Question
Assignment 2: Comprehensive Examination Overview
This assignment will familiarize you with the forensic psychology comprehensive examination that you will be scheduled to take soon. Check with your academic advisor for the dates your exam will be offered. The examination is based upon the program objectives, which form the backbone of the forensic psychology curriculum.
In a minimum of 300–400 words, respond to the following:
If you are scheduled to take the exam during this term, you will review the course Comprehensive Examination Course (another course that you should be attached to in eCollege). Please be sure to read all the announcements and review all the attachments. Pay particular attention to the Comprehensive Examination Guide and Comprehensive Examination Grading Rubric sections.
Watch the comprehensive examination review workshop (the link is provided below).
Compose a list of three open-ended questions that you want to ask about the comprehensive examination.
Add a reference citation for one scholarly source that you believe will be helpful in answering the comprehensive examination questions. Provide a clear rationale for how this reference will be helpful in preparing for and answering the comprehensive examination question.
Watch this set of videos on how to prepare for the comprehensive examination.
Sample paper
Comprehensive Examination Overview
Open-ended questions to consider
What are the appropriate psychological tests to apply in the case of Jason Warren?
What specific pitfalls should be avoided while making a diagnosis basing on the DSM model?
What role(s) does humor play during an interview?
Important reference citation
Cooper, R. V., PhD. (2013). Avoiding false positives: Zones of rarity, the threshold problem, and the DSM clinical significance Criterion/Éviter les faux positifs : Les zones de rareté, le problème du seuil, et le critère de significativité clinique du DSM. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 58(11), 606-11. Retrieved from https://login.libproxy.edmc.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.edmc.edu/ docview/1467950532?accountid=34899
This reference will be critical in answering the comprehensive examination questions. In establishing the correct diagnosis relating to the case study, it is important to apply the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual-5 (DSM-5). The DSM-5 is an important manual that can assist in classifying mental health disorders. Cooper (2013) examines the applications of the DSM-5 manual in the diagnosis of mental health disorders. The most important details presented in the reference concerns how a psychology professional or a researcher can avoid making false positives. False positives are invalid conclusions that the psychology professional can make concerning the perceived presence of a mental health disorder on the patient. While applying the DSM-5 statistical manual, there is an inherent risk that the psychology professional makes a wrong conclusion or diagnosis.
Cooper (2013) suggests different ways a psychologist professional can avoid arriving at false positives. One suggestion is for a psychology professional to utilize zones of rarity. Zones of rarity refer to the presence of distinct boundaries in the stages of defining characteristics. Another way of avoiding false positives is by applying the harm criterion. Unlike in DSM-IV where the harm criterion is presented as a solution to the emerging threshold problem, in DSM-5 the harm criterion is applied to ensure that harmless conditions do not pass of as conditions leading to the disorder. Although the harm criterion does not solve the threshold problem, it will help eliminate diagnosis of individuals who may be different in some ways, but their difference does not contribute to harming themselves. An example is a homosexual person. Another suggestion is to make enquiries about whether the patient needs treatment, or whether he/she has sought treatment.
Lastly, the reference will assist in solving the threshold problem. The threshold problem primarily involves making the critical decision on whether a particular behavior is normal or abnormal. Cooper (2013) suggests that a forensic psychologist can solve the threshold problem by setting arbitrary cut-off marks or points. For instance, the cut-off point for infatuation may be staring at somebody. Any behavior that goes beyond that point, such as stocking could be considered as above the threshold.
