SPA 2023 - Multi-Method Assessment with Narratives, Integration of Narrative-Rated Data and Responde

Abstract

The multi-method model of personality encourages clinicians to integrate multiple types of data when assessing individuals. Many clinicians collect narrative data and self-report data as part of their personality assessments. The research studies in this symposium all explore the utility of using expert-rated systems for assessing narratives in conjunction with respondent-rated personality assessments to predict important outcomes. The chair will present a brief paper describing the multi-method model of assessment generally and will review briefly review a study that explores the utility of expert-ratings and respondent-ratings of interpersonal narratives to predict functioning in college students. In this study, narratives were rated by experts using the Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale-Global Method Stein & Slavin-Mulford, 2018) and by respondents using the recently developed Self-Other Narrative Evaluation Scale (Siefert, 2019). As predicted by the multi-method model of assessment, variance in interpersonal functioning and well-being were best predicted using a combination of SONES and SCORS-G scales. The first presentation explores the utility of expert-rated defenses and respondent-rated coping to predict life satisfaction in a primary care sample. In this study, life story narratives were collected and rated using the Defense Mechanism Rating Scale (DMRS; Perry, 1990) and respondents rated their coping using the Brief COPE (Carver, 1997). The second presentation examines expert-ratings of self-other differentiation and respondent-rated attachment style can be used to predict positive psychological traits, healthcare utilization, and the quality of patient-doctor relationships in a sample of patients from an outpatient medical clinic. In this study, experts coded Self-Other Description Interviews using Blatt’s Differentiation-Relatedness Scale (DRS; Diamond et al., 1991) and respondents rated attachment style using the Relationship Questionnaire (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). The third presentation explores the utility of expert-rated defenses and respondent-rated coping for predicting pathological traits and distress from Covid-19 among primary care patients at two separate outpatient clinics. These data were gathered during the Covid-19 pandemic. In this study, experts coded defenses using the DMRS from life chapter narratives. Respondents rated the Brief COPE to assess coping, the PID-5-BF (Krueger et al., 2015) to assess pathological traits, and provided a rating of 1-100 to assess Covid-19 related distress. The fourth presentation examines the contributions of expert-rated defenses and respondent-ratings of warmth and dominance for predicting features of borderline personality disorder in a sample of patients receiving care in a hospital setting. In this study, experts rated defenses from TAT narratives using the DRMS, respondents provided ratings of warmth and dominance using the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991), and respondents rated the PAI borderline features scale. Together, these papers all explore how expert-ratings and respondent-ratings can be productively integrated to understand several aspects of functioning. Each paper discusses how integrating data across assessment methods can help clinicians understand individuals.

Chair

Caleb Siefert | University of Michigan-Dearborn