| pubmed-article:10743882 | rdf:type | pubmed:Citation | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C2700446 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0150095 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0175659 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C2349101 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0871208 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | lifeskim:mentions | umls-concept:C0332120 | lld:lifeskim |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:issue | 3 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:dateCreated | 2000-5-12 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:abstractText | Because of the potential for bias and error in questionnaire responding, many personality inventories include validity scales intended to correct biased scores or identify invalid protocols. The authors evaluated the utility of several types of validity scales in a volunteer sample of 72 men and 106 women who completed the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; P. T. Costa & R. R. McCrae, 1992) and the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ; A. Tellegen, 1978/1982) and were rated by 2 acquaintances on the observer form of the NEO-PI-R. Analyses indicated that the validity indexes lacked utility in this sample. A partial replication (N = 1,728) also failed to find consistent support for the use of validity scales. The authors illustrate the use of informant ratings in assessing protocol validity and argue that psychological assessors should limit their use of validity scales and seek instead to improve the quality of personality assessments. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:language | eng | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:journal | http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:citationSubset | IM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:status | MEDLINE | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:month | Mar | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:issn | 0022-3514 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:McCraeR RRR | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:AngleitnerAA | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:RiemannRR | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:author | pubmed-author:PiedmontR LRL | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:issnType | Print | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:volume | 78 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:owner | NLM | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:authorsComplete | Y | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:pagination | 582-93 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:dateRevised | 2009-11-11 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:meshHeading | pubmed-meshheading:10743882... | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:year | 2000 | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:articleTitle | On the invalidity of validity scales: evidence from self-reports and observer ratings in volunteer samples. | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:affiliation | Department of Pastoral Counseling, Loyola College, Columbia, Maryland 21045, USA. piedmont@vax.loyola.edu | lld:pubmed |
| pubmed-article:10743882 | pubmed:publicationType | Journal Article | lld:pubmed |
| http://linkedlifedata.com/r... | pubmed:referesTo | pubmed-article:10743882 | lld:pubmed |
