Pilot study examining factors asscociated with academic success for hispanic high school students

This study examines characteristics that distinguish succeeding and failing Hispanic students at an inner-city high school. While research on this topic has historically focused on dropouts, this study seeks to better understand successful high school students. Participants in the study were 48 Hispanic tenth-grade students at a large, predominantly minority and low-income high school. High-and low-risk groups were identified on the basis of ninth-grade attendance rates and course failures. When compared to their high-risk counterparts, low-risk students were found to be more satisfied with their school and to maintain a social group predominantly free of gang members. The findings are discussed in terms of how the distinguishing variables contribute to students' success.Obtained degree in clinical-community psychology from DePaul University. Research focuses on adolescent risk factors, particularly as they relate to academic success and high school completion.Earned degree in clinical-community psychology from the University of Rochester. Has published extensively on issues related to prevention and community psychology. Most recently work has focused on strategies to help high-risk school transfer children adjust to the academic demands of their new schools.     

A Comparison of Forensic and Nonforensic Malingerers: A Prototypical Analysis of Explanatory Models

Explanatory models of malingering strive to understand the primary motivation underlying attempts to feign. Rogers, Sewell, and Goldstein (1994) provided empirical support for the conceptualization of pathogenic, criminological, and adaptational models. In the current study, a prototypical analysis of 221 forensic experts results in a slightly refined formulation: the adaptational model was decomposed into its two broad dimensions (cost–benefit analysis and adversarial setting). An important finding is that the factor structure for the explanatory models remained stable when applied to both forensic and nonforensic cases. As a first investigation, significant differences were observed in prototypical cases of malingering by the category of referral (forensic or nonforensic) and by type of feigning (mental disorders, cognitive impairment, and medical syndromes). Surprisingly, the feigning of medical syndromes appeared to play a relatively prominent role in both forensic and nonforensic cases and to be influenced by the apparent adversarial context of the assessment. Finally, important gender differences were observed, especially with nonforensic prototypical cases of malingering.