<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rdf:RDF
 xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
 xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/"
 xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/"
 xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
 xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
 xmlns:prism="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/prism/"
 xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
>

<channel rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com">
<title>Assessment recent issues</title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com</link>
<description>Assessment RSS feed -- recent issues</description>
<prism:publicationName>Assessment</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>1073-1911</prism:issn>
<items>
 <rdf:Seq>
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/259?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/277?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/287?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/294?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/304?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/317?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/329?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/343?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/351?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/364?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/375?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/15/3/388?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/123?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/132?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/145?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/153?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/165?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/177?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/188?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/204?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/224?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/242?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/15/1/3?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/4?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/16?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/36?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/48?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/60?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/72?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/78?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/87?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/97?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/104?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/15/1/116-a?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/14/4/e1?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/323?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/341?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/351?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/361?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/375?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/385?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/399?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/408?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/417?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/426?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/14/4/433?rss=1" />
  <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/14/4/435?rss=1" />
 </rdf:Seq>
</items>
<image rdf:resource="http://asm.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif" />
</channel>

<image rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif">
<title>Assessment</title>
<url>http://asm.sagepub.com:80/icons/banner/title.gif</url>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com</link>
</image>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/259?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Psychometric Properties of Scores on Three Black Racial Identity Scales]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/259?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>In this study, we examined the internal consistency and the structural validity of scores on the African Self-Consciousness Scale (ASCS), the Multidimensional Inventory of Black Identity (MIBI), and the Cross Racial Identity Scale (CRIS). Participants consisted of 225 African American college students&mdash;75 attending predominantly White institutions (PWIs) and 150 attending historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs). Internal consistency estimates were above .60 for scores on one ASCS subscale, six MIBI subscales, and six CRIS subscales. Exploratory factor analytic procedures supported a two-factor structure for ASCS scores, a five-factor structure for MIBI scores, and a six-factor structure for CRIS scores. Implications for Black racial identity and scale development are discussed.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Simmons, C., Worrell, F. C., Berry, J. M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191108314788</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Psychometric Properties of Scores on Three Black Racial Identity Scales]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>276</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>259</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/277?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Examination of Racial Differences on the MMPI-2 Clinical and Restructured Clinical Scales in an Outpatient Sample]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/277?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The current study examined the possibility of differential predictive accuracy of selected Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory&mdash;Second Edition (MMPI-2) clinical and Restructured Clinical (RC) scales in a group of Black and White mental health center clients. Results indicate that Black clients scored higher than White clients on one non-K-corrected clinical scale and 4 RC scales. All these differences produced medium effect sizes and were clinically significant according to Greene's (1987) criterion. These differences, however, were not accompanied by differential predictive accuracy of the scales in Black versus White clients. Although additional research is needed, especially on the RC scales, this study indicates that the MMPI-2 is not a biased predictor of symptomatology for Black versus White test takers.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Castro, Y., Gordon, K. H., Brown, J. S., Anestis, J. C., Joiner, T. E.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107312735</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Examination of Racial Differences on the MMPI-2 Clinical and Restructured Clinical Scales in an Outpatient Sample]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>286</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>277</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/287?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Validation of the Urdu Translation of the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/287?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>This study aimed at developing an Urdu version of the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation (BSI) for use with Pakistani adolescents and young adults. For this purpose, the English BSI was translated into Urdu and tested for psychometric properties. The analyses were carried out with data from a sample of 904 adolescents and young adults from eight major cities of Pakistan. The Cronbach's alpha of .75 showed that the Urdu version of the BSI has reasonable internal consistency. Principal Component Analysis gave one meaningful component that indicated Active Suicidal Desire. This preliminary validation study of the Urdu version of the BSI showed that it is an acceptable measure to be used with Pakistani adolescents and young adults. The need for further research on suicide in Pakistan is discussed.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ayub, N.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107312240</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Validation of the Urdu Translation of the Beck Scale for Suicide Ideation]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>293</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>287</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/294?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Child Versus Parent Reports of Parenting Practices: Implications for the Conceptualization of Child Behavioral and Emotional Problems]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/294?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>This study examined parent and child reports of parenting practices separately to predict child and parent reports of child externalizing and internalizing features, as well as delinquent activity. Participants included 98 children (51 male, 47 female) from a community sample, aged 9-15 at the beginning of the study. Results revealed that child reports of parenting practices were significantly correlated with a greater number of indices of delinquency and conduct problems than were parent reports. Child reports of parenting also showed some association with delinquency at three yearly follow-ups, whereas parent reports did not. Finally, reports of negative parenting from both informants were concurrently related to internalizing characteristics. Implications for child assessment and planning interventions for children and parents are discussed.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Barry, C. T., Frick, P. J., Grafeman, S. J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107312212</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Child Versus Parent Reports of Parenting Practices: Implications for the Conceptualization of Child Behavioral and Emotional Problems]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>303</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>294</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/304?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Assessing Young Adolescents' Personality With the Five-Factor Personality Inventory]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/304?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The Five-Factor Personality Inventory (FFPI) assesses a person's position on the (Dutch) psycholexically based Big Five factors: Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and Autonomy. FFPI factor scores are reliable and valid if ratings are made by adults. The present study yields preliminary evidence of whether young adolescents provide reliable and valid self-ratings on this instrument or whether this depends on their cognitive ability level. The sample consisted of a large and representative cohort of youngsters with a mean age of 13 years. The adult structure of the FFPI was generally well replicated, across all ability levels represented in the study. The findings further suggest that young adolescents' factor scores are construct-valid and sufficiently reliable to be used in (group) research settings. However, for reports on individual profiles and decision making, an adolescent's cognitive ability level would need to be rather high. Even then, measuring Autonomy seems challenging.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jolijn Hendriks, A.A., Kuyper, H., Johan Offringa, G., Van der Werf, M. P. C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107313761</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Assessing Young Adolescents' Personality With the Five-Factor Personality Inventory]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>316</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>304</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/317?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Parent and Teacher SNAP-IV Ratings of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Symptoms: Psychometric Properties and Normative Ratings From a School District Sample]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/317?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>To examine Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham&mdash;IV (SNAP-IV) psychometric properties, parent (</I>N = <I>1,613) and teacher (</I>N = <I>1,205) data were collected from a random elementary school student sample in a longitudinal attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) detection study. SNAP-IV reliability was acceptable. Factor structure indicated two ADHD factors and an oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) factor. Parent and teacher scores varied by gender and poverty status (</I>d = <I>.49-.56) but not age; only teacher scores varied by race (</I>d = <I>.25-.55). Screening and diagnostic utility was evaluated with likelihood ratios (LRs) and posttest probabilities. Parent SNAP-IV scores above 1.2 increased probability of concern (LR</I> > <I>10) and above 1.8, of ADHD diagnosis (LR</I> > <I>3). Teacher hyperactivity/impulsivity scores above 1.2 and inattention scores above 1.8 increased probabilities of concern only (LR</I> = <I>4.2 and</I> ><I>5, respectively). Higher teacher scores for African American children and race differences in measurement models require future study.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bussing, R., Fernandez, M., Harwood, M., Wei Hou,  , Garvan, C. W., Eyberg, S. M., Swanson, J. M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107313888</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Parent and Teacher SNAP-IV Ratings of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Symptoms: Psychometric Properties and Normative Ratings From a School District Sample]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>328</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>317</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/329?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Construct Validity of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in Meditating and Nonmeditating Samples]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/329?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Previous research on assessment of mindfulness by self-report suggests that it may include five component skills: observing, describing, acting with awareness, nonjudging of inner experience, and nonreactivity to inner experience. These elements of mindfulness can be measured with the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ). The authors investigated several aspects of the construct validity of the FFMQ in experienced meditators and nonmeditating comparison groups. Consistent with predictions, most mindfulness facets were significantly related to meditation experience and to psychological symptoms and well-being. As expected, relationships between the observing facet and psychological adjustment varied with meditation experience. Regression and mediation analyses showed that several of the facets contributed independently to the prediction of well-being and significantly mediated the relationship between meditation experience and well-being. Findings support the construct validity of the FFMQ in a combination of samples not previously investigated.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Baer, R. A., Smith, G. T., Lykins, E., Button, D., Krietemeyer, J., Sauer, S., Walsh, E., Duggan, D., Williams, J. M. G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107313003</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Construct Validity of the Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire in Meditating and Nonmeditating Samples]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>342</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>329</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/343?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Factor Structure and Dimensional Scoring of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire for DSM-IV]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/343?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Despite favorable psychometric properties, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire for the</I> Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders <I>(4th ed.) (GAD-Q-IV) does not have a known factor structure, which calls into question use of its original weighted scoring system (usually referred to as the dimensional score). Analyses appropriate to categorical item responses in a large sample of undergraduates were used to establish the scale's factor structure. Analyses indicated that a one-factor structure resulted in good fit. A scoring method based on this one-factor structure was compared with a variety of alternative scoring procedures, and it was found that a method based on factor scores did relatively well but that the previously suggested dimensional score failed to perform better than a simple sum of items. Results support the general unity of the measure but raise doubts regarding its scoring and response options.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rodebaugh, T. L., Holaway, R. M., Heimberg, R. G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107312547</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Factor Structure and Dimensional Scoring of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Questionnaire for DSM-IV]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>350</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>343</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/351?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Anxiety Sensitivity and Obsessive--Compulsive Disorder]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/351?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Anxiety sensitivity (AS), a cognitive risk factor for anxiety disorders, was evaluated in a homogeneous obsessive&mdash;compulsive disorder (OCD) sample. A total of 280 individuals with OCD completed measures. Evaluation of the Anxiety Sensitivity Index revealed a latent structure that was congruent with previous studies showing a single higher order and three lower order factors, although greater variance was accounted for by the general factor than in a previous study. AS was significantly associated with OCD symptom severity after controlling for other putative cognitive risk factors, although the additional variance explained was small. Variability in the relationship of AS to OCD symptom severity was found across OCD symptom subgroups. Results suggest that AS might be an important aspect of OCD-relevant cognition for specific OCD subgroups, and the need for experimental evaluation is discussed.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Calamari, J. E., Rector, N. A., Woodard, J. L., Cohen, R. J., Chik, H. M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107312611</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Anxiety Sensitivity and Obsessive--Compulsive Disorder]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>363</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>351</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/364?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Convergence of Narcissism Measures From the Perspective of General Personality Functioning]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/364?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The construct of narcissism has a lengthy history and has been operationalized and measured by a variety of instruments. In this study, five narcissism scales were compared in terms of alternative conceptualizations of narcissism offered by C. C. Morf and F. Rhodewalt (2001), D. L. Paulhus (2001), and S. Vazire and D. C. Funder (2006), using the domains and facets of the five-factor model as a common point of comparison. The findings provided little support for the conceptualizations of Morf and Rhodewalt or Vazire and Funder. Support was obtained for the conceptualization of Paulhus, particularly as assessed by the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and, secondarily, the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory&mdash;III. Implications for the assessment and conceptualization of narcissism are discussed.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Samuel, D. B., Widiger, T. A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191108314278</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Convergence of Narcissism Measures From the Perspective of General Personality Functioning]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>374</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>364</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/375?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Clinical Validation of the Trait and State Versions of the Food Craving Questionnaire]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/3/375?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>This is the first study to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Food Craving Questionnaire-Trait (FCQ-T), and Food Craving Questionnaire&mdash;State (FCQ-S) measures using a clinically heterogeneous sample of eating disorder patients (</I>N = <I> 177) recruited from seven different outpatient eating disorder treatment centers in Spain. Confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) corroborated the factor structures of the FCQ-T and FCQ-S. The measures' scores and their factor-derived scale&mdash;scores yielded internal consistency reliability indexes that ranged from adequate to excellent. The measures were predictive of eating disorder symptoms. As expected, the FCQ-T was more strongly associated with eating disorder psychopathology than the FCQ-S. The results replicated the psychometric properties of the FCQ-T and FCQ-S in eating disorder populations and could become useful tools in clinical and research settings.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Moreno, S., Rodriguez, S., Fernandez, M. C., Tamez, J., Cepeda-Benito, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107312651</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Clinical Validation of the Trait and State Versions of the Food Craving Questionnaire]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>387</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>375</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/15/3/388?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/15/3/388?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-08-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191108323418</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>3</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>388</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-09-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>388</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/123?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the California Verbal Learning Test--Second Edition (CVLT-II) in the Standardization Sample]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/123?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The purpose of this study is to determine the latent structure of the California Verbal Learning Test&mdash;Second Edition (CVLT-II; Delis, Kramer, Kaplan, &amp; Ober, 2000) at three different age levels, using the standardization sample. Maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analyses are performed to test four competing hypothetical models for fit and parsimony. A four-factor model consisting of Attention Span, Learning Efficiency, Delayed Memory, and Inaccurate Memory provides the best fit to the data at two age levels (16-30 years and 31-60 years, respectively) but the factor structure is somewhat less robust in the oldest age group (</I>><I>60 years). The results clarify the latent structure of the CVLT-II and suggest that a multifactorial interpretation of quantitative and qualitative indexes from this instrument is appropriate for clinical practice with most adults, although findings may need to be interpreted more cautiously among older persons.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donders, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107310926</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of the California Verbal Learning Test--Second Edition (CVLT-II) in the Standardization Sample]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>131</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>123</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/132?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Equivalence of a Measurement Model of Cognitive Abilities in U.S. Standardization and Australian Neuroscience Samples]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/132?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>A psychological measurement model provides an explicit definition of (a) the theoretical and (b) the numerical relationships between observed scores and the latent variables that underlie the observed scores. Examination of the metric invariance of a measurement model involves testing the hypothesis that all components of the model relating observed scores to latent variables are equal across groups. The assumption of metric invariance is necessary for simple interpretation of scores. Establishing metric invariance also has implications for interpretation of convergent and divergent validity and patterns of deficit or disability. In this study the equivalence of the measurement model derived from the U.S. Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale&ndash;III standardization sample was compared with a heterogeneous neurosciences sample in Australia. A pattern of strict metric invariance was observed across samples. These results provide evidence of the generality of the model underlying measurement of cognitive abilities.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bowden, S. C., Weiss, L. G., Holdnack, J. A., Bardenhagen, F. J., Cook, M. J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107309345</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Equivalence of a Measurement Model of Cognitive Abilities in U.S. Standardization and Australian Neuroscience Samples]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>144</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>132</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/145?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Temporal Stability of the Effects Induced by the Cued Reaction Time Task]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/145?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The temporal stability of the effects induced by the Cued Reaction Time Task (CRTT) on the orienting of attention was assessed across four weekly sessions. Benefits, costs, and validity effects were computed for each session, and the correlation coefficients between each session were calculated (interindividual stability index). Intraindividual stability indices, the percentage of individuals showing both costs and benefits or the validity effect, were also calculated. The results (based on 41 participants) show a low stability for the effects in which the neutral trials were involved (benefits and costs) but an acceptable reliability for the validity effect, especially when evaluated using the intraindividual index. To maximize the reliability of the data collected using the CRTT, the validity effect seems to be a better probe of spatial orienting of attention.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Versace, F., Mazzetti, M., Codispoti, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107308106</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Temporal Stability of the Effects Induced by the Cued Reaction Time Task]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>152</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>145</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/153?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Testing the Hierarchical Structure of the Children's Depression Inventory: A Multigroup Analysis]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/153?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, the aims were (a) to obtain, describe, and compare different solutions of three, five, and six first-order factors raised in the previous literature about the Children's Depression Inventory (CDI); (b) analyze the number and nature of the second-order factors; (c) test which model best reproduces the CDI structure; and (d) test possible developmental differences between child and adolescent samples. The CDI was applied to 4,707 Spanish children and adolescents with an age range between 7 and 16 years. Results show that best models considered five or six factors, including Social Problems (Anhedonia), Negative Affect, Externalizing, School Problems, and Negative Self-Esteem (Self-Deprecation). Also, a factor of Biological Dysregulation obtained some support. Higher-order factors do not reproduce the classical distinction between internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Finally, no large developmental differences in the CDI structure were found between children and adolescents samples.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Garcia, L. F., Aluja, A., del Barrio, V.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107310310</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Testing the Hierarchical Structure of the Children's Depression Inventory: A Multigroup Analysis]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>164</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>153</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/165?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Validity and Utility of the Positive Presentation Management and Negative Presentation Management Scales for the Revised NEO Personality Inventory]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/165?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Schinka, Kinder, and Kremer developed "validity" scales for the</I> Revised NEO Personality Inventory <I>(NEO PI-R; Costa &amp; McCrae) to detect underreporting&mdash;the Positive Presentation Management (PPM) Scale and overreporting&mdash;the Negative Presentation Management (NPM) Scale. In this investigation, the clinical utility of these scales was examined using the established validity scales from the</I> Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory&ndash;2 <I>(MMPI-2; Butcher et al.) as the referent. The sample was composed of 370 psychiatric patients who completed the NEO PI-R and the MMPI-2 as part of a routine evaluation. Results indicated that response distortion compromised the utility of the NEO PI-R domain scales. Moreover, the PPM and NPM scales and an NPM&ndash;PPM index significantly differentiated invalid under-and overreporting groups from a valid responding group. The PPM and NPM&ndash;PPM index were adequate in classifying under- and overreporters, respectively.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Sellbom, M., Bagby, R. M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107310301</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Validity and Utility of the Positive Presentation Management and Negative Presentation Management Scales for the Revised NEO Personality Inventory]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>176</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>165</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/177?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Factor Structure of the Beck Depression Inventory-II: An Evaluation]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/177?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The Beck Depression Inventory&ndash;II (BDI-II) is a frequently used scale for measuring depressive severity. BDI-II data (404 clinical; 695 nonclinical adults) were analyzed by means of confirmatory factor analysis to test whether the factor structure model with a somatic-affective and cognitive component of depression, formulated by Beck and colleagues, has a good fit. We also evaluated 10 alternative models. The fit of Beck's model was not good for all criteria. Three of the alternative models had a better fit in both samples, but none of these met all criteria for good fit. Of the alternatives with a better fit, we selected the only model with unidimensional subscales, which assesses a somatic, affective, and cognitive dimension. For this model, which we recommend, as well as for Beck' original model, a good fitting structure containing 15 and 16 items was developed with an item-deletion algorithm.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vanheule, S., Desmet, M., Groenvynck, H., Rosseel, Y., Fontaine, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107311261</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Factor Structure of the Beck Depression Inventory-II: An Evaluation]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>187</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>177</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/188?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Latent Structure of Anxiety Sensitivity--Revisited]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/188?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Anxiety sensitivity has been implicated as a risk factor for the development and maintenance of panic and other anxiety disorders. Although researchers have generally assumed that anxiety sensitivity is a dimensional, rather than categorical, variable, recent taxometric research has raised questions concerning the accuracy of this assumption. The present study examined the latent structure of anxiety sensitivity by applying four taxometric procedures (MAXEIG, MAXCOV, MAMBAC, and L-Mode) to data collected from two large nonclinical samples (</I>n = <I> 1,025 and</I> n = <I>744) using two distinct measures of anxiety sensitivity (Anxiety Sensitivity Profile and Anxiety Sensitivity Index&mdash;Revised). In contrast to previous taxometric analyses of anxiety sensitivity, results of the present research provided convergent evidence for a latent anxiety sensitivity dimension. Several potential explanations for the discrepancy between these findings and those of previous research are discussed, as well as the implications of these findings for the conceptualization and measurement of anxiety sensitivity.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Broman-Fulks, J. J., Green, B. A., Berman, M. E., Olatunji, B. O., Arnau, R. C., Deacon, B. J., Sawchuk, C. N.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107311284</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Latent Structure of Anxiety Sensitivity--Revisited]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>203</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>188</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/204?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Assessment of Present-Moment Awareness and Acceptance: The Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/204?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The purpose of this project was to develop a bidimensional measure of mindfulness to assess its two key components: present-moment awareness and acceptance. The development and psychometric validation of the Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale is described, and data are reported from expert raters, two nonclinical samples (</I>n = <I> 204 and 559), and three clinical samples including mixed psychiatric outpatients (</I>n = <I>52), eating disorder inpatients (</I>n = <I>30), and student counseling center outpatients (</I>n = <I>78). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses support a two-factor solution, corresponding to the two constituent components of the construct. Good internal consistency was demonstrated, and relationships with other constructs were largely as expected. As predicted, significant differences were found between the nonclinical and clinical samples in levels of awareness and acceptance. The awareness and acceptance subscales were not correlated, suggesting that these two constructs can be examined independently. Potential theoretical and applied uses of the measure are discussed.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Cardaciotto, L., Herbert, J. D., Forman, E. M., Moitra, E., Farrow, V.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107311467</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Assessment of Present-Moment Awareness and Acceptance: The Philadelphia Mindfulness Scale]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>223</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>204</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/224?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Treatment Motivation Scales for Forensic Outpatient Treatment (TMS-F): Construction and Psychometric Evaluation]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/224?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The Treatment Motivation Scales for forensic outpatient treatment (TMS-F) is a Dutch 85-item self-report questionnaire for the motivation of forensic outpatients to engage in their treatment and six cognitive and affective determinants of this motivation. Following descriptions of the conceptual basis and construction, the psychometric properties of the TMS-F are evaluated in two studies. In Study 1 (</I>N = <I> 378), the factorial structure of the instrument and the dimensionality of its scales are evaluated by confirmative factor analysis. In Study 2 with a new sample (</I>N = <I>376), the results of Study 1 are largely confirmed. It is found that the factorial structure of the TMS-F is in accordance with expectations, that all scales are sufficiently homogeneous and reliable to interpret the sum scores, and that these results are stable across independent samples. The relative importance of the six determinants of the motivation to engage in the treatment and the generalizability of the results are discussed.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Drieschner, K. H., Boomsma, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107311650</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Treatment Motivation Scales for Forensic Outpatient Treatment (TMS-F): Construction and Psychometric Evaluation]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>241</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>224</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/242?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Validation of the Treatment Motivation Scales for Forensic Outpatient Treatment (TMS-F)]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/2/242?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The validity of the Treatment Motivation Scales for outpatient offender treatment (TMS-F), a self-report questionnaire with scales for the motivation of patients to engage in the treatment and six cognitive and emotional determinants of this motivation, is evaluated in two studies. In Study 1 (</I>N = <I>620), the</I> construct validity <I>of the TMS-F is investigated applying a multitrait-multimethod design with a therapist-rating instrument as the criterion method. All scales were found to have adequate convergent validity and acceptable discriminant validity. In Study 2 (</I>N = <I>328), the</I> criterion validity <I>of the TMS-F is addressed. Applying covariance structure analysis, the instrument is found to predict therapist ratings of the treatment engagement of patients to a substantial degree. Treatment engagement is best predicted by the scales for Motivation to Engage in the Treatment and Perception of the Suitability of the Treatment and not by the scales for Distress and the Perceived Legal Pressure.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Drieschner, K. H., Boomsma, A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-05-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107311651</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Validation of the Treatment Motivation Scales for Forensic Outpatient Treatment (TMS-F)]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>2</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>255</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-06-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>242</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/15/1/3?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Announcement of Affiliation Between Section IX of Division 12 of the American Psychological Association and Assessment]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/15/1/3?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Archer, R. P., Ben-Porath, Y. S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107312317</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Announcement of Affiliation Between Section IX of Division 12 of the American Psychological Association and Assessment]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>3</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>3</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/4?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Dependent Personality Disorder: Comparing an Expert Generated and Empirically Derived Five-Factor Model Personality Disorder Count]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/4?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Assessment of the</I> Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders <I>(4th Ed.;</I> DSM-IV<I> ) personality disorders (PDs) using five-factor model (FFM) prototypes and counts has shown substantial promise, with a few exceptions. Miller, Reynolds, and Pilkonis suggested that the expert-generated FFM dependent prototype might be misspecified in relation to the</I> DSM-IV <I>because of the overemphasis of high Agreeableness and underemphasis of low Conscientiousness in the experts' conception. A meta-analytic review of the relations between the FFM facets and Dependent PD (DPD) was conducted and used to create a revised, empirically based FFM DPD profile and count. The revised profile and count were more strongly correlated with</I> DSM <I>and non-</I>DSM <I>conceptualizations of maladaptive dependency. In addition, the revised FFM DPD profile was able to recreate the patterns of comorbidity typically found when using</I> DSM-IV <I>measures of DPD. Possible explanations for the discrepancy between the expert ratings and the meta-analytic results are offered.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Miller, J. D., Lynam, D. R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107306095</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Dependent Personality Disorder: Comparing an Expert Generated and Empirically Derived Five-Factor Model Personality Disorder Count]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>15</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>4</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/16?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Measuring Motivation Multidimensionally: Development of the Assessment of Individual Motives-Questionnaire (AIM-Q)]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/16?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>We report the development of the Assessment of Individual Motives&mdash;Questionnaire (AIM-Q), a new instrument based on an evolutionary psychology theory of human motivation. It provides multitrait&mdash;multimethod (MTMM) assessment of individual differences on 15 motive scales. A total heterogeneous sample of</I> N = <I>1,251 participated in eight studies that evaluated the homogeneity, internal consistency, test&mdash;retest reliability, and MTMM convergent and discriminant validities of the AIM-Q's three methods. These studies generally support the overall strategy of assessing individual differences in multiple evolutionary-based motives with multiple methods. Additional validity studies are underway and, when validated further, the AIM-Q may offer a promising option for evolutionary psychologists and behavioral geneticists wanting to incorporate individual differences into their research but have had to use existing self-report measures of personality, which were not designed for such a purpose. It may also offer clinical and counseling psychologists an additional approach to personality measures for the prediction of behavior.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Bernard, L. C., Mills, M., Swenson, L., Walsh, R. P.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107306131</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Measuring Motivation Multidimensionally: Development of the Assessment of Individual Motives-Questionnaire (AIM-Q)]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>35</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>16</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/36?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Factorial Validity and Measurement Invariance of the 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale in Clinical and Nonclinical Samples]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/36?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The most widely used instrument to measure alexithymia is the 20-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20). However, different factor structures have been found in different languages. This study tests six published factor models and metric invariance across clinical and nonclinical samples. It also investigated whether there is a method effect of the negatively keyed items. Second-order models with alexithymia as a higher order factor are tested. Confirmatory factor analyses showed that the original factor model with three factors&mdash;difficulty identifying feelings (DIF); difficulty describing feelings (DDF) and externally oriented thinking (EOT)&mdash;is the best fitting model. Partial measurement invariance across samples was illustrated but requires further study. A weakness of the model is the low internal consistency of the third factor. Because models with a method factor had a better fit, future reconsideration of the negatively formulated items seems necessary. No evidence was found for the second-order models.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Meganck, R., Vanheule, S., Desmet, M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107306140</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Factorial Validity and Measurement Invariance of the 20-Item Toronto Alexithymia Scale in Clinical and Nonclinical Samples]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>47</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>36</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/48?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Development and Examination of the Social Appearance Anxiety Scale]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/48?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The Social Appearance Anxiety Scale (SAAS) was created to measure anxiety about being negatively evaluated by others because of one's overall appearance, including body shape. This study examined the psychometric properties of the SAAS in three large samples of undergraduate students (respective</I> n<I>s</I> = <I>512, 853, and 541). The SAAS demonstrated a unifactorial structure with high test-retest reliability and internal consistency. The SAAS was positively associated with measures of social anxiety. The SAAS was also related to greater disparity between perceived, actual, and ideal physical attributes, beliefs that one's appearance is inherently flawed and socially unacceptable and that being unattractive is socially deleterious, feelings of unattractiveness, emphasis on appearance and its maintenance, and a preoccupation with being overweight. It was a unique predictor of social anxiety above and beyond negative body image indicators. Findings suggest that the SAAS is a psychometrically valid measure of social anxiety regarding one's overall appearance.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hart, T. A., Flora, D. B., Palyo, S. A., Fresco, D. M., Holle, C., Heimberg, R. G.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107306673</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Development and Examination of the Social Appearance Anxiety Scale]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>59</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>48</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/60?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Measurement Invariance of the Appearance Schemas Inventory-Revised and the Body Image Quality of Life Inventory Across Age and Gender]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/60?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The majority of body image measures have largely been developed with younger female samples. Before these measures can be applied to men, and to middle-aged and older women, and used to make gender and age comparisons, they must exhibit adequate cross-group measurement invariance. This study examined the age and gender cross-group measurement invariance of the Appearance Schemas Inventory&mdash;Revised (ASI-R) and the Body Image Quality of Life Inventory (BIQLI), with a sample of 1,262 adults (422 men and 840 women) aged 18 to 98 years. For the ASI-R, all groups met requirements for configural and metric invariance. Scalar invariance was found only for the three age groups, which indicated that mean comparisons may be conducted across gender for young, middle-aged, and older adults but should not be conducted across age groups within either gender. Results for the BIQLI indicated that observed mean comparisons may be conducted across all age and gender groups.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rusticus, S. A., Hubley, A. M., Zumbo, B. D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107306805</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Measurement Invariance of the Appearance Schemas Inventory-Revised and the Body Image Quality of Life Inventory Across Age and Gender]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>71</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>60</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/72?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Characteristics of the Florida Cognitive Activities Scale in Older African Americans]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/72?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Substantial research effort has recently focused on the potential protective effect of cognitively demanding activities on cognitive decline in late life. A significant methodological issue in this effort has been the lack of consistency in approaches to the operational measurement of cognitive activity. In this study, data in support of the reliability and construct validity of the recently developed Florida Cognitive Activities Scale (FCAS) in a sample of 223 African American older adults are provided. Consistent with the findings of the Schinka et al. study using a sample of Whites, the FCAS full scale showed a reasonably high level of internal consistency, small negative correlations with age and a measure of depressive symptomatology, and moderate positive correlations with years of education and neuropsychological measures of overall cognitive functioning, memory, and executive functioning. Even after controlling for the effects of age, education, and gender, the full scale score contributed significantly to the prediction of global cognitive functioning. The results of this study suggest that the FCAS is a reliable and valid measure of cognitive activities in older African Americans and provides additional, although not causative, evidence in support of the hypothesis of a protective effect of cognitive activity against cognitive decline regardless of ethnicity or race.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dotson, V. M., Schinka, J. A., Brown, L. M., Mortimer, J. A., Borenstein, A. R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107307509</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Characteristics of the Florida Cognitive Activities Scale in Older African Americans]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>77</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>72</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/78?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Incremental Validity of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 and Symptom Checklist-90-Revised With Mental Health Inpatients]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/78?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>This study evaluated the incremental validity of scores from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory&mdash;2 (MMPI-2) and the Symptom Checklist&mdash;90&mdash;Revised (SCL-90-R) in a sample of mental health inpatients originally published by Archer, Griffin, and Aiduk (1995). The incremental validity of scores from the SCL-90-R primary symptom dimensions and MMPI-2 Clinical, Content, and Restructured Clinical scales was assessed in a sample of 544 mental health inpatients using conceptually related items from the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) as criteria. A series of hierarchical multiple regressions indicated that scores from the SCL-90-R primary symptom dimensions exhibited limited incremental validity (</I>Mdn R<I><sup>2</sup></I> = <I>.01, range</I> = <I>0&mdash;.01), whereas scores from MMPI-2 scales contributed additional information in the prediction of ratings on all but one BPRS item (</I>Mdn R<I><sup> 2</sup></I> = <I>.08, range</I> = <I>.04&mdash;.12).</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Simonds, E. C., Handel, R. W., Archer, R. P.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107307529</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Incremental Validity of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 and Symptom Checklist-90-Revised With Mental Health Inpatients]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>86</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>78</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/87?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Positive Response Distortion by Police Officer Applicants: Association of Paulhus Deception Scales With MMPI-2 and Inwald Personality Inventory Validity Scales]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/87?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Interpretation of positive response distortion (socially desirable responding) in employment evaluations is an important validity issue. This study of police officer applicants examined the construct validity of the Paulhus Deception Scales (PDS)&mdash;Moralistic Bias (MB; exaggerated adjustment/agreeableness) and Egoistic Bias (EB; exaggerated power/ status)&mdash;in relation to validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory&mdash;2 (MMPI-2; L, K, and S) and Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI; Guardedness). In regression analyses, MB was significantly associated with each validity scale (particularly L and Guardedness), whereas EB was significantly, but weakly, associated with L only. MB is consistent with response distortion as reflected in L ("perfect" adjustment/personality) and Guardedness (denial of shortcomings/faults). EB is a unique form of response distortion that is not reflected in MMPI-2 or IPI validity scales. The relevance of EB to self-assessment among police officer applicants is an important practical concern in personnel selection and an important theoretical question for future response distortion research.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Detrick, P., Chibnall, J. T.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107306082</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Positive Response Distortion by Police Officer Applicants: Association of Paulhus Deception Scales With MMPI-2 and Inwald Personality Inventory Validity Scales]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>96</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>87</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/97?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Detection Strategies for Malingering With the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Its Underlying Dimensions]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/97?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Two of the most widely used measures for the assessment of malingering in forensic populations are the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST) and the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS). The underlying dimensions of the SIRS have been well established in the literature, but the structure of the M-FAST remains relatively untested. Understanding of its dimensions is critical for construct validity and guiding its proper use. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to provide evidence of a single parsimonious malingering factor to account for the covariation of the M-FAST items in a sample of 244 forensic patients. In addition, the model was cross-validated with an independent sample of 210 forensic patients. Finally, the M-FAST factor was modeled in conjunction with two factors of the SIRS. Results provide further validation of the underlying detection strategy found in the M-FAST.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Vitacco, M. J., Jackson, R. L., Rogers, R., Neumann, C. S., Miller, H. A., Gabel, J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107308085</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Detection Strategies for Malingering With the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis of Its Underlying Dimensions]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>103</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>97</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/104?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[A Comparative Study of Adolescent Risk Assessment Instruments: Predictive and Incremental Validity]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/15/1/104?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Promising new adolescent risk assessment tools are being incorporated into clinical practice but currently possess limited evidence of predictive validity regarding their individual and/or combined use in risk assessments. The current study compares three structured adolescent risk instruments, Youth Level of Service/Case Management Inventory (YLS/CMI), Structured Assessment of Violence Risk in Youth (SAVRY), and Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV), for both predictive and incremental validity with respect to general and violent recidivism. Receiver operating characteristic and hierarchical logistic regression analyses revealed that the risk tools predicted general and violent recidivism to varying degrees of accuracy, but the SAVRY offered the most in incremental validity. Clinical implications and future directions for youth risk assessment are discussed.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Welsh, J. L., Schmidt, F., McKinnon, L., Chattha, H. K., Meyers, J. R.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107307966</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[A Comparative Study of Adolescent Risk Assessment Instruments: Predictive and Incremental Validity]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>115</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>104</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/15/1/116-a?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Errata]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/15/1/116-a?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2008-02-07</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107314024</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Errata]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>1</prism:number>
<prism:volume>15</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>117</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2008-03-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>116</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/14/4/e1?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Errata]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/14/4/e1?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-20</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/10731911073058821</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Errata]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>e2</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>e1</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/323?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Validity of Factors of the Psychopathy Checklist Revised in Female Prisoners: Discriminant Relations With Antisocial Behavior, Substance Abuse, and Personality]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/323?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The validity of the Psychopathy Checklist&mdash;Revised (PCL-R) has been examined extensively in men, but its validity for women remains understudied. Specifically, the correlates of the general construct of psychopathy and its components as assessed by PCL-R total, factor, and facet scores have yet to be examined in depth. Based on previous research conducted with male o fenders, a large female inmate sample was used to examine the patterns of relations between total, factor, and facet scores on the PCL-R and various criterion variables. These variables include ratings of psychopathy based on Cleckley's criteria, symptoms of antisocial personality disorder, and measures of substance use and abuse, criminal behavior, institutional misconduct, interpersonal aggression, normal range personality, intellectual functioning, and social background variables. Results were highly consistent with past findings in male samples and provide further evidence for the construct validity of the PCL-R two-factor and four-facet models across genders.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Kennealy, P. J., Hicks, B. M., Patrick, C. J.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107305882</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Validity of Factors of the Psychopathy Checklist Revised in Female Prisoners: Discriminant Relations With Antisocial Behavior, Substance Abuse, and Personality]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>340</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>323</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/341?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Reliability and Validity of Two Self-Report Measures of Psychopathy]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/341?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The present study assessed the psychometric properties and construct validity of two self-report measures of psychopathy in a male-college sample: the Levenson Psychopathy scales (LPS; Levenson, Kiehl, &amp; Fitzpatrick, 1995) and the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI; Lilienfeld &amp; Andrews, 1996). Both the LPS and the PPI demonstrated good internal consistency, although selected items from the PPI correlated weakly with their respective factor scores, suggesting the need for further investigation of the factors' item content. The PPI showed stronger validity than the LPS in terms of convergent and discriminant validity of its factor scores and factor associations with two criterion variables, aggression, and anxiety. Overall, the current study provides greater support for the use of the PPI over the LPS in studies investigating psychopathic traits in nonclinical and nonforensic samples.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Falkenbach, D., Poythress, N., Falki, M., Manchak, S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107305612</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Reliability and Validity of Two Self-Report Measures of Psychopathy]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>350</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>341</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/351?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Taxometric Analysis of the Antisocial Features Scale of the Personality Assessment Inventory in Federal Prison Inmates]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/351?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The Antisocial Features (ANT) scale of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) was subjected to taxometric analysis in a group of 2,135 federal prison inmates. Scores on the three ANT subscales&mdash;Antisocial Behaviors (ANT-A), Egocentricity (ANT-E), and Stimulus Seeking (ANT-S)&mdash;served as indicators in this study and were evaluated using the following taxometric procedures: mean above minus below a cut (MAMBAC), maximum eigenvalue (MAXEIG), and latent mode factor analysis (L-Mode). Objective and subjective evaluation of the results revealed consistent support for a dimensional interpretation of latent structure across the di ferent taxometric procedures as well as across gender, race, and security level. As a dimensional construct, antisocial personality disorder arranges respondents along one or more quantitative dimensions (degree of antisociality), rather than assigning them to qualitatively distinct categories (antisocial or not antisocial).</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Walters, G. D., Diamond, P. M., Magaletta, P. R., Geyer, M. D., Duncan, S. A.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107304353</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Taxometric Analysis of the Antisocial Features Scale of the Personality Assessment Inventory in Federal Prison Inmates]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>360</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>351</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/361?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Self-Report Measures of Child and Adolescent Psychopathy as Predictors of Offending in Four Samples of Justice-Involved Youth]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/361?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The authors examined the relation between self-report psychopathy measures and o ficial records of o fending in four samples of justice-involved youth (total N</I> = <I> 447). Psychopathy measures included the Antisocial Process Screening Device (APSD) and a modified version of the Childhood Psychopathy Scale (mCPS). Measures of o fending included the total number of preadmission arrest charges for three samples (n</I> = <I>392) and the total number of o fenses in the year following release for two samples (n</I> = <I>138). Neither measure was a strong correlate of preadmission o fenses. Although mCPS scores were associated with postrelease o fending in one sample, e fects for the APSD were observed only when reo fending was conceptualized as a dichotomous variable, indicating a lack of robustness in this association. The findings suggest caution in the use of self-report measures of psychopathic features for decision making with respect to issues of delinquency risk among justice-involved youth.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Boccaccini, M. T., Epstein, M., Poythress, N., Douglas, K. S., Campbell, J., Gardner, G., Falkenbach, D.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107303569</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Self-Report Measures of Child and Adolescent Psychopathy as Predictors of Offending in Four Samples of Justice-Involved Youth]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>374</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>361</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/375?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Psychometric and Structural Analysis of the MMPI-2 Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) Facet Subscales]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/375?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) is a model of personality psychopathology assessed in adult populations with a set of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory&mdash;2 (MMPI-2) scales. The authors examine the reliability and validity of recently developed lower-order facet subscales for each of these five domains, with an emphasis on structural invariance, using both confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA). MMPI-2 protocols completed by psychiatric patients (</I>N = <I>693) served as the data source. The reliability and discriminant validity of the subscales were mostly inadequate. Results from the CFAs reveal universally poor statistical fits. Subsequent EFAs extracted alternate latent structures, which also demonstrate mostly inadequate reliability and validity. Overall, results suggest that the item pool that forms the MMPI-2 PSY-5 domain scales may not be able to sustain meaningful facet subscales.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Quilty, L. C., Bagby, R. M.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107305570</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Psychometric and Structural Analysis of the MMPI-2 Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) Facet Subscales]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>384</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>375</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/385?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Perfectionism and the Five-Factor Model of Personality]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/385?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>In this study of the discriminant, convergent, and incremental validity of the Almost Perfect Scale&mdash;Revised (APS-R), university students completed the APS-R, additional measures of perfectionism, the NEO Five-Factor Inventory&mdash;Form S, and measures of self-esteem and depression. The results revealed expected significant, but not completely overlapping, associations between the APS-R Discrepancy subscale scores and the Five-Factor Model of Personality (FFM) dimension of Neuroticism, and between the APS-R High Standards and Order subscales and the FFM dimension of Conscientiousness. The incremental validity of APS-R scores over FFM dimensions was supported in analyses of self-esteem but not depression. The implications of these findings for further psychometric and clinical studies of perfectionism and facets of FFM dimensions are discussed.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Rice, K. G., Ashby, J. S., Slaney, R. B.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107303217</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Perfectionism and the Five-Factor Model of Personality]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>398</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>385</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/399?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[The Performance of Two Pathological Gambling Screens in College Students]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/399?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>The psychometric properties of two pathological gambling (PG) screening instruments, the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) and the Massachusetts Gambling Screen&mdash;</I>DSM-IV <I> subscale (MAGS), were explored in a sample of college students (</I>N = <I> 159). Participants completed the two screening instruments, a diagnostic interview for PG, the Gambling&mdash;Timeline Followback (G-TLFB), Gambling Self-E ficacy Questionnaire (GSEQ), and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL). Both screening measures were found to have adequate internal consistency and were highly correlated with each other and the diagnostic interview. The screening measures demonstrated convergent and discriminant validity. Using the diagnostic interview as the criterion measure, the SOGS demonstrated better sensitivity in identifying PG college students than the MAGS. The MAGS demonstrated better specificity in identifying non-PG college students than the SOGS. The results of this study suggest that although neither measure is perfect in identifying PG college students, the SOGS is a more appropriate measure for screening purposes.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Weinstock, J., Whelan, J. P., Meyers, A. W., McCausland, C.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107305273</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[The Performance of Two Pathological Gambling Screens in College Students]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>407</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>399</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/408?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Development and Validation of the HIV Medication Readiness Scale]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/408?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Excellent medication adherence (</I>><I>95%) is required for optimal HIV treatment success. This study aimed to develop and validate a brief scale to assess psychological readiness for successfully starting and adhering to HIV medications. HIV-positive men and women (</I>N = <I>142) from an HIV outpatient clinic completed the proposed HIV Medication Readiness Scale (HMRS) prior to starting HIV medications. The 10-item HMRS demonstrated high internal consistency (alpha</I> = <I>.90), test-retest reliability (</I>r = <I>.83), and sensitivity to change following a standardized 4-session psychoeducational intervention designed to increase readiness for successful adherence. Predictive validity was supported by higher readiness scores on the day starting HIV medications, predicting higher treatment adherence at 1-month follow-up. The HMRS is a brief, easy-to-use, clinically relevant tool that can assist in identifying people living with HIV at high risk of nonadherence, who might benefit from tailored readiness counseling prior to initiating HIV medications.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Balfour, L., Tasca, G. A., Kowal, J., Corace, K., Cooper, C. L., Angel, J. B., Garber, G., MacPherson, P. A., Cameron, D. W.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107304295</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Development and Validation of the HIV Medication Readiness Scale]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>416</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>408</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/417?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Validity of the Butcher Treatment Planning Inventory as a Measure of Negative Treatment Attitudes]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/417?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>This study evaluated the validity of the Butcher Treatment Planning Inventory (BTPI) as a measure of negative expectations and attitudes toward counseling. Undergraduate students completed the BTPI, the Attitudes Toward Seeking Professional Psychological Help Scale&mdash;Abbreviated Version, and the Expectations About Counseling&mdash;Brief Form during one administration period. Higher scores on the BTPI Closed-Mindedness and Low Expectation of Benefit scales were associated with more negative attitudes toward counseling. Furthermore, higher scores on Closed-Mindedness, Problems in Relationship Formation, and the Treatment Di ficulty Composite were associated with lower expectations to become actively involved in counseling. Participants reporting higher levels of psychological distress on the BTPI were less likely to expect warm therapeutic relationships and to take active roles in treatment. Relationships between attitudes and expectations about counseling were also evaluated. Participants reporting more positive attitudes toward counseling reported higher expectations to work with warm, empathic counselors and to take active roles in counseling and lower expectations for prescriptive, doctor-patient relationships with counselors.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Hatchett, G. T.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107303043</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Validity of the Butcher Treatment Planning Inventory as a Measure of Negative Treatment Attitudes]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>425</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>417</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/426?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[WAIS-III Percentile Scores by Education and Sex for U.S. and Canadian Populations]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/14/4/426?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[<p><I>Tables are presented for the</I> Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale&mdash;Third Edition <I>(WAIS-III) IQ and index scores by education level for both the U.S. and Canadian normative samples. This allows clinicians to provide more accurate identification of relative strengths or weaknesses, compared to expectations from an individual's background, rather than the general population. Because sex di ferences are notable on the Processing Speed Index, data for this measure are presented separately. The similarities and di ferences between the two national samples are noted, with particular reference to the relatively weaker demographic e fects found in the Canadian sample.</I></p>]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[Longman, R. S., Saklofske, D. H., Fung, T. S.]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107304114</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[WAIS-III Percentile Scores by Education and Sex for U.S. and Canadian Populations]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>432</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>426</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/14/4/433?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Assessment Ad Hoc Reviewers: August 2006 August 2007]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/14/4/433?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191106310253</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Assessment Ad Hoc Reviewers: August 2006 August 2007]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>434</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>433</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

<item rdf:about="http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/14/4/435?rss=1">
<title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></title>
<link>http://asm.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/14/4/435?rss=1</link>
<description><![CDATA[]]></description>
<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator>
<dc:date>2007-11-06</dc:date>
<dc:identifier>info:doi/10.1177/1073191107310252</dc:identifier>
<dc:title><![CDATA[Erratum]]></dc:title>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:volume>14</prism:volume>
<prism:endingPage>435</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2007-12-01</prism:publicationDate>
<prism:startingPage>435</prism:startingPage>
<prism:section>Article</prism:section>
</item>

</rdf:RDF>