Psychological assessment underwent substantive challenges and changes when the COVID-19 pandemic began, and these changes are likely to endure given the rapid growth of telehealth clinical practice and assessment research using virtual procedures. COVID-19-related changes to assessment practices have impacted accordingly how we study overreporting scale functioning, including the modality through which we administer measures. No available research provides direct comparisons of overreporting scale effectiveness within simulation research across in-person and telehealth modalities, despite early support for novel instruments relying on remote procedures within the historic context of the pandemic. We used simulated feigning conditions collected using best telehealth practices to examine if, and how, overreporting scales differed in effectiveness by evaluating mean scores, elevation rates, and classification accuracy statistics, relative to parallel in-person conditions. Results indicate no meaningful differences in scale effectiveness, particularly when exclusion procedures included a posttest questionnaire. Our findings support telehealth assessment practice and the integration of research collected virtually into the traditional, in-person feigning literature. Limitations and future directions are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

对比 MMPI-3 有效性量表在现场和远程医疗管理程序中的有效性差异。

当 COVID-19 大流行开始时，心理评估经历了实质性的挑战和变化，鉴于使用虚拟程序的远程医疗临床实践和评估研究的快速增长，这些变化可能会持续下去。与 COVID-19 相关的评估实践变化相应地影响了我们研究多报量表功能的方式，包括我们管理措施的方式。尽管在大流行的历史背景下早期支持依赖远程程序的新型仪器，但没有现有的研究对面对面和远程医疗模式的模拟研究中过度报告的规模有效性进行直接比较。我们使用最佳远程医疗实践收集的模拟假装条件，通过评估平均分、升高率和分类准确性统计数据（相对于平行的面对面条件）来检查过度报告量表的有效性是否以及如何不同。结果表明，量表有效性没有显着差异，特别是当排除程序包括后测问卷时。我们的研究结果支持远程医疗评估实践以及将虚拟收集的研究整合到传统的面对面假装文献中。讨论了局限性和未来的方向。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2023 APA，保留所有权利）。