{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01936619718309859, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006161971830985915, 'mean_word_length': 5.4602272727272725, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Acceptance of Trait-Descriptive vs “Medical Model” Oriented Feedback Statements

The current controversy surrounding the medical or illness model of disordered behavior has very largely neglected the area of psychological assessment and feedback. It was the aim of the present study to examine the acceptability of feedback statements derived from inventories based on pathology-oriented vs trait-descriptive personality constructs. 88 male and female students completed the MMPI and the PRF (Personality Research Form) in group sessions in a counterbalanced design. 5 wk. later all Ss ranked feedback statements from both of these instruments in the exact order that the statements were viewed as accurately descriptive of themselves. Pathology ratings of these feedback statements by 6 male and 6 female judges were also obtained. The results were: (1) MMPI feedbacks were judged as significantly more indicative of pathology than PRF feedbacks, and (2) Ss endorsed PRF feedbacks as significantly more self-descriptive than MMPI feedbacks. Implications of these findings for professional practice and validity research were discussed.