Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences

3698 Pages·53.618 MB·English

by  Virgil Zeigler-Hill, Todd K. Shackelford (eds.)

A
Antisocial Process Screening Device oftoolsthatcanaccuratelyassessthesecharacter-
(APSD) istics among youth. As a result, a number of
psychopathy measures appropriate for youth
JamesRay havebeenintroducedtothisend.TheAPSDwas
UniversityofTexasatSanAntonio,SanAntonio, one of the first methods developed to serve as a
TX,USA screening and research tool for assessing psy-
chopathyamongyouth.
Synonyms
DescriptionofAPSD
PsychopathyScreeningDevice(PSD)
TheAPSD(FrickandHare2001)wasoriginally
developedasa20-itemmeasuredesignedtoeval-
Definition uate psychopathy based on the content of the
Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R; Hare
Psychopathy is a personality disorder comprised 1998) from which items were appropriately
ofanarrogantanddeceitfulinterpersonalstyle,a extended downward to youth. Each item of the
deficient affective experience, and an impulsive APSD is rated on a three-point Likert scale
andirresponsiblebehavioralstyle.TheAntisocial (0 = not at all true, 1 = sometimes true, or
ProcessScreeningDevice(APSD)isascreening 3=definitelytrue).TheAPSDwasdesignedfor
tool for assessing psychopathy among children a variety of settings (e.g., forensic, clinical, and
andadolescents. community) and has an administration time of
approximately10min.Inadditiontothecalcula-
tion ofa total psychopathy score, the APSD was
Introduction designed to capture two dimensions consistent
withFactor1(interpersonal/affective)andFactor
Psychopathyisamultifacetedconstructthatiden- 2 (impulsive-antisocial lifestyle) of the PCL-R
tifies a subgroup of seriously violent adult which were respectively labeled callous/unemo-
offenders with distinct etiologies underlying tional and impulsivity/conduct problems. How-
theirbehavior.Attemptstoidentifythissubgroup ever,subsequentstudiesfoundstrongerevidence
inearlierdevelopmentalstagesinordertoprevent forathree-factorstructureofAPSDthatseparates
this serious pattern of behavior have emerged. theimpulsivity/conductproblemsfactorintosep-
Suchattemptsarecontingentonthedevelopment aratenarcissismandimpulsivityfactorswhilethe
#SpringerInternationalPublishingAG2016
V.Zeigler-Hill,T.K.Shackelford(eds.),EncyclopediaofPersonalityandIndividualDifferences,
DOI10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_1-1
2 AntisocialProcessScreeningDevice(APSD)
callous/unemotional factor remained largely distinct factors based on their intercorrelations
intact (Frick etal. 2000). The CUfactor consists anduniqueassociationswithseveraldiscriminat-
of six items that capture the affective features of ing criteria. Across a number of studies, the cor-
psychopathy (e.g., lack of guilt, callous use of relationsbetweenthefactorstendtobemoderate
othersforone’sowngain,andshallowemotions), in strength (~0.50) suggesting they are over-
thenarcissism factor consists ofseven items that lappingbutuniquecomponentsofthesamecon-
capturetheantagonisticinterpersonalstyleofpsy- struct. Additionally, the callous/unemotional
chopathy (e.g., conning, manipulative), and the factor has unique associations with measures of
impulsivity dimension consists of five items that anxiety (negative) and social avoidance
capturethepoorbehavioralcontrolelements(e.g., (positive), the impulsivity factor tends to have
antisocialactions)associatedwithpsychopathy. unique positive associations with externalizing
The APSD was initially designed to evaluate problems,andthenarcissismfactorshowsunique
such traits among younger children (i.e., ages positive associations with measures of interper-
6–13 years) based on parent and teacher report sonalmanipulation(Goodwinetal.2015).
forms.Additionally,acombinedformisavailable
to integrate the parent and teacher report forms
when both are available. The added benefits of CriterionValidityoftheAPSD
synthesizing information across multiple sources
and settings include enhanced accuracy of the The predictive, concurrent, convergent, and dis-
assessmentandabilitytoidentifypotential situa- criminant validity of the APSD has been exten-
tionalfactorscontributingtothechild’santisocial sivelyevaluated.TheAPSDhasshownconsistent
behavior where discrepancies arise between unique associations with a number of antisocial
reporters. A subsequent self-report form of the criteria including conduct problems and prior
APSDwasdevelopedasaresearchtooltocapture delinquency and has also shown unique positive
psychopathy among adolescents (Caputo associations with severity of antisocial behavior
et al. 1999) by altering the wording of items including level of violence, persistence in prob-
from third-person to second-person format, lembehaviors,andlevelofaggression.Addition-
thereby retaining the same item content across ally, scores on the APSD have been found to be
thethreesources.Theself-reportformathasalso predictive of recidivism and poor institutional
been shown to have a similar factor structure as adjustment and noncompliance with treatment
thetwoinformantforms(Vitaccoetal.2003). evenwhenaccountingforpriorantisocialbehav-
iorsuchaspriorarrestsanddiagnosisofconduct
disorder among both forensic and community
ConstructValidityoftheAPSD samples (Munoz and Frick 2007; Spain
et al. 2004; also see Vaughn and Howard 2005
Aconsiderableamountofresearchevaluatingthe forareview).
constructvalidityoftheAPSDhasfoundsupport TheAPSDhasalsoshownconvergentvalidity
for the three-factor structure of the measure with validated measures of psychopathy and a
(Vaughn and Howard 2005). This same factor number of external criteria theoretically relevant
structureappearsrobustacrossadiverserangeof totheconstructofpsychopathybeyondantisocial
samplesbasedonethnic,gender,andagecharac- behavior. The APSD and its associated factors
teristics as well as type of setting (e.g., forensic, have shown positive moderate (r’s range from
community, clinical) and format (i.e., parent, 0.30 to 0.40) associations with the Psychopathy
teacher,self-reportforms).Studiesdirectlytesting Checklist Youth Version (PCL: YV; Forth
theinvarianceofthefactorstructurefindsupport et al. 2003) with the expected stronger associa-
for its consistency across these different groups tions between the analogous facets of the PCL:
(Goodwin et al. 2015). Research has also YVandtheAPSDemerging(VaughnandHoward
supported the APSD as being comprised of 2005; Vitacco et al. 2003). The APSD has also
AntisocialProcessScreeningDevice(APSD) 3
shown similar convergence with alternative non- of the broader psychopathy construct (Vaughn
clinical (e.g., self-report) measures of psychopa- andHoward2005).Consideringtheimplications
thy (Poythress et al. 2006). The APSD has also foridentifyingandpejorativelylabelingyouthin
beenfoundtohaveuniqueassociationswithmea- such ways, more research is needed to ensure
sures of emotion recognition (negative), reward accurateassessmentofthesetraitsamongyouth.
dominantresponsestyles(positive),andabnormal
psychophysiological responses to distress
(positive) which are consistent with findings Cross-References
from research examining similar associations
amongadultsamples(FrickandHare2001). ▶Callousness
▶ChildPsychopathyScale
▶Impulsivity
ReliabilityoftheAPSD ▶PCL:YV
▶Psychopathy
Anumberofstudieshavereportedonthereliabil- ▶YouthPsychopathicTraitsInventory
ity of the APSD including internal reliability,
inter-raterreliability,aswellastest-retestreliabil-
ity. In terms of internal reliability, the APSD has References
shown acceptable alpha coefficients for the total
score. The reliability coefficients (Cronbach’s Caputo,A.A.,Frick,P.J.,&Brodsky,S.L.(1999).Family
alpha) for the subscales have been considerably violenceandjuvenilesexoffending:Potentialmediat-
ingrolesofpsychopathictraitsandnegativeattitudes
lower, particularly for the CU factor (Poythress
toward women. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 26,
et al. 2006). Additionally, the APSD has shown 338–356.
acceptable stability across measurement periods Eremsoy,C.E.,Karanci,A.N.,&Berument,S.K.(2011).
forboththetotalanddimensionalsubscalescores Psychometric properties of the antisocial process
screening device in a non-clinical sample of Turkish
(MunozandFrick2007).Althoughevaluatedtoa
children.Procedia–SocialandBehavioralSciences,
lesserextent,theinter-raterreliabilityforthepar- 30,2319–2323.
ent andteacher forms has also been shownto be Forth,A.,Kosson,D.,&Hare,R.(2003).Theharepsy-
quitegoodforthetotalscoreandthedimensional chopathy checklist: Youth version, technical manual.
NewYork:Multi-HealthSystems.
subscales of the APSD (Eremsoy et al. 2011;
Frick, P. J., & Hare, R. D. (2001). Antisocial process
MunozandFrick2007;Spainetal.2004).
screeningdevice.Toronto:Multi-HealthSystems.
Frick,P.J.,Bodin,S.D.,&Barry,C.T.(2000).Psycho-
pathictraitsandconductproblemsincommunityand
Conclusion clinic-referred samples of children: Further develop-
mentofthepsychopathyscreeningdevice.Psycholog-
icalAssessment,12,382.
The APSD is one the most widely used and ver- Goodwin, B. E., Sellbom, M., & Salekin, R. T. (2015).
satile screening tools for assessing psychopathy ElucidatingtheconstructvalidityoftheAntisocialPro-
cessScreeningDevice(APSD)inasampleofyoung
among adolescents (self-report) and children
adults. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral
(parent and teacher reports). The majority of Assessment,37,1–11.
research supports its use across a number of set- Hare, R. D. (1998). The Hare PCL-R: Some issues
tings for both clinical and research purposes. concerningitsuseandmisuse.LegalandCriminolog-
icalPsychology,3,101–122.
There have been some limitations regarding the
Munoz,L.C.,&Frick,P.J.(2007).Thereliability,stabil-
subscalesoftheAPSDparticularlyregardingthe
ity,andpredictiveutilityoftheself-reportversionofthe
internal consistency of the CU dimension. Lim- Antisocial Process Screening Device. Scandinavian
itedresearchhasassessedtheinter-raterreliability JournalofPsychology,48(4),299–312.
Poythress,N.G.,Douglas,K.S.,Falkenbach,D.,Cruise,
of the APSD across the different formats.
K.,Lee,Z.,Murrie,D.C.,etal.(2006).Internalcon-
Research, however, consistently shows clinical
sistencyreliabilityoftheself-reportAntisocialProcess
utilitywithregardtotheAPSDasavalidmeasure ScreeningDevice.Assessment,13(1),107–113.
4 AntisocialProcessScreeningDevice(APSD)
Spain,S.E.,Douglas,K.S.,Poythress,N.G.,&Epstein, A comparative review. Journal of Emotional and
M.(2004).Therelationshipbetweenpsychopathicfea- BehavioralDisorders,13,152–162.
tures,violenceandtreatmentoutcome:Thecomparison Vitacco,M.J.,Rogers,R.,&Neumann,C.S.(2003).The
of three youth measures of psychopathic features. antisocialprocessscreeningdevice:Anexaminationof
BehavioralSciences&theLaw,22,85–102. itsconstructandcriterion-relatedvalidity.Assessment,
Vaughn, M. G., & Howard, M. O. (2005). Self-report 10(2),143–150.
measures of juvenile psychopathic personality traits:
A
Attributional Styles Questionnaire helplessnessinwhichdogsexposedtouncontrol-
lable electric shocks later failed to escape even
SarahA.Reiland when escape was possible. The learned helpless-
DepartmentofPsychology,WinthropUniversity, ness hypothesis suggests that the perception of
RockHill,SC,USA uncontrollability influences responses to events.
The reformulated model of learned helplessness
(Abramsonetal.1978)wasdevelopedtoexplain
individual differences in the response to
uncontrollability.
Definition The reformulated model of learned helpless-
nesspositsthatattributionscanberatedonseveral
Attributional style refers to how people tend to dimensions, including internal-external, stable-
explain the causes of events that occur in their unstable, and global-specific (Abramson et al.
lives (Peterson 1991). The Attributional Style 1978).Causesthatareattributedtopersonalchar-
Questionnaire (ASQ; Peterson et al. 1982) is a acteristics are internal attributions, whereas
60-item survey that measures individual differ- causes that are explained by environmental or
encesinattributionalstylesbyaskingrespondents situational factors are external attributions. The
to identify and rate causes for 12 hypothetical stability dimension refers to the perception that
situations. Although it is traditionally adminis- eventsarecausedbyfixedandconstantfactorsor
teredinpaperformat,ithasbeenadministeredin by variable and changing factors. Global attribu-
electronic form as well (e.g., Proudfoot tionsareperceptionsthatthecauseofoneeventis
et al. 2003). A longer version of the ASQ with also going to affect other areas of one’s life,
24 hypothetical situations is also available whereas specific attributions are perceptions that
(Expanded Attributional Style Questionnaire; thecauseisrestricted totheparticular event. For
PetersonandVillanova1988). example,explaining one’sfailure onanexam by
referencing intelligence is using attributions that
areinternal(failurecausedbyone’spersonalchar-
Introduction acteristics), stable (intelligence is unlikely to
change), and global (intelligence affects more
The ASQ was developed with strong theoretical than the exam score). Attributing failure to a
ties to the concept of learned helplessness and distracting test environment is using attributions
subsequent attribution theories. Modern attribu- thatareexternal(failurecausedbythesituation),
tion theories evolved from studies of learned unstable (test environments vary), and specific
#SpringerInternationalPublishingAG2016
V.Zeigler-Hill,T.K.Shackelford(eds.),EncyclopediaofPersonalityandIndividualDifferences,
DOI10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_2-1
2 AttributionalStylesQuestionnaire
(thetestingenvironmentisunlikelytoaffectother external, unstable, and specific. The negative or
areasofone’slife). depressive explanatory style is characterized by
Abramson et al.’s (1978) reformulated model ratingsforpositiveeventsthataremoreexternal,
oflearnedhelplessnessproposesthatattributions unstable, and specific and ratings for negative
fornegativeeventsthataremoreinternal,stable, events that are more internal, stable, and global.
and global are more likely to lead to learned Scoresforeachdimensionarecalculatedbyaver-
helplessness or depression than attributions that agingratingsacrossevents,separatelyforpositive
are more external, unstable, and and negative events. Scores can be summed to
specific. Individuals who habitually explain neg- provide an overall measure of attributional style.
ativeeventswithinternal,stable,andglobalattri- According to Peterson and Villanova (1988),
butions are said to have a negative or depressive many studies only examine scores for negative
explanatory style that heightens their risk for events, because the theoretical underpinnings of
depression after negative life events (Peterson learnedhelplessnessandattributiontheoriessug-
etal.1982).TheASQisdesignedtoassessattri- gest that it is attributions for unpleasant events
butional style by asking respondents to identify thatrelatetomentalhealthoutcomes.
likely causes for a variety of hypothetical events
and to rate these causes according to their inter-
nality, stability, and globality. The ASQ can be PsychometricProperties
used to assess the extent to which a respondent
displays a negative or depressive attributional Studiesgenerallysupportthevalidityofthescale
style. and reliability of the total scores. Peterson
et al. (1982) summarize results from their previ-
ous studies that indicate that the ASQ has good
FormatandScoring construct validity, as evidenced by expected cor-
relations between ASQ scores and depression
TheASQ(Petersonetal.1982)isa60-itemself- symptoms. They also report that their own past
report measure that presents individuals with six studies showed that ASQ scores were signifi-
hypothetical positive events and six hypothetical cantly correlated with attributions for real-life
negativeeventsinvolvingthemselves.Theevents events that participants reported having experi-
include six achievement events (e.g., job-related enced.Test-retestreliabilityoftotalscoresovera
event)andsixaffiliationevents(e.g.,relationship 5-week period has been shown to be adequate
event). Respondents are asked to record the one (0.64 for negative events and 0.70 for positive
majorcauseofeacheventandrateeachcauseona events;Petersonetal.1982).Theinternalconsis-
7-pointLikert-typescaleaccordingtoitsinternal- tenciesofeachdimensionofattributionalstyleon
ity,stability,andglobality.Theyarealsoaskedto the ASQ are rather poor (Cronbach’s alphas of
rate how important each event would be if it 0.21–0.66), but the total scores show adequate
happenedtothem.Internalityisassessedbyask- reliability (0.72 for negative events and 0.75 for
ing individuals to rate the degree to which they positive events;Petersonetal.1982).Due tothe
believethattheyarepersonallyresponsibleforthe generally weak reliabilities for subscale scores,
event. Stability is assessed by asking individuals researchers often use total scores instead of
toratethedegreetowhichtheybelievethecause subscalescores(PetersonandVillanova1988).
to be present over time. Globality is assessed by
askingindividualstoratethedegreetowhichthey
believe the cause of the event influences other Adaptations
areas of life. The optimistic or positive explana-
tory style is characterized by ratings for positive Peterson and Villanova (1988) developed the
events that are more internal, stable, and global Expanded Attributional Style Questionnaire
and ratings for negative events that are more (EASQ) to improve the modest reliability of the
AttributionalStylesQuestionnaire 3
subscales on the original ASQ. The EASQ con- Conclusion
tainstheoriginalsixaversiveeventsontheASQ
and an additional 18 events that were adapted The60-itemASQisarelativelybriefmeasureof
from alife events questionnaire.It doesnotcon- attributional style with adequate reliability and
tainanypositiveevents.Subscalereliabilitiesare validitythathasbeenusedextensivelyinresearch
higher than for the ASQ, and scores are signifi- on depression. The assessment of attributional
cantlycorrelatedwithattributionratingsforactual style with the ASQ contributes to an increased
aversive events (Peterson and Villanova 1988). understanding of the role of cognitions in well-
Because of the greater reliability of the EASQ beingandperformance.
comparedtotheASQ,itsauthorsrecommendits
useovertheASQwhenresearchersareinterested
inattributionsfornegativeeventsandnotpositive References
events.
The ASQ has also been adapted for use in Abramson, L. Y., Seligman, M. E., & Teasdale, J. D.
(1978).Learnedhelplessnessinhumans:Critiqueand
different settings. Adaptations have been made
reformulation.JournalofAbnormalPsychology,87(1),
for employment settings (Work Attributional 49–74.doi:10.1037/0021-843X.87.1.49.
Style Questionnaire; Ashforth and Fugate 2006), Ashforth,B.E.,&Fugate,M.(2006).Attributionalstylein
academiccontexts(AcademicAttributionalStyle worksettings:Developmentofameasure.Journalof
LeadershipandOrganizationalStudies,12(3),12–29.
Questionnaire; Peterson and Barrett 1987), and
doi:10.1177/107179190601200302.
settingswithtimeconstraints(ExpandedAttribu-
Petersen,T.,Harley,R.,Papakostas,G.I.,Montoya,H.D.,
tionalStyle–short;Whitley1991). Fava, M., & Alpert, J. E. (2004). Continuation
cognitive-behavioural therapy maintains attributional
style improvement in depressed patients responding
acutely to fluoxetine. Psychological Medicine, 34(3),
Applications 555–561.doi:10.1017/S0033291703001028.
Peterson,C.(1988).Explanatorystyleasariskfactorfor
illness. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 12(2),
Attributional style as measured by the ASQ has 117–130.doi:10.1007/BF01204926.
been applied to many constructs. The ASQ has Peterson, C. (1991). The meaning and measurement of
been shown to predict depression and anxiety explanatory style. Psychological Inquiry, 2(1), 1–10.
doi:10.1207/s15327965pli0201_1.
(e.g.,Sweeneyetal.1986),physicalhealth(e.g.,
Peterson,C.,&Barrett,L.(1987).Explanatorystyleand
Peterson1988),andacademicachievement(e.g.,
academic performance among university freshmen.
Peterson and Barrett 1987). The relationship JournalofPersonalityandPsychology,53,603–607.
between personality factors and attributional doi:10.1037/0022-3514.53.3.603.
Peterson,C.,&Villanova,P.(1988).Anexpandedattribu-
style has been examined (e.g., Thomson and
tional style questionnaire. Journal of Abnormal Psy-
Martinko1995). chology, 97(1), 87–89. doi:10.1037/0021-
The ASQ can be used clinically as part of an 843X.97.1.87.
intervention to target maladaptive thoughts con- Peterson, C., Semmel, A., von Baeyer, C., Abramson,
L. Y., Metalsky, G. I., & Seligman, M. E. P. (1982).
tributing to depression or anxiety. Proudfoot
The attributional style questionnaire. Cognitive Ther-
et al. (2003) piloted a computer-based therapy apy and Research, 6(3), 287–299. doi:10.1007/
program to target depression and anxiety. They BF01173577.
included sessions on attributional style and used Proudfoot, J., Swain, S., Widmer, S., Watkins, E.,
Goldberg,D,Marks,I.,...,&Gray,J.A.(2003).The
theASQclinicallytodemonstratetopatientshow
developmentandbeta-testofacomputer-therapypro-
attributions can influence mood. Several studies
gramforanxietyanddepression:Hurdlesandlessons.
havealsousedtheASQtoassesstheeffectiveness Computers in Human Behavior, 19(3), 277–289.
ofinterventionstochangeattributionalstyle.For doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00062-6.
Sweeney,P.D.,Anderson,K.,&Bailey,S.(1986).Attri-
example,cognitivebehavioraltherapywasfound
butional style in depression: A meta-analytic review.
to contribute to attributional style changes in
Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology,50(5),
patientswithdepression(Petersenetal.2004). 974–991.doi:10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.974.
4 AttributionalStylesQuestionnaire
Thomson,N.F.,&Martinko,M.J.(1995).Therelation- Whitley, B. E. (1991). A short form of the expanded
shipbetweenMBTItypesandattributionalstyle.Jour- attributionalstylequestionnaire.JournalofPersonality
nalofPsychologicalType,35,22–30. Assessment, 56(2), 365–369. doi:10.1207/s15327752
jpa5602_14.
B
Balanced Inventory of Desirable the desirable responses are accurate self-reports,
Responding whereas impression management (IM) assesses
socially desirable responding, where the respon-
RonaldR.HoldenandG.CynthiaFekken dent knows the responses are deliberately
DepartmentofPsychology,Queen’sUniversity, inaccurate.
Kingston,ON,Canada The inventory is appropriate for adults and
adolescents age 16 years or older, for both non-
clinicalandclinicalpopulations,requiresagrade
Synonyms 5readinglevel,andcanbecompletedinapprox-
imately 3–5 min. Items are responded to on
Paulhusdeceptionscales 5-pointratingsthatvarybetween1(nottrue)and
5 (very true) but are scored dichotomously (0 or
1).Atotalsocialdesirabilityscalescorecanalso
Definition be generated by summing SDE and IM scale
scores.
TheBalancedInventoryofDesirableResponding The development of the BIDR was preceded
(BIDR), also known as the Paulhus Deception by Paulhus’ (1984) factor analysis of existing
Scales (Paulhus 1999), is a 40-item self-report scales of social desirability responding in which
inventorywithonescalethatassessesadeliberate he empirically demonstrated that a two-
sociallydesirableresponsestyleandanotherscale component model of social desirability is better
that assesses a nondeliberate socially desirable interpretedasself-deceptionandimpressionman-
responsestyle. agement than by the previously proposed con-
structs of denial and attribution. Subsequently,
items were rationally constructed for the two
Introduction dimensions of self-deceptive enhancement and
impressionmanagement inordertobetter articu-
The BIDR measures a respondent’s tendency to latebetweentherespectiveunconsciousandcon-
distort his/her self-report responses in order to scious response biases. Over the years, several
reflect socially desirable responses rather than revised versions of the BIDR have been intro-
accurate answers about the self. The BIDR has duced. These involved balancing the number of
two, 20-item scales: self-deceptive enhancement items on each of the SDE and IM scales with
(SDE) assesses nondeliberate socially desirable regard to direction of keying so as to reduce the
responding,wheretherespondentinfactbelieves impact of acquiescent (yea-saying) or resistant
#SpringerInternationalPublishingAG2017
V.Zeigler-Hill,T.K.Shackelford(eds.),EncyclopediaofPersonalityandIndividualDifferences,
DOI10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_3-1
2 BalancedInventoryofDesirableResponding
(nay-saying) responding and factor analyzing a FactorStructure
compilation ofexistingitems and supplementary The structural validity of the BIDR has been
items with the goal of creating less correlated examined by several factor analyses of item
scales by selecting items that emphasized scale responses. Confirmatory factor analysis of the
independence. The current commercially avail- item responses of 180 undergraduates has
ableBIDRversionisthe1999version. supported the two-factor structure of the BIDR
(Paulhus1999).Holdenetal.(2000),usingprin-
cipal component analysis applied to the item
responses of 200 undergraduates, also supported
PsychometricProperties
thetwo-dimensionalnatureoftheitemswithcon-
gruence coefficients between the obtained solu-
Norms
tion and the scoring key being 0.88 and 0.91 for
Normative data for the BIDR are from the
SDEandIMscales,respectively.
responses of 441 community adults sampled in
the United States and Canada. College student
(N=289),incarceratedoffender(N=603),and Validity
military recruit (N = 124) norms are also avail- The BIDR has shown strong evidence of scale
able. Cutoff scores for identifying invalid score validity. Paulhus (1999) reported that
responding have also been developed, but only BIDR total scores correlate 0.73 with scores on
fortheIMscale,basedeitheronthedistributional the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale
likelihood for a community sample (IM scale and 0.64 with scores on the Edwards’ Social
scores >12 or <1 for probably invalid, IMscale Desirability Scale. Helmes and Holden (2003)
scores >8 or <2 for may be invalid; Paulhus found scores on the SDE scale correlated 0.53,
1999) or on research with experimental induced 0.41,and0.40withscoresonthreeotherstandard
faking (IM scale scores >10 or <4 for faking scalesofsocialdesirabilityrespondingdeveloped
positively or faking negatively, respectively; byCrowneandMarlowe(1960),Jackson(1984),
Lambertetal.2016). andEdwards(1957),respectively.Corresponding
correlations for the IM scale scores were 0.63,
0.35,and0.18,respectively.Instudiesofexperi-
Reliability
mentally induced faking, Lambert et al. (2016)
BIDR scale scores demonstrate acceptable levels
found that scores on each of the SDE and IM
of internal consistency reliability. Based on the
scales could significantly identify fakers (either
normative groups, coefficient alpha reliabilities
faking in a positive direction or in a negative
for scores on the SDE scale range from 0.70 to
direction) from individuals who were instructed
0.75,ontheIMscalefrom0.81to0.84,andonthe
torespondunderstandardinstructions.
totalscalefrom0.83to0.86(Paulhus1999).Fora
sample of 200 university students, Holden et al.
(2000)reportanidenticalcoefficientalphaof0.72
forscoresoneachoftheSDEandIMscales. AlternateVersions
Test-retest reliabilities for SDE and IM scale
scoresare0.77and0.79,respectively,basedona ThecommerciallyavailableversionoftheBIDR,
1-weekinterval(VispoelandKim2014);0.69and also called the Paulhus Deception Scales, stan-
0.65,respectively,fora5-weekinterval(Paulhus dardlyhaseachitemansweredon5-pointratings.
1991);and0.71and0.68,respectively,basedona An alternative version, using 7-point ratings, is
3-year interval (Lonnqvist et al. 2007). Crutzen alsoavailablebutisnotcommerciallydistributed.
andGoritz(2010)reportedatest-retestreliability
of 0.74 for the IM scale scores with a 4-month
interval.