This week’s blog was contributed by Maegan Sady, PhD, ABPP-CN. Maegan is a project director in PAR’s research and development department in addition to being a licensed psychologist and board-certified neuropsychologist. She worked as a pediatric neuropsychologist for nearly a decade before joining PAR.
Add trauma screening to your evaluation checklist
Assessment clinicians are trained to look for hidden problems, and we all know the common ones. If a child comes in with a referral for an ADHD evaluation, we screen for anxiety and sleep problems. When an older adult complains of memory problems, we inquire about symptoms of depression. There’s a new kid on the block, though—trauma. Trauma isn’t new, of course, but more clients may be experiencing its effects along with whatever brought them to you for assessment.
Expanding the definition of trauma
Trauma is a broad term for experiences that are dangerous or threatening. Although abuse or violence quickly come to mind, experiences of losing a loved one, food insecurity, or chronic social isolation can just as readily result in symptoms. The COVID-19 pandemic has increased these experiences, and some argue the pandemic itself may be a form of trauma. The impact of multiple stressful events—say, experiencing displacement due to a wildfire during the pandemic—can be multiplicative. Similarly, existing health and economic disparities have been exacerbated by pandemic-related stressors.
Screening for trauma
Because traumatic experiences have increased, it makes sense that more clients are experiencing trauma effects. Trauma symptoms can mimic other disorders, including anxiety, depression, and even psychosis or personality disorder. Untreated, trauma effects can negatively impact physical health and lead to higher rates of suicide and substance abuse.
To decrease the chance that you miss trauma as a comorbid cause of your client’s problems, make it routine to ask about trauma history. A written checklist (e.g., the Adverse Childhood Experiences Questionnaire) can help clients feel more comfortable disclosing their history. Unless you are specifically trained in trauma-related care, do not ask your client for details, but assure them you will provide resources.
If there is a positive history of trauma, assess for associated symptoms to guide recommendations; structured checklists can identify the severity and breadth. No matter the age of the client, PAR has you covered with the TSCYC, TSCC, TSI-2, FACT, and the DAPS. When time is short, screening versions are also available for most of these measures. And because many digital options are available on PARiConnect, it's easy to add a variety of administrations to your inventory when you need them.
Referring for additional assessment or treatment
When trauma is a contributing factor for your patient, you can provide a referral for evidence-based treatment and/or educational resources. For children, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and The National Child Traumatic Stress Network have handouts and book recommendations. For adults, visit the National Center for PTSD. For individuals of all ages, see the website for the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies.
Making trauma screening a routine part of your clinical assessment may uncover important treatment targets, helping your client deal more effectively with their original presenting concerns.
Recently, PAR added several new features to the PAI Plus reports on PARiConnect. As a result, we have received a few questions about how to use the Negative Impression Management (NIM) and Positive Impression Management (PIM) predicted profile overlays as well as the NIM- and PIM-specific profiles. We went directly to author Leslie C. Morey, PhD, to get his answers on how you can use these features to enhance your understanding.
LM: NIM and PIM predicted profile overlays are regression-based predictions of the profile based on information from the validity scales. These profiles represent one strategy for understanding the influence of the response styles represented by the validity scales, NIM and PIM. In this approach, PAI scale scores are predicted solely by either NIM or PIM, using a regression model based on the correlations observed in the standardization samples. Thus, these profiles are not based on data from the profile of the individual being assessed, with the exception of their NIM or PIM scores. The resulting profile constitutes what would be expected given the observed score on NIM or PIM. The contrast between observed (i.e., the respondent’s actual PAI profile) and predicted profiles indicates the extent to which scale scores are expected to have been influenced by response set distortion. If the observed and expected scores are comparable (e.g., within one standard error of measurement), then the scores can be largely attributed to the effects of whatever led to the observed response set, such as potential exaggeration or cognitive distortions.
LM: The NIM- and PIM-specific profiles represent another strategy for understanding the influence of any observed response styles on the PAI profile. However, instead of predicting every score on the rest of the profiles, it compares the observed profile to a group of profiles from the standardization samples that displayed a similarly elevated score on PIM or NIM. This strategy then calculates standard scores for the individual’s observed scores based on the means and standard deviations of similarly distorted profiles. Thus, elevations indicate psychopathology above and beyond response sets. Unlike the predicted scores, which tend to yield greater variability in predictions for negative impression management than for positive impression management, the specific score strategy is equally useful in understanding the influences of both types of response sets.
Two groups are used for comparison purposes on the NIM- and PIM-specific scores, as defined by two ranges on these scales. The first group, the lower range, is based on cutoff scores determined to have maximal efficiency in distinguishing impression management from genuine groups. For NIM, this range is 84T to 91T; for PIM, it is 57T to 67T. The second group, the higher range, is equivalent to scores that equal or exceed two standard deviations above the mean in a clinical population: 92T for NIM and 68T for PIM. No specific scores are generated if NIM is less than 84T and PIM is less than 57T.
Read more about how the NIM scale can be used to assess malingering.
This year commemorates the 100th anniversary of one of the most widely used tests ever published—the Rorschach Test. We take this opportunity to look back on the history of this assessment and the person who made it possible.
Hermann Rorschach was a Swiss psychologist and psychiatrist who is best known for developing the Rorschach inkblot test. He died in 1922 at the age of 38—before the test gained popularity. This projective test was never intended to be what it is today. In fact, initial research was focused on using this as a test for schizophrenia.
As a child, Rorschach was a fan of a game called Klecksographie. He was so devoted that his childhood nickname was Kleck. The game involved collecting inkblot cards and using those cards to create stories based on your interpretation.
Rorschach's early training was in psychiatry and psychoanalytic theory, and he became interested in the use of projective techniques. During his training, he noticed that individuals who had schizophrenia made different associations with the Klecksographie cards than those individuals without schizophrenia. He believed that the human mind projects its own subjective interpretations onto ambiguous stimuli, and these projections could reveal important information about an individual's personality and emotional functioning.
Rorschach studied 405 subjects, 117 of whom were not psychiatric patients. He showed each person a card and asked them what it may be. After four years of research, he believed this test could help diagnose and assess mental illness.
His results were published in 1921. The test gained popularity in the years following Rorschach's death, becoming the most popular test in clinical practice in the U.S. following World War II. It remains one of the most widely used and well-known psychological tests to this day.
The Rorschach test consists of 10 psychodiagnostic plates, which are presented to the subject one at a time. Though the test was initially designed for adults, normative data is available for adolescents and children.
After administration, the subjects’ insights and reactions are recorded and analyzed. In addition to scores, interpretation of behaviors during testing, patterns of responses, and themes may be taken into account.
Rorschach established a parallel between a mostly global approach to the blots and the ability to synthesize versus a more detailed approach reflecting a more analytical mind. He also determined that it was important to attend to an individual’s sensitivity to grey and black colors as well as the proportion of objects. Through this work, Rorschach proposed a typology distinguishing three basic modalities of relating to the world: introversiveness, extratensiveness, and ambitancy. These types relate to the way people associate, dissociate, or mix emotions and thoughts.
The validity of the Rorschach Test has been challenged over the years, and much research has been dedicated to both the criticism and support of the measure. As Rorschach died before the test achieved notoriety, much of the work has been done by others, and there is concern that other researchers may have modified or reinterpreted the assessment. The International Society of the Rorschach and Projective Methods (ISR) encourages users to only original stimulus material to maintain the integrity of the test.
The ISR produces the journal Rorschachiana that publishes the theory and clinical applications of the Rorschach and other projective techniques. You can read its latest issue here.
The Rorschach Test Centenary Edition is now available. It includes the original test plates, a newly translated and annotated edition of the original book, and a special issue of the Rorschachiana journal that addresses recent studies on the reliability and validity of the test.
This week’s blog was contributed by Melissa Milanak, PhD, PAR’s clinical assessment. Melissa is a licensed clinical psychologist and internationally recognized academic. She has extensive clinical experience providing therapy and conducting assessments with a diverse array of patient populations.
As your trusted source for assessments for all your clinical needs, PAR is excited to also partner with you in many practical ways as you conduct your research, whether it be a large federally funded grant, a manuscript you are preparing to submit, or a course project with your students and trainees running on zero budget. Here are just a few of the ways PAR can help researchers.
The submission deadline is approaching, and it is time to write the methods section. Instead of spending hours pouring through assessment manuals and reading journal article after journal article to extract psychometric data for the one paragraph, consider reaching out to PAR directly. Our psychologists and researchers have already prepared and formatted the assessment info paragraphs for you that you can insert into your manuscripts and grant applications. Don’t see the one you need there? Let us know and we will get you the info you need.
Through our data sharing program, you can partner with our R&D team to help us collect important data on our assessments all while receiving discounts and/or free usage of the related assessments. All data sharing is of course de-identified and confidential to protect participants.
Through our digital assessment platform, PARiConnect, you can email HIPAA-compliant links directly to research participants to complete all of your research assessments online, expanding your geographical reach. You can also access observer and collateral research data without requiring additional individuals to come into your data collection site. Plus, if you send out an assessment link and a participant decides not to participate, you can revoke the link and reuse the assessment with another participant without having to pay for an unused assessment.
By using PARiConnect, either through a HIPAA-compliant email link or in-person digital entry option, participants enter their own data, removing a layer of data entry error (and the need to invest in time for research assistants to enter and check data entry). Plus, with settings to prevent skipping questions, you can reduce the risk of missing data.
In less than a minute, you can download item-level assessment data to a CSV spreadsheet formatted to integrate with statistics software such as SPSS to increase the ease of data processing and analyzation.
Through our FREE Training Portal and team of clinical assessment advisors, PAR provides on-demand training for you and your research teams to learn about the assessments from underlying constructs to administration, scoring, and interpretation.
As you are designing your research, clinical psychologists, neuropsychologists, and psychometrists who have a history of successfully securing federally funded grants and publishing in high impact-factor journals are available to consult with you to build effective, efficient research assessment batteries.
These examples are just the beginning when exploring ways that PAR can partner with you to design, conduct, and publish your research using high-caliber, industry gold-standard assessments. Reach out to our team today to learn more!
Check out this video on ways PAR can help you easily integrate digital assessments into your practice.
This week’s blog was contributed by Terri Sisson, EdS, educational assessment advisor, national accounts. Terri spent more than 20 years in public schools as a licensed school psychologist. She is a past president of the Virginia Association of School Psychologists.
Many students with executive function deficiencies find their performance in both the home and classroom environments is negatively impacted. When I practiced in the schools, I wrote my recommendations with parents and teachers in mind, as these were the people who would read and use my recommendations. I found that if the intended audience understood executive functions and how they impact learning, they were more likely to be effective at implementing successful strategies.
Lauren Kenworthy, PhD, coauthor of the Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function, 2nd Ed. (BRIEF2) and the Unstuck and on Target! curriculum, and her colleagues have created a free video series designed for parents and teachers that explains different executive function concepts and provides recommendations for intervention.
Some videos are designed specifically for teachers and offer free training (with continuing education credits). For parents, informative videos and tip sheets help explain the executive functions in a way they can easily understand. Some videos are available in Spanish.
Although the videos support the Unstuck and on Target! curriculum, which improves flexibility, planning, organization, problem solving, and coping, they provide useful information for all parents and teachers about how to improve executive functioning in students. Check out the videos for teachers or parents and share them with others who may benefit.
Learn more about Unstuck and on Target!
This week’s blog was contributed by Eric Culqui, MA, PPS, PAR’s educational assessments advisor–regional accounts. Eric is a licensed school psychologist with more than 14 years of experience and a NASP-certified crisis response trainer and first responder.
Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, educators were struggling with increases in disruptive behaviors. In a 2019 study of nearly 1,900 elementary school teachers, administrators, and staff, behavioral disruptions including tantrums, bullying, and defiance were noted to have increased in kindergarten through fifth-grade classrooms.
Beyond impeding instructional time, these behaviors had a negative impact on the mental health of students. Trauma in the family, untreated mental illness, overexposure to electronic devices, and inadequate playtime, in addition to changes in parenting styles, were cited as suspected factors in these behaviors. Upon the return to school after quarantine, these behaviors were noted to have increased and were observed in much younger students. This was further exacerbated by increased mental health needs of students. Traditional methods and resources were not seen to be sufficient. Given the increased need for mental health intervention and promotion, strengths-based assessment can be used to evaluate strengths and competencies as part of a comprehensive psychoeducational evaluation and to plan for an individualized behavioral, educational, and/or treatment plan.
The Social Emotional Assets and Resilience Scales (SEARS) is a system for assessing, from multiple informants, the social–emotional competencies and assets of children and adolescents ages 5 to 18 years across multiple settings. Social–emotional assets and resiliencies can be broadly defined as a set of adaptive characteristics that are important for success at school, with peers, and in the outside world. The SEARS offers assessment professionals the opportunity to measure common constructs of self-regulation, responsibility, social competence, and empathy.
The SEARS utilizes a strengths-based approach to guide interventions that help identify a child’s internal assets as opposed to focusing on their deficits. This allows for a diversity of intervention strategies across a multi-tiered system of supports as opposed to making a referral directly to special education assessment. Addressing the whole child by helping them identify and leverage their strengths is critical given myriad stressors impressed on our students as a result of COVID-19.
Read more about recent research on SEARS that supports its clinical use or visit the PAR Training Portal for an on-demand training course.
The need for mental health services for Spanish-speaking populations has never been greater. A study published in May reveals that from 2014–2019, the Hispanic population in the U.S. increased by 4.5%, but the number of facilities providing services in Spanish decreased by 17.8%. And these statistics don’t include the overall uptick in demand for mental health services created by the pandemic.
As part of our commitment to provide access to underserved populations, PAR now offers several Spanish-language assessment tools on PARiConnect, our online assessment platform, providing you with flexible assessment options for your Spanish-speaking clients and students to assess your Spanish-speaking clients.
Administration for these products is now available in Spanish on PARiConnect:
The Parenting Stress Index™, Fourth Edition Short Form (PSI™-4-SF) can quickly identify parent–child problem areas.
The Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function®, Second Edition (BRIEF®2) Parent and Self-Report forms help you assess impairment of executive function from the parent or child’s perspective.
The Trauma Symptom Inventory™-2 (TSI™-2) evaluates acute and chronic posttraumatic symptomatology.
The Emotional Disturbance Decision Tree™–Parent Form and EDDT™-Self-Report Form assess emotional disturbance from the parent’s or student’s perspective.
The Personality Assessment Inventory™ (PAI®) Spanish: Revised Translation comprehensively assesses adult psychopathology.
Visit our Spanish-Language Products page for a complete listing of the many other products we offer in Spanish, plus you can download our FREE Language Acculturation Meter!
When schools shut down in 2020 due to the pandemic, millions of children, parents, and teachers found their worlds upended. Without kids in school, school psychologists were unable to test students who had been referred for special education services. Initial evaluations and re-evaluations piled up. Students, many of whom needed academic accommodations and interventions, were unable to receive the help they needed.
“We paused [testing], like everyone else in the country,” said Tina S. Nguyen, PhD, a school psychologist with Washington, D.C., public schools. “Initially, we thought it would be a few weeks. But eventually, we realized we couldn’t just not do these assessments.”
The scenario was similar for Tiombe Bisa Kendrick-Dunn, SSP, MS, NCSP, the district psychology chairperson for Miami-Dade County, Florida, public schools. “We did no evaluations at all between March and July [2020],” she said.
Both school districts began using the Reynolds Intellectual Assessment Scales, Second Edition Remote (RIAS-2 Remote), which was published in July 2020.
Developed specifically to support school psychologists and clinicians who need to test students and clients from afar, the RIAS-2 Remote features minimally modified and digitally packaged components. It’s administered using a videoconferencing platform, and a 2018 study showed equivalency with the paper-and-pencil version.
Nguyen had used the RIAS-2 prior to the pandemic, so, for her, “it was a no-brainer to continue to use it,” she said. “We couldn’t determine eligibility without the information. The RIAS-2 Remote allowed us to evaluate these kids. Otherwise, we would have had to table [the evaluations] or do them without all the components.”
Norma Castillo, MEd, assistant director of special education for the Clint Independent School District in El Paso, Texas, also ordered the RIAS-2 Remote that summer. With a backlog of referrals to work through and new referrals coming in, she needed a trusted tool that her team could use to reach students and get them the services they needed.
“Without the RIAS-2 Remote, we would have waited [to test],” Castillo said. “I didn’t feel comfortable using a test that wasn’t meant to be used in any other way and have the diagnosticians write in their reports that they used a test the way it wasn’t meant to be used. The nice thing about the RIAS-2 Remote is that you don’t have to do that. It’s RIAS-2 Remote. It was great.”
The quick administration time for the RIAS-2 (less than 30 minutes for intelligence assessment) can help school psychologists reach more students in less time and work through their backlog of evaluations.
“I have so many assessments to do,” Nguyen said. “It’s easier for me to get through them with the RIAS-2 Remote. It’s a time-saver.”
Kendrick-Dunn said the RIAS-2 allows her to complete more evaluations per day. “I have used it more than I typically would for children who have been referred for the gifted program, specifically because of the time,” she said. “Other tests can take 90 minutes to 2 hours. I can do the RIAS-2 in half that time.”
“It’s quick,” agreed Rachael Donnelly, MA, AC, NCSP, a school psychologist with Anne Arundel County, Maryland, public schools. “There are other things I could be doing, like working directly with students or in consultation with teachers.”
In addition to being faster, the RIAS-2 also has fewer motor demands and language requirements, making it a more accurate test of intelligence. This was one of the authors’ goals during development.
“It is not necessary to include motor-dependent tasks to assess intelligence accurately.” said co-author Cecil R. Reynolds, PhD. “Intelligence tests should emphasize thinking, reasoning, and problem-solving.”
“The RIAS-2 is just as good a measure of cognitive ability and overall full-scale IQ than any other test that maybe has a million manipulatives that may impede or impact the validity,” Donnelly said. “It does a good job of measuring intelligence purely.”
With straightforward administration and clear directions, school psychologists also find that the RIAS-2 is easier for students to understand, giving them confidence that results are valid.
“I never have any fears that a student’s response is because they don’t understand what I’m asking them,” Nguyen said. “That is helpful. It’s clear their score is their score because they [do or] don’t know the answer, not because they didn’t understand what to do.
“On other intelligence tests,” she added, “[if] there’s a subtest that the kids don’t understand. They bomb completely. The examples confuse them. I’m grateful for the RIAS-2. It’s simple, straightforward direction.”
More than two years post-pandemic, most students are now back to in-person learning. However, school psychologists continue to be overwhelmed and understaffed—and an uptick in mental health and academic concerns means more referrals and more evaluations.
With a faster administration time, the RIAS-2 and RIAS-2 Remote can help them continue to work through their case loads quicker and meet the needs of all the children they serve.
“If the student for some reason is not able to come to school, it’s okay because they can do a portion of the evaluation remotely now,” Castillo said. “It’s another piece of mind.”
“I’m glad that we [will continue to] have the remote option,” Kendrick-Dunn said, “so we can make the best clinical decision based on the needs of the child.”
Learn more about remote assessment and using the RIAS-2 in one of our free PARtalks webinars available on the PAR Training Portal. Learn more about the development of RIAS-2 from coauthor Cecil R. Reynolds, PhD, in this video.
This is the third part in a series on the Feifer Assessment of Reading (FAR). Catch up on the first part here and the second part here.
The Feifer Assessment of Reading (FAR) stands out from other reading tests not only because it measures several aspects of reading and identifies likely dyslexic subtypes, but also because it provides targeted interventions based on a student’s strengths, weaknesses, and age.
“The FAR is able to say, This is what the kid is really good at in the area of reading, so that tells us we can play into their strengths to help them compensate for their weaknesses,” said Angela Hodges, EdS, NCSP, a school psychologist from Aiken, South Carolina. “It gives a much better diagnostic and even research-based assessment of reading than just basic reading comprehension or reading fluencies or word recognition.”
The FAR features 15 subtests that measure various aspects of reading, from vocabulary and phonological awareness to word memory and reading fluency. Detailed interpretations of index, index discrepancy, and subtest scores are provided in the FAR Interpretive Report, available on PARiConnect, along with targeted reading interventions based on current reading research.
“It helps me tell the team what to focus on in the special education IEP,” said Angela Hoffer, PsyD, NCSP, a school psychologist. “Sometimes, the recommendations or interventions become so general when you say, It’s a reading disability. … Knowing how they perform qualitatively on specific subtests on the FAR can help me with recommendations.”
“The big thing about the FAR is it gives so much more information about the different processes in reading,” Hodges said. “The more you know about the deficit, the easier it is to intervene.
“It helps teachers know where the gaps are and where they need to drill into those developing skills versus a universal screener, which just places a child in a ranking,” she added, “and gives us a clearer picture of the specific areas where the child needs help.”
A FAR Screening Form and FAR Screening Form Remote are also available.
This is the second part in a series on the Feifer Assessment of Reading (FAR). Catch up on the first part here.
The FAR is a comprehensive assessment of reading and related processes that was developed to fill a gap in student testing. It measures the neurocognitive processes responsible for reading, within the actual context of reading, to explain why a student may struggle.
Information gleaned from the FAR can be used to determine if a student is likely to have dyslexia. However, it digs deeper than other measures to identify the likely dyslexic subtype as well, which arms educators with the detailed information they need to develop effective interventions.
“I prefer the FAR over other measures because it gives me more specific dyslexia information,” said Angela Hoffer, PsyD, NCSP, a school psychologist in Aiken, South Carolina. “I like that I can provide more tailored recommendations for students.”
The FAR is based on the premise that interventions for reading disorders vary by dyslexic subtype. The FAR measures four subtypes of dyslexia:
Dysphonic—an inability to sound out words; these students rely on visual and orthographic cues to identify words in print.
Surface—the opposite of dysphonic dyslexia; students can sound out words but have difficulty recognizing them in print.
Mixed—the most severe type of reading disability; these students have difficulty across the language spectrum.
Reading comprehension—these students struggle to derive meaning from print despite good reading mechanics.
Recommendations are based on FAR scores and dyslexic subtype, allowing for more tailored—and effective—interventions to help students become better readers.
The FAR Interpretive Report on PARiConnect also helps explain a student’s reading concerns in ways parents and teachers can readily understand.
“The FAR does a good job of testing for dyslexia but also explaining to parents exactly what dyslexia is,” said Angela Hodges, EdS, NCSP, a school psychologist from Aiken, South Carolina. “It’s not always the stereotypical flipping of letters. It helps parents understand, Yes, your child might have dyslexia, but it really is a comprehension issue or a phonemic awareness issue. It helps parents and even some teachers understand that there are more functions and operations involved in reading than just sight word recognition, fluency, and comprehension. It helps parents understand where their child’s reading gaps are as opposed to, My child can’t read, or My kid’s below grade level in reading.”
A FAR Screening Form and FAR Screening Form Remote are also available!