A comparison of two computer-administered versions of the NIMH diagnostic interview schedule

This study compared three versions of the NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS): “traditional” interviewer-administered DIS; computer-administered DIS (subject interacting alone with computer); computer-prompted DIS (interviewer using computer program as a guide). Kappas for 20 diagnoses ranged f...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of psychiatric research Vol. 26; no. 1; pp. 85 - 95
Main Authors Erdman, Harold P., Klein, Marjorie H., Greist, John H., Skare, Stacey S., Husted, Jack J., Robins, Lee N., Helzer, John E., Goldring, Evelyn, Hamburger, Merle, Phillip Miller, J.
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Oxford Elsevier Ltd 1992
Elsevier
Subjects
Adult
Aged
Biological and medical sciences
Female
Humans
Interview, Psychological
Male
Medical sciences
Mental Disorders - diagnosis
Mental Disorders - psychology
Microcomputers
Middle Aged
Personality Assessment
Personality Tests - instrumentation
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychometrics
Psychometrics. Diagnostic aid systems
Psychopathology. Psychiatry
Techniques and methods
Human
Interrater agreement
Diagnostic Interview Schedule
Methodology
Evaluation scale
Psychometrics
Computer aid
Online AccessGet full text
ISSN0022-3956
1879-1379
DOI10.1016/0022-3956(92)90019-K

Cover

More Information
Summary:This study compared three versions of the NIMH Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS): “traditional” interviewer-administered DIS; computer-administered DIS (subject interacting alone with computer); computer-prompted DIS (interviewer using computer program as a guide). Kappas for 20 diagnoses ranged from .15 to .94, and averages for the three method pairs ranged from .57 to .64, which are comparable to other DIS reliability studies. Agreement between pairs of methods were comparable. Subjects' attitudes toward the computer interview were positive. While they felt they could better describe their feelings and ideas to a human, they found the computer contact less embarrassing. Overall, subjects had no preference for one method over another. Measures of social desirability and deviant response biases were correlated with diagnostic results. Reading ability did not affect subject's ability to respond to the DIS, although subjects with lower reading levels preferred the computer interview more.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0022-3956
1879-1379
DOI:10.1016/0022-3956(92)90019-K