Incremental Validity and the Assessment of Psychopathology in Adults.

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Results from studies on incremental validity are described for (a) interviews, (b) personality inventories, (c) projective techniques, and (d) brief self-rated and clinician-rated measures. In some of the studies (clinical judgment studies), psychologists were given increasing amounts of information. In other studies (statistical prediction studies), increasing amounts of assessment information were entered into a statistical prediction rule. Although relatively little research has been conducted on incremental validity, results that have been obtained tend to favor the use of interviews, personality inventories (e.g., the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory--2; J. N. Butcher, W. G. Dahlstrom, J. R., Graham, A. Tellegen, & B. Kaemmer, 1989), and brief self-rated measures (e.g., the Anxiety Sensitivity Index, S. Reiss, R. A. Peterson, D. M. Gursky, & R. M. McNally, 1986). Results are generally less encouraging for projective techniques.