ArticlePeerJ2025
Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI): obsolete norms identify psychopathology in nearly everyone.
Article in PeerJ, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), a self-report personality test, is one of the frequently used measures to assess psychopathology in a wide variety of settings including in high stakes assessments, for example, in child custody disputes, employment settings and fitness for duty assessments. The PAI has never been normed on a Canadian population and the PAI users have simply assumed that the US norms also describe the Canadian population. Moreover, accumulated research demonstrates that the PAI's 35 years outdated and obsolete norms no longer describe neither university students' nor normal adult US populations. Method: We administered the PAI to over 200 university students in a mid-size Canadian university. Results: Our students scored on average in moderately elevated range (60T to 69T) on many of the PAI scales including anxiety (ANX), anxiety-related disorders (ARD), depression (DEP), schizophrenia (SCZ), and borderline features (BOR). Multivariate base rate analyses revealed that approximately 95% of our sample scored in elevated range on at least one out of the 22 PAI Scales. Furthermore, although some of the PAI reliabilities are adequate for research, the PAI reliabilities are too low for using the PAI in high stakes and forensic assessment, for example, in insurance benefits, child custody, employment, and fitness for duty assessments. Discussion: We conclude that the PAI US norms are no longer appropriate for high-stakes assessments, ought to be withdrawn immediately, and new up-to-date norms ought to be established to prevent mislabelling and diagnostic misclassifications of and harm to examinees. Continued use of the PAI outdated norms in high stakes assessments carries ethical risks, is non-scientific, and likely amounts to malpractice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.