The Parents Preference Test (PPT) is a graphical test comprised of 24 easy to understand images of daily family life, which is widely used in forensic assessments of parenting skills. Nevertheless, the PPT lacks validity scales to detect participants' attitudes toward the test; this is an important oversight, as the tendency to demonstrate faking-good parenting behaviors is common in child custody litigants. Study 1 aimed at identifying the differences in PPT responses between a normative/control group (N = 110) and a sample of parents undergoing a psychological evaluation of parenting ability (N = 99). Chi-square goodness of fit tests showed significant differences in answer preferences between groups in 11 vignettes (almost half of the total PPT items). Study 2 aimed at developing an index to detect faking-good behaviors. On the 11 vignettes in which significant differences in answer preferences were found in Study 1, the alternatives chosen with the highest frequency by the forensic group were added to an index called the "Conforming Parenting Index" (CPI). The area under the curve (AUC) of a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for a sample of 58 participants who completed the PPT under both standard and faking-good instructions demonstrated good classification accuracy (AUC= .813).

Use of the parents preference test in child custody evaluations: Preliminary development of conforming parenting index / Burla, F.; Mazza, C.; Cosmo, C.; Barchielli, B.; Marchetti, D.; Verrocchio, M. C.; Roma, P.. - In: MEDITERRANEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY. - ISSN 2282-1619. - 7:3(2019), pp. 1-17. [10.6092/2282-1619/2019.7.2213]

Use of the parents preference test in child custody evaluations: Preliminary development of conforming parenting index

Burla F.;Mazza C.;Cosmo C.;Barchielli B.;Roma P.
2019

Abstract

The Parents Preference Test (PPT) is a graphical test comprised of 24 easy to understand images of daily family life, which is widely used in forensic assessments of parenting skills. Nevertheless, the PPT lacks validity scales to detect participants' attitudes toward the test; this is an important oversight, as the tendency to demonstrate faking-good parenting behaviors is common in child custody litigants. Study 1 aimed at identifying the differences in PPT responses between a normative/control group (N = 110) and a sample of parents undergoing a psychological evaluation of parenting ability (N = 99). Chi-square goodness of fit tests showed significant differences in answer preferences between groups in 11 vignettes (almost half of the total PPT items). Study 2 aimed at developing an index to detect faking-good behaviors. On the 11 vignettes in which significant differences in answer preferences were found in Study 1, the alternatives chosen with the highest frequency by the forensic group were added to an index called the "Conforming Parenting Index" (CPI). The area under the curve (AUC) of a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for a sample of 58 participants who completed the PPT under both standard and faking-good instructions demonstrated good classification accuracy (AUC= .813).
2019
Accuracy; Faking-good; Forensic evaluation; Parenting skills assessment; PPT
01 Pubblicazione su rivista::01a Articolo in rivista
Use of the parents preference test in child custody evaluations: Preliminary development of conforming parenting index / Burla, F.; Mazza, C.; Cosmo, C.; Barchielli, B.; Marchetti, D.; Verrocchio, M. C.; Roma, P.. - In: MEDITERRANEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY. - ISSN 2282-1619. - 7:3(2019), pp. 1-17. [10.6092/2282-1619/2019.7.2213]
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Burla_Use of the parents_2019.pdf

accesso aperto

Tipologia: Versione editoriale (versione pubblicata con il layout dell'editore)
Licenza: Creative commons
Dimensione 275.18 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
275.18 kB Adobe PDF

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1414960
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 8
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 7
social impact