Publication Type: Symposium Paper
Abstract: This current study was designed to evaluate the M-PULSE validity scales. Police candidates (5821)had been administered the M-PULSE, and the MMPI-2.The two validity measures (IM & TA) were correlated to validity measures on the MMPI-2 scales.

The analyses yielded correlations between the IM and MMPI-2 L scale (.60) and K scale (.41). The IM was significantly negatively correlated with the F scale, the Fb scale, and the VRIN scale. The TA validity scale was correlated with the MMPI-2 F scale, Fb scale, TRIN scale, and VRIN scale. The TA scale was found to significantly negatively correlate with the K scale.

Publication Type: Symposium Paper
Abstract: We continue our investigation of SIRS test characteristics by use of MGV. In the last sample, we evaluate persons undergoing court-ordered evaluations who were administered the SIRS and the MMPI-2 concurrently.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The central topic of this paper is the measurement of one variable, civic duty. This variable has become a mainstay in empirical research on individual voting behavior since the 1960s and it is one of the chief explanatory saviors of the rational choice model of voting. Nevertheless, the measurement of civic duty on the American National Elections Study is prima facie substandard. Question wording is one concern, as a number of scholars have demonstrated that seemingly small changes in question wording can have large effects on the answers individuals provide and the conclusions scholars draw. My primary concern is measurement validity, commonly defined as “whether a variable measures what it is supposed to measure” (King, Keohane, and Verba 1994). In survey research, the question is the instrument through which we measure a concept; if the wording is unclear, biased, or just plain bad, then any research that uses that indicator will also be flawed.
In the paper, I will explain the controversies surrounding question wording and measurement validity; I will examine the existing body of work on civic duty; and I will empirical evaluate the validity of survey instruments that use different measures of civic duty in the United States and the United Kingdom. Possible explanations for the results, recommendations for further analysis, and the implications of these findings for research on voting behavior will also be discussed.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: The RAVE Study (Risk Assessment Validation Experiment) evaluated the predictive accuracy of several methods of assessing risk of repeat assault or potential lethality in domestic violence cases. The baseline sample of 1307 battered women was recruited from NYC Family Courts (n=630), shelters (n=177), hospitals (n=30) and community programs (n=11), Los Angeles (LA) County sheriff’s departments (n=399), and domestic violence shelters (n=60). The ethnically diverse sample, including 38% foreign-born women, was severely abused. Sixty percent were re-interviewed 9 months after the baseline risk assessment (n=782); 31% had been reassaulted. They had been severely abused less frequently at baseline. Arrest records for the abusers of the1307 participants were also searched.

One of the instruments tested, the revised Danger Assessment (DA), is designed to assess risk of lethal and potentially lethal domestic violence. It includes a weighted scoring system with “levels of danger” based on demonstrated femicide risk factors. The results for the DA included reliability of .66 and a statistically significant correlation (.25) with the CTS2 measure of the frequency of severe physical abuse at follow-up. For the outcome of any physical or sexual abuse during the follow-up period, sensitivity was .917 and specificity was .219 at the increased risk level; sensitivity was .477 and specificity was .684 at the extreme risk level. Utilizing Receiver Operator Characteristic Curve(ROC) analysis to assess predictive accuracy of the DA while controlling for protective actions, the area under the ROC was .711 for any reassault and .714 for severe reassault.

Publication Type: Poster
Abstract: The importance of peer relationships for behavior and decision making in adolescents has been documented (Arriaga, & Foshee, 2004; Lento, 2006). This study examined whether peer validation of partner violence was associated with the use of violence or victimization. Participants self-reported their worst intimate partner conflict and whether violence was used. We investigated supportive and critical peer responses to participants’ use of violence. Research questions included: 1) Who do participants talk to about their relationship conflicts? 2) Did peers respond supportively or critically to their friend’s use of violence? 3) Does the gender of peers affect the type of response (supportive or critical)? 4) Are there any ethnic differences in peer validation of use of partner violence?

The diverse sample consisted of 307 undergraduate students (27% men, 73% women; ethnicity: 49% Latino/a, 27% African American, 16% White, 8% other). The Conflict Tactics Scale (CTS2) was used to measure IPV. Peer Validation was assessed by supportive response (7 items) and critical response (8 items) questions created for this purpose.

A majority of participants (60.5%) spoke to both their male and female peers, and these participants were also more willing to speak about their relationship conflict then those who spoke to only men or only women. The nature of the support differed for female and male participants. For females, not using violence was associated with support. In contrast, for men, using violence was associated with critical peer responses. Further implications for gender roles, cultural relationships and peer relationships will be discussed.