA) is a structured 22- item formal interview which is used during a pretrial assessment for the cases of adjudicative competence.
MacCAT_CA has a sole main purpose to evaluate for any form of competency to participate in any adjudicatory process. This tool gives access rights to these individuals t confront the victims’ to get the necessary information. This system technology can help in the restoration of competency during adjudication thus a form of therapy. It assesses treatment progress with skill in mind.
The critical aspects required in adjudicative competency are; relevance of the constructs, competency and evaluation instruments. The skill and assessment usually give the results based on intelligence or mental disorder. Any form of cognitive disability or instead mental disorder is a threshold to make him or her incompetent. The symptoms according to Fletcher, 1995, the incompetency symptom can only be relevant if linked with to impairments that can deter the individual to comprehend the legal proceedings and even actualize the situation and participate in their defense. The measure o psychopathology and intelligence in these individuals creates a sense in associating it to particular scores on the competency assessment plan
For competency construct, the nomological features connect to intelligence impairments. Different levels of psycholegal abilities can relate to covariate constructs based on an ideal measure of incompetencies.
There is a need for existence between any form of incompetence through an indirect path which indicates different abilities. The conceptualization competency assumes a particular pattern to give facts behind the answer provided. Validity, in this case, can be compromised based on the fact that its skill bears robust commendation on the strength of the instrument. The instrument cannot impart the truth thus making it unreliable to some extent.
The limits in this test are; it is based on a hypothesized factor structures giving clear boundaries on the factor structure regarding the nature of the incompetencies standards.
Risk assessment is a test category that checks to support the forensic populations using an actuarial method amongst different forms of the test.
Violent risk appraisal guide. (VRAG)
This test is an actuarial instrument used to asses violence risk on suspected populations. The guide involves an assessment question that gathers and consolidate information for charges. The sole purpose of this assessment is to engage the interviewee or rather the victim to ensure that there is enough evidence to press charges on an offender. The questions that are most common include; the sexual offense history or any form of index sexual offense. These questions are leads to gauging the occurrence of any further violence among different genders for people who have already committed various types of crimes. The violence risk appraisal guide yields the effect it has on the predictive violent recidivism in multiple and separate replications. Operational violence is based on the offender populations.
The VRAG is characterized using 12 items in the actuarial instrument that are used to assess the risk of violent recidivism among persons apprehended for criminal violence. This type of assessment was developed by the involvement of 618 male violent offenders who were given an assessment form to fill. Most criminals can be predicted using this kind of evaluation, and it’s sometimes accurate and reliable since some of these people will always do more crimes if not similar crimes as those that were done before.
The variability in this kind of assessment depends on predicted recidivism and combines with the likelihood of predicting violence by including different psychological samples answers. Its validity depends on the replications and their predictions.
Aizawa, N., Ishibashi, M., Nakamura, Y., Uchiumi, C., Makita, K., & Iwakiri, M. (2018). Near‐Infrared Spectroscopy Detects Prefrontal Activities During Rorschach Inkblot Method. Japanese Psychological Research.
Asghar-Ali, A. A., & Boyle, L. L. (2018). Mental Status Examination. In Psychiatric Disorders Late in Life (pp. 75-77). Springer, Cham.
Bornstein, Robert F., and Joseph M. Masling, eds. 2005. Scoring the Rorschach: Seven Validated Systems. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Harman, P., Law, C., Pradhan, S., Lin, Z. H., Johnson, M., Walter, S., … & Grunwald, I. Q. (2018). Can resting state functional MRI assist in routine clinical diagnosis?. BJR| case reports, 20180030.
Kolb, B., & Whishaw, I. Q. (1998). Brain plasticity and behavior. Annual review of psychology, 49(1), 43-64.
Ruiz, M. A., Hopwood, C. J., Edens, J. F., Morey, L. C., & Cox, J. (2018). Initial development of pathological personality trait domain measures using the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI). Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 9(6), 564.
Vincent, G. M., Drawbridge, D., & Davis, M. (2019). The validity of risk assessment instruments for transition-age youth. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 87(2), 171.
Wood, M. E., Anderson, J. L., Gillespie, M. L., Alexander, A. A., Backstrom-Sieh, T., & Glassmire, D. M. (2018). The association between specific competence-related abilities and competency restoration treatment. The Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 1-20.
Running Head: TEST ASSESSMENT
Running Head: TEST ASSESSMENT 1
The post The validity of risk assessment instruments for transition-age youth. appeared first on best homeworkhelp.