Extending the Use of the SCORS-G Composite Ratings in Assessing Level of Personality Organization

• Published in: Journal of personality assessment Vol. 100; no. 2; pp. 166 - 175
• Main Authors: Stein, Michelle B., Slavin-Mulford, Jenelle, Sinclair, Samuel Justin, Chung, Wei-Jean, Roche, Michael, Denckla, Christy, Blais, Mark A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Routledge 04.03.2018; Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
• Subjects: Academic achievement; Clinical assessment; Clinical research; Narratives; Object relations; Personality; Personality tests; Psychological assessment; Psychopathology; Ratings & rankings; Social cognition; Social functioning; Suicide; Thematic Apperception Test
• ISSN: 0022-3891; 1532-7752
• DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2016.1195394

The Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale-Global Rating Method (SCORS-G; Stein, Hilsenroth, Slavin-Mulford, & Pinsker, 2011 ; Westen, 1995b ) reliably measures the quality of object relations in narrative material. It assesses 8 dimensions (on a continuum from maladaptive to adaptive) that mediate interpersonal functioning. The 8 dimensions can be averaged to create a global or composite score to represent a person's overall object relational functioning. This study aimed to create levels of personality organization using the SCORS-G global score ratings of Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) narratives and to explore the construct validity of these levels using a multimethod approach (i.e., psychopathology, normal personality, and life-event data). Meaningful relationships were found between the SCORS-G level of personality organization and aspects of psychopathology (Personality Assessment Inventory; Morey, 1991 ), regulation and control (NEO Five-Factor Inventory; Costa & McCrae, 1989, 1992b ), and number of psychiatric hospitalizations, suicide attempts, and educational level. Overall, this study demonstrates the potential value of creating levels of personality organization (LPO) using the SCORS-G composite or global ratings as a supplement to the psychological assessment process and further highlights the utility of this measure in the field of personality assessment. Clinical and research-related implications as well as limitations are discussed.