1968
DOI: 10.2466/pr0.1968.22.3.809
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Affective Differential: Comparison of Emotion Profiles Gained from Clinical Judgment and Patient Self-Report

Abstract: Narcotic addicts comprising 2 diagnostic groups as defined by MMPI profile types (49′ sociopathic and 468′ paranoid) were selected to test the validity of emotion profiles gleaned from affective differential ratings, the affective differential methodology and the assumption that patients with different character structures have measurable differences in emotion profiles. Comparisons were made between the patient groups and between profiles gleaned from clinicians' ratings and the patients' self-reports. Emotio… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1969
1969
1974
1974

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 4 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This would indicate that although there was evident in the addict group a greater tendency toward social nonconformity and a rejection of traditional values and restrictions, at least some of these sociopathic individuals were also experiencing de-pression and anxiety. That narcotic users with different character structures also show measurable differences on emotion profiles has been demonstrated by Shepparcl, Fiorentino, andMerlis (1968) andShepparcl, Fiorentino, . Collins, andMerlis (1969).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%
“…This would indicate that although there was evident in the addict group a greater tendency toward social nonconformity and a rejection of traditional values and restrictions, at least some of these sociopathic individuals were also experiencing de-pression and anxiety. That narcotic users with different character structures also show measurable differences on emotion profiles has been demonstrated by Shepparcl, Fiorentino, andMerlis (1968) andShepparcl, Fiorentino, . Collins, andMerlis (1969).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 72%