Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for FREE ACCESS to this landmark database

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Applied Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Burdock, E. I.
Right arrow Articles by Greco, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

A Comparison of Psychiatric and Psychological Assessments of Acute Schizophrenics

Eugene I. Burdock

New York University School of Medicine

Anne S. Hardesty

New York University School of Medicine

William A. Frosch

New York University School of Medicine

Samuel Gershon

New York University School of Medicine

Philip Greco

New York University School of Medicine

Psychiatric and psychological ratings of psycho pathology were compared by means of canonical correlation of scores on the Inpatient Multidimen sional Psychiatric Scale (IMPS) syndromes with scores on the 10 subtests of the Structured Clinical Interview (SCI). The ratings by a team of psycholo gists on the SCI and by a team of psychiatrists on the IMPS were made simultaneously, while one of the psychologists conducted the structured interview of the SCI. In this way, 72 acute schizophrenics were rated shortly after admission to a psychiatric hospital; 58 of them were re-rated approximately one month later in a replication of the original procedure. Two canonical analyses were carried out: one on the initial ratings, the second on the replication. Canonical correlations of .84 and .86 were obtained respectively for the first latent roots at each occasion. Successive significant roots yielded correlations of .78 and .68 on the initial rat ings and .76, .69, and .64 on the follow-up ratings. After all 10 latent roots had been extracted for each occasion of rating, redundancy coefficients were calculated for each instrument. The results showed that for the initial ratings 30% of each in strument's variance could be explained by the other instrument; at the follow-up ratings the redun ancies were 40% for both sets of variables. The data are interpreted as evidence for the congruent validity of the SCI.

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 2, No. 2, 175-187 (1978)
DOI: 10.1177/014662167800200202
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?