Validation of PCL-5 symptom validity indices in a Cross-Cultural Forensic Sample.

IF 1.8 4区 心理学 Q3 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Ryan W Schroeder, Jack Spector, Makenna Snodgrass, Rachel K Bieu
{"title":"Validation of PCL-5 symptom validity indices in a Cross-Cultural Forensic Sample.","authors":"Ryan W Schroeder, Jack Spector, Makenna Snodgrass, Rachel K Bieu","doi":"10.1080/13803395.2025.2482650","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Three symptom validity indices have recently been developed for the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5). To date, these validity indices have been examined in North American research and clinical samples, generally with promising results. The current study aimed to cross-validate the symptom validity indices in a cross-cultural forensic sample.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Examinees (<i>N</i> = 79) were Balkan (Macedonian, Kosovar, and Serbian) contractors previously employed at United States military bases in Afghanistan and Iraq. Examinees claimed posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) secondary to alleged adverse experiences, and they were pursuing Federal Workers' Compensation claims for PTSD under the auspices of the Defense Base Act. In this study, validity status was determined via outcome on the Inventory of Problems-29.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were no significant differences between most demographic and background variables when groups were divided by validity status. Conversely, scores on all validity tests were significantly different between the group of examinees who were likely credibly presenting and the group that was likely noncredibly responding; medium to large effect sizes were observed. Area under the curve statistics ranged from .73 to .77. Sensitivity rates ranged from .33 to .47 when specificity was held at .90 or higher.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings converge well with prior research results, extending the use of PCL-5 symptom validity indices to a cross-cultural forensic sample.</p>","PeriodicalId":15382,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":"117-127"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical and experimental neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2025.2482650","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Three symptom validity indices have recently been developed for the PTSD Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5). To date, these validity indices have been examined in North American research and clinical samples, generally with promising results. The current study aimed to cross-validate the symptom validity indices in a cross-cultural forensic sample.

Method: Examinees (N = 79) were Balkan (Macedonian, Kosovar, and Serbian) contractors previously employed at United States military bases in Afghanistan and Iraq. Examinees claimed posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) secondary to alleged adverse experiences, and they were pursuing Federal Workers' Compensation claims for PTSD under the auspices of the Defense Base Act. In this study, validity status was determined via outcome on the Inventory of Problems-29.

Results: There were no significant differences between most demographic and background variables when groups were divided by validity status. Conversely, scores on all validity tests were significantly different between the group of examinees who were likely credibly presenting and the group that was likely noncredibly responding; medium to large effect sizes were observed. Area under the curve statistics ranged from .73 to .77. Sensitivity rates ranged from .33 to .47 when specificity was held at .90 or higher.

Conclusions: The findings converge well with prior research results, extending the use of PCL-5 symptom validity indices to a cross-cultural forensic sample.

跨文化法医学样本PCL-5症状效度指标的验证。
简介:DSM-5 (PCL-5)的PTSD检查表最近发展了三个症状效度指标。迄今为止,这些效度指标已在北美的研究和临床样本中进行了检验,通常具有良好的结果。本研究旨在交叉验证跨文化法医样本的症状效度指标。方法:考生(N = 79)为巴尔干地区(马其顿、科索沃和塞尔维亚)以前在阿富汗和伊拉克美国军事基地工作的承包商。考生声称创伤后应激障碍(PTSD)继发于所谓的不良经历,他们在国防基地法案的支持下寻求联邦工人的创伤后应激障碍赔偿要求。在本研究中,效度状态是通过问题清单-29的结果来确定的。结果:以效度状态分组时,大多数人口统计学变量和背景变量之间无显著差异。相反,所有效度测试的分数在可能可信陈述的考生组和可能不可信回答的考生组之间存在显著差异;观察到中到大的效应量。曲线下面积从0.73到0.77不等。当特异性保持在0.90或更高时,敏感性从0.33到0.47不等。结论:研究结果与先前的研究结果很好地融合,将PCL-5症状效度指标的使用扩展到跨文化法医样本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
4.50%
发文量
52
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology ( JCEN) publishes research on the neuropsychological consequences of brain disease, disorders, and dysfunction, and aims to promote the integration of theories, methods, and research findings in clinical and experimental neuropsychology. The primary emphasis of JCEN is to publish original empirical research pertaining to brain-behavior relationships and neuropsychological manifestations of brain disease. Theoretical and methodological papers, critical reviews of content areas, and theoretically-relevant case studies are also welcome.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信