Use of the Personality Assessment Inventory in Fitness-for-Duty Evaluations of Physicians

Dominance Analysis of Bright and Dark Dispositional Predictors of Socially Desirable Responding

Although the role of so-called dark traits in the prediction of maladaptive behavior has seen a large increase in interest by researchers, the Big Five still maintain their ubiquity in the prediction of most behaviors. This study uses measures of the Dark Tetrad and the Big Five personality traits to predict a very specific form of maladaptive behavior: the impression management form of socially desirable responding. In regression-based dominance analysis, results suggest that not all of the Big Five nor the Dark Tetrad provide statistically significant incremental validity but as a block, the Big Five dominate the Dark Tetrad in the prediction of the purposeful misrepresentation of one's self to others on self-report inventories. More specifically, four of the Big Five as well as the traits of Machiavellianism and sadism from the Dark Tetrad are significant predictors of impression management.

The Personality Assessment Inventory in U.S. Case Law: A Survey and Examination of Relevance to Legal Proceedings

The Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), a popular measure of personality, psychopathology, and interpersonal functioning, has demonstrated utility to address various psycholegal questions. This case law review examines a large sample of randomly selected published U.S. case law decisions to ascertain how the PAI has been applied and considered by legal decision makers. The review indicates the instrument is popular in criminal and civil legal settings, particularly in preadjudication forensic mental health evaluations (e.g., competency to proceed) and cases considering social security disability benefits. Forensic evaluators and legal actors primarily consider the results of the PAI as indicators of examinee impression management, psychopathology, and interpersonal functioning, although this varied by psycholegal context. The admissibility of the instrument was rarely challenged, although some challenges to the forensic evaluator's interpretation and conclusions emerged. Despite the PAI's popularity, the utility of the instrument is determined by specific, empirically supported, contexts. As such, forensic evaluators must consider how the PAI may inform decision making given examinee characteristics and the psycholegal question.