Abstracts
Résumé
L’expertise psychologique requise lors de litige en matière de garde d’enfants doit composer avec l’attitude défensive des parents. La recherche est basée sur un groupe de 120 parents évalués en contexte de droits de garde contestés. Elle démontre que les parents ont tendance à se présenter modérément sur la défensive à l’échelle PIM. En plus de l’échelle PIM, l’utilisation du PIM Predicted Profil, du PIM Specific Profil et des échelles DEF, RXR et WRM, permet d’identifier les caractéristiques défensives prépondérantes à l’interprétation de l’Inventaire de Personnalité. Les résultats révèlent l’efficacité du PAI pour discriminer les profils authentiques des profils défensifs.
Mots-clés :
- droits de garde,
- PIM,
- attitudes parentales défensives,
- PAI
Abstract
The psychological expertise required in a child custody dispute must account for the defensive attitude of parents. This research is based on a group of 120 parents assessed in the context of custody disputes. It shows that parents tend to be moderately defensive on the PIM scale. In addition to the PIM scale, the use of the PIM Predicted Profile, the PIM Specific Profile and the DEF, RXR and WRM scales allow identifying predominant defensive patterns for the interpretation of the Psychological Assessment Inventory. The results reveal the PAI’s effectiveness in discriminating authentic profiles from defensive profiles.
Keywords:
- child custody,
- PIM,
- defensive parenting attitudes,
- PAI
Appendices
Bibliographie
- Ackerman, M. et Ackerman, M. (1997). Custody evaluation practices: a survey of experienced professionals. Professional Psychology : Research and Practice, 28(2), 137-145.
- Ackerman, M. et Pritzl, B. (2001). Child custody evaluation practices: A 20 years follow-up. Family Court Review, 49, 618-628.
- Bagby, M., Nicholson, R., Buis, T. et Radovanovic, H. (1999). Defensive responding on the MMPI-2 in family custody and access evaluations. American Psychology Association, 11(1), 24-28.
- Bagby, M., Nicholson, R., Bacchiochi, J., Ryder, A. et Bury, A. (2002). The predictive capacity of the MMPI-2 and the PAI Validity Scales and Indexes to detect coached and uncoached feigning. Journal of Personality Assessment, 78(1), 69-86.
- Bathurst, K. et Gottfried, A. (1997). Normative data for the MMPI-2 in child custody litigation. American Psychological Assessment, 9(3), 205-211.
- Butcher, J. (2005). Frequency of MMPI-2 Scores in Forensic Evaluation. University of Minnesota, 1-20.
- Carr, G., Moretti, M et Cue, B. (2005). Evaluating parenting capacity : Validity problems with the MMPI-2, PAI, CAPI, and ratings of child adjustment. American Psychological Association, 36(2), 188-196.
- Cashel, M. L., Rogers, R., Sewell, K. et Martin-Cannici, C. (1995). The Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) and the defensiveness. Assessment, 2(4), 349-354.
- Deutsch, R. et Pruett, M. (2009). Child adjustment and hight-conflict divorce. Dans R. M. Galatzer-Levy (dir.), The scientific basis of child custody decisions (p 353-374). John Wiley et Sons.
- Dresler, C. et Kurtz, J. (2013) Discriminating self-deceptive versus other-deceptive positive response distortion in structured personality assessment. Journal Article. Poster presentation at the 2013 society for personality assessment.
- Groth-Marnat, G. et Wright, J. (2017). Personality assessment inventory. Dans G. Groth-Marnat et J. Wright, Handbook of psychological assessment (6e éd., p 371-416). John Wiley et Sons.
- Hopwood, C., Talbert, C., Morey, L. et Rogers, R. (2008). Testing the incremental utility of the negative impression - positive impression differential. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 64(3), 338-343.
- Hynan, D. (2013). Use of the personality assessment Inventory in child-custody evaluation. Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology, 5, 120-133.
- Hynan, D. (2015). New CCE-specific research on the Personality assessment inventory. Dans D. Hynan (dir.), Child custody evaluations : new theoretical applications and research (p 546-549). Charles C Thomas Pub Ltd
- King, J. et Sullivan, K., (2009). Detecting malingered psychopathology: the effect of warning simulating malingerers. Behavioral Sciences and Law, 27, 35-49.
- Kurtz, J., Tarquini, S. et Iobst, E. (2008). Socially desirable responding in personality assessment: still more substance than style. Personality and Individual Difference, 45(1), 22-27.
- Kurtz, J., Bupp, L., Henk, C. et Dresler, C. (2015) The validity of a regression-based procedure for detecting concealed psychopathology in structured personality assessment. American Psychology Association, 27(2), 392-402.
- Kurtz, J., Linsdsey, B. et Henk, C. (2016). novel approaches to adjusting for positive response distortion with the Personality assessment inventory. Dans U. Kumar (dir.), The Wiley handbook of personality assessment (p. 374-386). John Wiley et Sons.
- Lamb, M. et Kelly, J. (2009). Improving the quality of parent-child in separation families with infants and young children : empirical research foundations. Dans K. Galatzer-Levy, et R. M. Galatzer-Levy (dir.), The scientific basis of child custody decisions (p 417-462). John Wiley et Sons, Inc.
- Mazza, C., Burla, F., Verrocchio, M. C., Marchetti, D., Di Domenico, A., Ferracuti, S. et Roma, P. (2019). MMPI-2-RF Profiles in child custody litigants. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10(725).
- McCredie, M. et Morey, L. (2018) Evaluating new supplemental indicators for the Personality assessment inventory: standardization and cross-validation. American Psychological Assessment, 30(10), 1292-1299.
- Morey, L. (1996). An interpretative guide to the Personality assessment inventory (PAI). Psychological Assessment Resource.
- Morey, L. et Lanier, V.W. (1998). Operating characteristics of six response distortion indicators for the personality assessment inventory. Assessment, 5(3), 203-214.
- Morey, L. (2003). Essentials of PAI assessment. John Wiley et Sons.
- Morey, L. et Hopwood, C. (2007). Casebook for the Personality assessment inventory (PAI): a structural summary approach. Psychological Assessment Resource.
- Morey, L. (2007). Personality assessment inventory (PAI): Professional manual (2e éd.). Psychological Assessment Ressource.
- Parisien, M. (2012). Le MMPI-2 et le MCMI en expertise psycholégale. Dans L. Brunet (dir.), L’expertise psycholégale (2e éd., p. 273-326). PUQ.
- Posthuma, A. (2014). New developments in psychological testing for child custody disputes. American College of Forensic Psychology - 30th Annual Symposium.
- Pruett, M. et Barker, C. (2009). Joint custody: a judicious choice for families - but how, when, and why? Dans K. M. Galatzer-Levy (dir.), The scientific basis of child custody decisions (p 417-462). John Wiley et Sons, Inc.
- Semel, R. (2016) The Personality assessment inventory (PAI) in child custody evaluations : some contextual and psychometric considerations. Journal of Psychology and Clinical Psychiatry, 5(3), 1-4.
- Strong, D., Greene, R., Hoppe, C., Johnston, T. et Olesen, N. (1999). Taxometric analysis of impression management and self-deception on the MMPI-2 in child-custody litigants. Journal of Personality Assessment, 73(1), 1-18.
- Weiner, I. et Greene, R. (2017). Personality Assessment Inventory. Dans I. B. Weiner et R. L. Greene, Handbook of personality assessment, (2e éd., p 257-286). John Wiley et sons.
- Weiss, P. (2010). Use of the PAI in personnel selection. Dans M. A. Blais, M. R. Baity et C. J. Hoopwood (dir.), Clinical applications of the Personality assessment inventory (p 163-176). Routledge.