From: anticree8908989p@gmail.com   
      
   TEXAS IMNATE STUDY (PAGES 1-23) KENNETH MARTIN DOLAN IS DIFFERENT THAN ALL >   
   64 TEXAS INMATES AND NEVER LEGITIMATELY THE SAME AS ALL > 64 TEXAS INMATES   
   THEREFORE KENNETH MARTIN DOLAN CAN NEVER BE LEGITIMATELY AN INMATE AS STATED   
   SINCE AT LEAST 2009   
      
   (PAGES 1 THROUGH 23)   
      
   DETECTING INMATES MALINGERING ON THE MMPI-2:   
   AN ANALOGUE INVESTIGATION   
   by   
   JARROD S. STEFFAN, M.A.   
   A DISSERTATION   
   IN   
   CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY   
   Submitted to the Graduate Faculty   
   of Texas Tech University in   
   Partial Fulfillment of   
   the Requirements for   
   the Degree of   
   DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY   
   Approved   
   Robert D. Morgan, Ph.D.   
   Chairperson of the Committee   
   James R. Clopton, Ph.D.   
   Chuck L. Giles, Ph.D.   
   Darcy A. Reich, Ph.D.   
   Steven Richards, Ph.D.   
   Accepted   
   John Borrelli   
   Dean of the Graduate School   
   August, 2006   
   Copyright 2006, Jarrod Scott Steffan   
   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS   
   I would first like to express my gratitude to my mentor, Robert Morgan. Dr.   
   Morgan is an excellent role model of integrity, perseverance, thoroughness,   
   professionalism, and ethics. I am grateful for the overwhelmingly positive   
   influence you   
   have had, and will continue to have, on my professional and personal   
   development.   
   Thank you for seeing me through my graduate school years and this   
   dissertation. Next, I   
   would like to thank the members of my dissertation committee for their   
   contributions to   
   my education and life. Thank you, Dr. Jim Clopton, for your assistance in   
   developing my   
   writing skills and for your contributions to my research activities. Dr. Darcy   
   Reich, I   
   appreciate your expertise with the statistical analyses. Also, Dr. Fireman, I   
   appreciate   
   your contributions to the formulation of the dissertation. Dr. Steven   
   Richards, I am   
   grateful for your help in finalizing the dissertation. Dr. Chuck Giles, I   
   appreciate your   
   assistance in formulating the study, gaining access to participants in the   
   study and   
   graciously contributing testing materials. I would also like to acknowledge   
   the Texas   
   Department of Criminal Justice (TDCJ) for granting me access to the prison   
   system in   
   order to collect data. I am also grateful for the numerous persons in TDCJ who   
   assisted   
   me in the collection of data, as well as the research assistants who   
   contributed to data   
   collection and entry. To these unnamed persons, I thank you. Additionally, I   
   received   
   financial support from several sources for which I am appreciative, including   
   the   
   American Psychology-Law Society Division of the American Psychological   
   Association   
   (APA), Psychologists in Public Service Division of APA, and American Academy of   
   ii   
   Forensic Psychology. Importantly, I would like to express my appreciation to   
   my parents   
   and family, whose support, care, and encouragement helped me to persevere   
   through the   
   many trials of the dissertation and graduate school. Thank you everyone. Above   
   all else, I   
   would like to acknowledge God for the many blessings He has bestowed upon me,   
   including my family, friends, and education.   
   This research was supported, in part, by funding obtained through a Stipend for   
   Graduate Research awarded in 2003 by the American Psychology-Law Society   
   Division   
   41 of the American Psychological Association and through a Dissertation Grant   
   in   
   Applied Law and Psychology awarded in 2004 by the American Academy of Forensic   
   Psychology. "The research contained in this document was coordinated in part   
   by the   
   Texas Department of Criminal Justice (Research Agreement # 443-R04). The   
   contents of   
   this report reflect the views of the author and do not necessarily reflect the   
   views or   
   policy of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice."   
   iii   
   TABLE OF CONTENTS   
   Page   
   ABSTRACT........................................................   
   ...................... v   
   LIST OF TABLES..................................................   
   ..................... vi   
   CHAPTER ONE.....................................................   
   .......................................... 1   
   Introduction....................................................   
   ........................................ 1   
   Definition of Terms.............................................   
   .................................... 8   
   Research Questions..............................................   
   .................................. 9   
   Research Hypotheses.............................................   
   ................................. 10   
   CHAPTER TWO.....................................................   
   .......................................... 11   
   Method..........................................................   
   ....................................... 11   
   Participants....................................................   
   ............................. 11   
   Materials.......................................................   
   ............................ 15   
   Procedure.......................................................   
   ................... 20   
   Research Design.................................................   
   ........................ 26   
   CHAPTER THREE...................................................   
   .................. 28   
   Results.........................................................   
   .................. 28   
   Demographic Equivalence of the Groups........................... 28   
   Adherence to Instructions............................................. 30   
   Data Preparation........................................................ 33   
   Preliminary Analyses................................................... 37   
   iv   
   Primary Analyses...................................................... 40   
   CHAPTER FOUR....................................................   
   ................... 53   
   Discussion......................................................   
   ................. 53   
   LIST OF REFERENCES..............................................   
   ..................................... 89   
   APPENDICES......................................................   
   .............................................. 103   
   A. Extended Literature Review...................................   
   ............................ 103   
   B. Demographic Form.............................................   
   ............................... 151   
   C. Informed Consent Form........................................   
   ............................. 153   
   D. Instructions Form............................................   
   ............................. 158   
   E. Experimenter's Script........................................   
   .......................... 160   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)