Cultural Issues in Psychological Assessment

Jayawickreme, Nuwan; Knight, Sommer; Rasmussen, Andrew; Ryder, Andrew G.

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-818697-8.00182-5

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 146 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Notwithstanding the importance of locating the sources of racial biases, when such race-based group biases exist, it is important for psychologists to demonstrate that the construct(s) measured by a psychological test in the majority group are similarly represented in other minority groups (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, National Council on Measurement in Education, Joint Committee on Standards for Educational & Psychological Testing, 2014). The use of tests that are biased in certain cultural (including racial groups) can lead to erroneous diagnoses or other false conclusions about members of those groups, with harmful consequences (Jayawickreme et al, 2021). As such, it is essential, "that test-taker characteristics do not interfere with the validity or interpretation of a test score" and "that any interpretation is the same for individuals from diverse subgroups such as those defined by race, ethnicity, gender, culture : : : .…”

Section: Nonbiased Psychological Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the measurement invariance of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) in Black Americans and White Americans.

Bagby¹,

Keeley²,

Williams³

et al. 2022

Psychological Assessment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 (PID-5) assesses the five pathological personality trait domains that comprise the descriptive core of the DSM-5 Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD). The PID-5 five-domain factor structure is aligned with the AMPD and is reported as replicable across samples in the U.S., in other countries, and in different languages. In this study, the PID-5 factor structure is examined in two distinct racial groups within the U.S.-White Americans (WA) and Black Americans (BA). Student participants from four universities in the U.S. (N = 1,834)-composed of groups of WA (n = 1,274) and BA (n = 560)-were proportionally parsed into derivation and replication subsamples. The "traditional" PID-5 five-factor structure emerged for the WA group in the derivation subsample and was subsequently confirmed in the WA replication subsample. In the BA group derivation subsample, a single-factor solution emerged, which was also confirmed in the BA replication sample. This single-factor solution in the BA group reflects large shared covariation across all pathological personality domains, suggesting an undifferentiated, broadly based level of demoralization represented by the item pool of the PID-5. We argue that this structure can be construed as mirroring a racialized and prejudice-based living experience for many BAs in a predominantly non-Black society. Based on the results with the samples employed in the present study, we conclude that the PID-5 is not an equivalent measure of pathological personality traits across Black Americans and White Americans. Public Significance StatementIn this study, the authors report that a commonly used instrument to assess personality pathology (the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 [PID-5]) is not an equivalent measure across Black Americans and White Americans. Until other evidence emerges to suggest otherwise, we advise against its use in Black American samples.

show abstract

Section: Nonbiased Psychological Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluating the measurement invariance of the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) in Black Americans and White Americans.

Bagby¹,

Keeley²,

Williams³

et al. 2022

Psychological Assessment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Given this within-culture heterogeneity, clinician should assess the extent to which given clients’ responses reflect their cultural backgrounds, perhaps by attempting to directly evaluate response style (Rohling et al, 2011) or using measures of the client’s values orientations, self-construal, or acculturation. Although such measures are more appropriate for assessing group differences, they may provide some indication of the extent to which an individual is representative of group-level responses styles and thus may help contextualize scores from psychological testing (Jayawickreme et al, 2022). To directly assess response style, it may be useful for psychologists to consider extreme, acquiescent, and midpoint responding as part of a continuum rather than as discrete entities (He et al, 2014).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Response Styles Among Latinx Populations

Zolopa,

Leon,

Rasmussen

2023

Assessment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Culture influences responses to psychological measurements in ways unrelated to target constructs, thus biasing test scores and potentially contributing to under- and over-diagnosis of mental health problems in populations for which measures have not yet been normed. We conducted a systematic review of publications addressing response style among Latinx population groups in North and South America. In a final corpus of 24 studies, Latinx/Latin American populations were generally found to exhibit higher levels of extreme response style ( n = 17), acquiescent response style ( n = 10), and socially desirable responding ( n = 5). The few publications ( n = 3) that investigated midpoint responding reported no differences. Seven publications (29%) attempted to adjust scores to mitigate response style bias, using both scale design and statistical techniques. Findings suggest that researchers and clinicians should directly assess culturally patterned response style as a construct, rather than inferring style indirectly using other measures. For clinicians, knowledge of response style represents another facet of case conceptualization.

show abstract