Parental attachment was hypothesized as a mediational variable, explaining the relationship between parental alcoholism, family dysfunction, and the expression of interpersonal distress. Undergraduate students (N = 152) were administered questionnaires to assess parental attachment, parental alcoholism, family dysfunction, and interpersonal distress; structural analysis was used to specify the relations among measured constructs. Parental alcoholism was not a significant predictor of attachment to parents or interpersonal distress; however, the mediating role of parental attachment was evident when family dysfunction was examined. As the level of family dysfunction increased, participants reported less parental attachment and more interpersonal distress. Viewing parental attachment as a mediator has important implications for theory and clinical practice.Much of the clinical writing and research on adult children of alcoholics (ACOAs) has been based on a narrow stereotypical view of the impact of parental alcoholism on family dynamics (Wright & Heppner, 1993). A great deal of research in this area has focused on comparisons of two groups, individuals who did or did not report growing up in a family where alcohol was abused (ACOAs vs. non-ACOAs). As would be expected with such a heterogeneous population, the results have been inconsistent. For example, ACOAs research, typically that done with clinical samples, has found ACOAs to report more psychological and interpersonal problems than their non-ACOAs counterparts (e.g., Hinz, 1990). Other studies, typically done with nonclinical samples, failed to find differences between these two groups (Wright & Heppner, 1991. The validity of classifying ACOAs as a separate group is clearly under question (Harrington & Metzler, 1997). Heppner (1993) andMintz, Kashubeck, andTracy (1995) argued that ACOAs research has been based on a "uniformity assumption." Specifically, writers and researchers have assumed that (a) all ACOAs are alike regardless of the type and severity of parental drinking problems and (b) all ACOAs share similar family environments and experiences. In regard to this first assumption, Mintz et al. found significant within-group differences among ACOAs. In this

This article reviews the application of clinical neuropsychology to criminal court proceedings, a complex, underserved, yet growing area of neuropsychological practice. The authors write from the perspective that the audience is primarily neurorehabilitation clinicians with limited experience in criminal matters. Discussions on the theoretical differences between clinical and forensic work, the forensic evaluation process with conceptual model, historical and current perspectives on criminal competencies and responsibility, prediction of dangerousness, and professional and ethical issues often encountered in criminal neuropsychology are provided.

The purpose of this article is to provide evidence for the validity of performance curve classification on the nonverbal subtest of the Validity Indicator Profile (VIP-NV). A four-fold classification scheme of performance on cognitive testing is proposed. This scheme combines effort and motivation to generate four response classifications: compliant, careless, irrelevant, and malingering. Data are presented across six studies from cognitive and personality testing for 737 male pretrial criminal defendants. Additionally, computer-generated VIP-NV performances were subjected to four levels of randomization to investigate VIP-NV carelessness indicators. The findings support the validity of the four-fold classification scheme and support the classification of response on the basis of motivation and effort.

The utility of the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms [SIRS; Rogers, R., Bagby, R. M., & Dickens, S. E. (1992). Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources], Improbable Failure Rate (IF) scale in pretrial (N=64) and clinical (N=153) samples was explored. Internal consistencies of the IF items were alpha=.81 and alpha=.92, respectively, with split-half reliabilities of .89 and .84, respectively. The IF scale loaded distinctly from the SIRS primary (psychosis) scales in principal components analysis, and the pattern of performances among clinical groups were as expected (e.g., normal controls outperformed patients with focal lesions and dementia, CHI patients outperformed dementia patients). Performance on the IF items was correlated with MMSE score (r=-.59, p

No abstract