الگوهای تمارض و انطباق در اقدامات مربوط به تلقین پذیری استفهامی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|38180||2006||9 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 40, Issue 3, February 2006, Pages 453–461
This study aimed to compare indicators of malingering with those of compliance on the Gudjonsson Suggestibility Scales (GSS 1). It was hypothesised that participants issued with instructions either to appear susceptible to leading questions or to comply with an interviewer’s perceived requirements would show unique patterns of GSS scores, allowing them to be differentiated from each other, and from a control group. The study had a single-factor between participants design. Participants were tested in one of three conditions: Misled, Compliant, or Standard instructions. Sixty-six participants took part in the study. Results indicated unique patterns of scoring in all three conditions; all three groups were distinguishable from each other. Results support previous studies which indicate that some patterns of malingering may be identifiable on the GSS. However, compliant responding may not be readily distinguishable from genuine vulnerability. Results are discussed in terms of the theoretical distinction between suggestibility and compliance.
Malingering is defined in DSM-IV as the intentional production of false or exaggerated physical or psychological symptoms, motivated by incentives such as avoiding criminal prosecution. One area where such faking may present a problem is in the evaluation of defendants in criminal cases who claim that they have been subject to undue pressures in police interrogations. Gudjonsson and Clark (1986) term susceptibility to suggestion and pressure during police and similar interviews ‘interrogative suggestibility’ (IS) and define it as: