Bob's MMPI-2 Blog

Ethical Issues Involved with Diagnosing a Person: Review of the DSM-5, ICD-10 and the PDM 15th Annual Ethics Workshop-PPF Fundraiser

rmgordonphd — Fri, 17 May 2013 01:38:37 +0000

Presenters: Robert M. Gordon, Ph.D.,
& Alan C. Tjeltveit, Ph.D.

May, 17, 2013Ethical Issues Involved with Diagnosing a Person: Review of the DSM-5, ICD-10 and the PDM 15th Annual Ethics Workshop-PPF Fundraiser

DSM5, ICD10 and PDM Implications for Psychotherapy

rmgordonphd — Fri, 10 May 2013 13:25:04 +0000

DSM5, ICD10 and PDM Implications for Psychotherapy

DSM5, ICD10-11 and the PDM1-2- Review and Issues

rmgordonphd — Fri, 10 May 2013 13:09:00 +0000

J&K Dx 2013.2

The Psychodiagnostic Chart (PDC) Free download

rmgordonphd — Sat, 16 Mar 2013 01:36:45 +0000

Down Load: PDC2013.2

Robert M. Gordon and Robert F. Bornstein, version 2013.2

A Practical Tool to Integrate and Operationalize the PDM with the ICD or DSM

Use: The Psychodiagnostic Chart (PDC) is a quick practitioner rating form that integrates the PDM with the ICD or DSM. The PDC may be used for diagnoses, treatment formulations, progress reports, and outcome assessment, as well as for empirical research on personality, psychopathology, and treatment. Our overarching aim is to make psychodiagnoses more useful to the practitioner by combining the symptom-focused ICD or DSM with the full range and depth of human mental functioning addressed by the PDM.

How to use: The clinician must perform (or have access to) diagnostic interview data and psychological assessment data to derive optimal ratings. We recognize that this is not always feasible, and in many instances the clinician will code an initial impression, then re-assess as additional information accrues. If this is used for progress notes, there will be opportunities to re-assess and revise the person’s diagnosis as well. The validity of this chart can be enhanced with the integration of relevant psychological tests. Recent research by Gordon and Stoffey (in press) show excellent construct validity and reliability of the PDC.

LVPCA 2013 Overview of DSM5, ICD10&11 and the PDM

rmgordonphd — Fri, 01 Mar 2013 02:43:59 +0000

LVPCA2013

PDC Applicability, Stability and Construct Validity

rmgordonphd — Sun, 24 Feb 2013 23:38:42 +0000

Addendum to “Operationalizing the Psychodynamic Diagnostic Manual: A Preliminary Study of the Psychodiagnostic Chart (PDC).”

PDC Hypotheses and Results-Long.

PPT Slides on Personality Structure (Healthy-Neurotic, Borderline, Psychotic) PDM and MMPI-2

rmgordonphd — Sun, 30 Dec 2012 15:51:21 +0000

ApsaA 2013 Research Presentation on Personality Structure

Are there any studies that empirically support psychoanalytic theory and treatment?

rmgordonphd — Wed, 07 Mar 2012 02:11:25 +0000

PDT2012 Book
Bornstein Freud Emprical Support\
DepressionPanksepp2011
Science 2010 unconscious goals
science and psychodynamics_Weinberger_psych inquiry 2001
scientific status of unconscious processes_Westen_jrnl of apa 1999
Shedler Effic. of PDT2010
Shedler_Scientific_American
Westen’s article on Freud and Science

Psychodynamics in 2012 Comparing the Cases of Little Hans and Little Albert.ppt

Psychodynamics in 2012 and Comparing the Cases of Little Hans and Little Albert.PDF

How to Respond to the Challenge of “Why did you use the short form of the MMPI-2?”

rmgordonphd — Fri, 10 Feb 2012 22:21:41 +0000

Some psychologists are afraid to use the “short form” of the MMPI-2. There are many reasons to use the so-called “short form” which has 370 items (the too long form has 567 items). The short form (which I prefer to call the “basic form,” is much better to use when the person may have dyslexia, be in pain, have limited attention span, be minimally cooperative, be in jail or in a hospital, or when the time spent on the long form would be better spent on other types of assessments. Just piling up more items on a self report does not increase the predictive validity of the test. It is more effective psychodiagnostics to use a battery of different kinds of assessment, i.e. self-reports (such as the MMPI-2), clinician rating instruments (such as the SWAP), performance tests (such as the Rorschach or TAT), an intelligence test and neuropsych screen, document review, structured interview, and collateral interviews.

When asked in court why I hadn’t used the “full MMPI-2″ as if I had failed to give the complete test, my response is, “I used the basic MMPI-2. It is not a truncated incomplete version of the MMPI-2. It has 370 items. That makes it the longest self-report test other than the 567 item long form of the MMPI-2. The other most used psychodiagnostic self-report tests are the Millon with 175 items, the Personality Assessment Inventory with 344 items, and the NEO-PI-R with 240 items. I get all the basic validity scales, basic clinical scales and subscales with the basic version. These are the most researched psychodiagnostic scales in the world. I get about 100 scales from the basic MMPI-2. So it is not like I am missing important data from using it, and I’d rather not exhaust the person and use other forms of assessment as well.”

Should Forensic Psychiatrists Conduct Psychological Testing?

rmgordonphd — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 05:09:27 +0000

Abstract
Forensic psychiatrists occasionally conduct psychological testing, for a host of reasons that may include a lack of access to psychological consultation, a lack of funding for such consultation, or a genuine belief that they are technically and legally qualified to select, administer, score, and interpret the most suitable instruments for informing a particular medicolegal opinion. This phenomenon may have several clinical, ethical, and legal ramifications, depending upon the forensic psychiatrist’s level of training, the forensic issues being addressed, and the nature of the psychological tests employed. In this article, the authors distinguish between what constitute “psychological tests” as opposed to appraisals, rating scales, and inventories. Also addressed is the need for formal training and supervision, including familiarity with the mechanics of test construction and statistically determined interpretive limitations. The authors offer recommendations and provide several case vignettes that illustrate how these issues may surface in both civil and criminal law contexts. The article concludes with the caveat that psychiatrists should avoid using psychological tests without obtaining and maintaining necessary credentials.
Dattilio, F. M., Sadoff, R. L., Drogin, E. Y., & Gutheil, T. G. (2011). Should forensic psychiatrists conduct psychological testing? Journal of Psychiatry and Law, 39(3), 1-10.