Differentiating Parents with Faking-Good Profiles from Parents with Valid Scores on the Child Abuse Potential Inventory
Differentiating Parents with Faking-Good Profiles from Parents with Valid Scores on the Child Abuse Potential Inventory
复制标题
区分假装良好档案的父母和在虐待儿童潜在清单上拥有有效分数的父母
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2014
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
C. McNeil
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Amanda H. Costello;C. McNeil
在虐待儿童案件调查期间，父母能力评估仍然很常见，“最佳做法”评估方法包括使用综合评估（Budd等人，2011年）。儿童虐待潜力量表（CAP;米尔纳1986）是PCA期间使用的一种风险评估措施，但结果可能会受到假装良好行为的干扰。目前，有少量文献研究了在CAP上假装良好的父母的特征和影响。本研究通过人口统计学信息、精神病理学、行为观察数据和虐待累犯，探讨了在CAP上有伪造或无伪造个人资料的身体虐待父母之间的差异。父母的智商和抑郁评分显着不同，但没有显着差异，发现在任何其他变量，包括累犯率在治疗后。研究结果的影响，并强调多方法的方法PCA将进行讨论。
Parental capacity assessments (PCAs) remain common during child abuse investigations, and “best practice” approaches to evaluations consist of using a comprehensive assessment (Budd et al. 2011). The Child Abuse Potential Inventory (CAP; Milner 1986) is one risk assessment measure used during PCAs, but results may be confounded by faking-good behavior. Currently, there is a small amount of literature examining the characteristics and implications of parents who fake good on the CAP. The present study examined differences between physically abusive parents with a faking or non-faking profile on the CAP by demographic information, psychopathology, behavioral observation data, and abuse recidivism. Parents differed significantly by IQ and depression scores, but no significant differences were found on any other variable including recidivism rates at posttreatment. Implications of study outcomes, and the emphasis for a multimethod approach to PCAs will be discussed.
影响因子：
4.8
作者：
Fang X;Brown DS;Florence CS;Mercy JA
通讯作者：
Mercy JA
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
J. Milner;Julie L. Crouch
通讯作者：
J. Milner;Julie L. Crouch
与对压力事件结果的积极和消极思考相关的一些心理影响：盲目乐观是对的吗？
影响因子：
7.6
作者：
Goodhart,DE
通讯作者：
Goodhart,DE