HS(1)	D(2)	HY(3)	PD(4)	MF(5)	PA(6)	PT(7)	SC(8)	MA(9)	SI(0)
94	72	96	105	62	63	99	108	45	63

High
Low

▲Hs(1) Hypochondriasis:T94   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Hs assessment focuses on physical symptoms, catastrophic interpretations of health threats, and the resulting functional impairment
(2) interpretation should be accompanied by validity checks (L/F/K/consistency items), a detailed physical medical history and physical examination, necessary laboratory and imaging tests, history of medication and substance use, and third-party data to distinguish between organic diseases, somatization/health anxiety, and culturally-based health beliefs

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Recent research has placed Hs-related constructs within a framework of mind-body medicine and emotion recognition, finding that high Hs is associated with somatization tendencies, hypochondriacal-like cognition, alexithymia (difficulty recognizing emotions), early exposure to trauma, and increased healthcare utilization
(2) Psychobiological research suggests that some individuals with high Hs exhibit sleep-wake rhythm disturbances, HPA axis dysfunction, and altered inflammatory markers, supporting a psychophysiological interaction mechanism
(3) Hs interacts with other scales (such as D, Hy, and K) to influence clinical phenotypes and treatment responses
(4) interpretation should incorporate RC reconstruction indices, medical history, physical examination findings, and third-party data to enhance validity
(5) Intervention studies indicate that CBT-based somatic symptom modules, behavioral activation, sleep interventions, and multidisciplinary management have practical support for improving functioning and reducing healthcare utilization
(6) however, cross-cultural longitudinal and randomized evidence remains limited. Clinically, it is recommended to incorporate Hs results into multi-source, longitudinal assessments and combine them with medical examinations to develop individualized treatment pathways.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Highly positive on this item
(2) repeated preoccupation with multiple physical complaints and distrust of medical explanations
(3) frequently requests repeated tests or second opinions
(4) symptoms are often chronic and accompanied by loss of appetite, insomnia, fatigue, and low mood

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High anxiety sensitivity, catastrophic thinking, perfectionism, or a strong need for control
(2) often manifests as unhappiness, self-centeredness, high demands, complaining, and attempts to elicit sympathy
(3) may also present as passivity, withdrawal, and reduced social interaction
(4) frequently accompanied by depressive-like features (psychomotor retardation, physical weakness, low self-confidence)

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common features include overutilization of medical resources, conflicts with healthcare providers, and impaired occupational and social functioning
(2) the patient is more prone to fatigue and feels more vulnerable than others under high work stress
(3) family and occupational conflicts and a history of repeated medical visits may be present
(4) the patient’s physical complaints must be taken seriously to avoid misdiagnosis as a purely psychosomatic disorder

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Immediately conduct a comprehensive medical evaluation (laboratory tests, imaging, and specialist consultations) to rule out organic causes
(2) review past test results to avoid redundant and ineffective testing
(3) and assess scores for comorbid depression (D) and hysteria (Hy) to determine whether symptoms are exaggerated or somatized
(4) pay attention to discrepancies between the patient’s self-reports and third-party evidence or physical findings

♦ Recommendations
(1)Evidence-based psychotherapy (CBT—Health Anxiety, Exposure and Response Prevention) is the first-line treatment, combined with chronic symptom management and functional recovery
(2) for patients with comorbid severe depression, consider antidepressant medication and establish structured follow-up with primary care to limit unnecessary testing
(3)Prioritize medical/psychiatric collaboration and intensive follow-up for patients with significant functional impairment or risk of self-harm or harm to others
(4) if Hy scores are high, be alert to symptom exaggeration and incorporate reality testing and behavioral activation into the treatment plan

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Extremely high Hs score
(2) the patient repeatedly focuses on multiple physical discomforts and frequently seeks medical care, accompanied by loss of appetite, insomnia, and fatigue
(3) necessary medical examinations have been completed to rule out organic lesions
(4) it is recommended to initiate the CBT-health anxiety module and establish a structured follow-up and examination protocol with primary care


▲D(2) Depression:T72   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The D Scale assesses depressive mood, loss of interest, decreased energy, self-evaluation and negative cognitions, changes in sleep and appetite, and their impact on social and occupational functioning
(2)Interpretation should be conducted in conjunction with validity checks (L/F/K/consistency items), structured clinical interviews, suicide risk screening, history of somatic causes and medication/substance use, and third-party functional information to distinguish between major depressive disorder, situational depression, mood changes caused by somatic illnesses, and baseline personality traits

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research on depression emphasizes that depression is a multidimensional construct
(2) the D scale reflects low mood, reduced energy, and negative cognitive bias. Longitudinal studies show that high D scores are associated with functional impairment, comorbidity with chronic diseases, and suicide risk, and have moderate predictive power for future functioning and treatment response
(3)neurobiological research suggests abnormalities in depression-related neural circuits, HPA axis dysregulation, and alterations in inflammatory markers
(4) cognitive biases and executive function deficits often influence treatment selection and prognosis
(5) clinical practice recommends interpreting D scores in conjunction with other scales (e.g., 7, Hs, Ma), longitudinal medical history, functional assessments, and physiological examinations to improve diagnostic accuracy
(6)Interventions primarily consist of evidence-based pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy (CBT, behavioral activation, and interpersonal therapy)
(7) when necessary, multidisciplinary management and long-term follow-up are employed to reduce relapse and improve functioning.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)The entry indicates persistent or recurrent low mood, diminished interest, reduced energy, and sleep/appetite issues
(2) patients often feel worthless and tend to withdraw from social activities
(3) symptoms tend to worsen under stressful circumstances

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Self-criticism, perfectionism, or an internalizing emotional style
(2) may manifest as indecisiveness, complaining, or seeking sympathy
(3) poor tolerance for uncertainty

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Reduced work efficiency, strained interpersonal relationships, and sleep and attention problems are common
(2) patients often seek help but may have limited cooperation
(3) everyday trivialities can easily cause distress, and even a small amount of work can lead to significant physical discomfort
(4) if Scale 7 is also high, particular attention should be paid to compulsive-like symptoms or features of an acute episode

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Conduct a structured interview, functional assessment, and medical screening concurrently
(2) evaluate symptom duration, triggers, and past treatment history
(3) verify the presence of any somatic causes or bipolar tendencies
(4) avoid initiating excessive medical testing based solely on self-reports

♦ Recommendations
(1)Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) or interpersonal therapy is the preferred psychological intervention
(2) for moderate depression, consider antidepressants or psychotherapy alone or in combination
(3) concurrently implement sleep and lifestyle interventions, social support, and vocational rehabilitation
(4) conduct regular reassessments to monitor treatment response

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)D score is elevated
(2) patients report persistent low mood and reduced energy affecting work and sleep, and are often troubled by everyday trivial matters
(3) it is recommended to complete a structured depression assessment, evaluate for comorbid obsessive-compulsive-like symptoms, and initiate CBT or IPT
(4) assess the appropriateness of pharmacotherapy if necessary.


▲Hy(3) Hysteria:T96   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Hy scale assesses an individual’s tendency to externalize emotional distress through somatic symptoms or dramatic emotional expressions, attention to and exaggeration of physical discomfort, dependent patterns of seeking support, and the resulting functional impairment
(2) interpretation should be accompanied by validity testing (L/F/K and consistency items), a detailed physical history and physical examination, and necessary laboratory/imaging studies, as well as the collection of trauma and personality histories and third-party information (from family members and primary care records) to distinguish between organic diseases, somatization disorder, conversion disorder, histrionic personality traits, or culturally specific expressions
(3) the Hy scale includes numerous items related to somatic complaints (with overlap with the Hs scale), so a high Hy score alone is insufficient to diagnose conversion or dissociative symptoms

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research situates Hy within the framework of mind-body interaction and personality defense mechanisms, emphasizing that high Hy scores are often associated with dependent or dramatic personality traits, as well as early childhood overindulgence or long-term experiences of socialization marked by feelings of victimization
(2)Psychobiological research suggests that some individuals with high Hy scores exhibit disrupted sleep rhythms, abnormalities in the stress response system (e.g., the HPA axis), and increased healthcare utilization
(3) furthermore, the interaction patterns between Hy and scales such as Hs, D, and K significantly influence clinical phenotypes and treatment responses
(4)Intervention studies support the use of CBT-based modules for managing somatic symptoms, family education, and multidisciplinary management to reduce healthcare utilization and improve functioning
(5) however, cross-cultural longitudinal and randomized evidence remains limited. Clinical interpretation should integrate data from multiple sources, physical examinations, and longitudinal follow-up to develop individualized treatment pathways.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Highly positive scores on this scale indicate frequent reports of diverse somatic complaints (headaches, stomachaches, back pain, numbness, digestive or neurotic-like symptoms) accompanied by emotional expressiveness, exaggerated emotional displays, and a search for sympathy
(2) female patients often experience symptom exacerbation during menstruation and may present with dramatic manifestations such as psychogenic insomnia, paralysis, or sensory loss

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Exhibits dependence, naivety, extroversion, immaturity, and self-absorption
(2) appears friendly, talkative, and enthusiastic on the surface, but internally lacks self-awareness and tends to be self-centered, complaining, and seeking sympathy
(3) possesses sexual charm and is easily attracted to physicians of the opposite sex
(4) if scores are high for both Hy and Pa (4), performative behavior and complaints about authority are more pronounced
(5) if scores are low for Ma (6) and show periodic declines, outbursts of anger or suicidal threats may occur

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common manifestations include overutilization of medical resources, repeated visits to healthcare providers, and conflicts with medical staff or family members
(2) symptoms are typically chronic and more common in general hospitals
(3) symptoms worsen under stressful situations and may be accompanied by conversion symptoms or marked emotional outbursts
(4) persistently high scores are often associated with family upbringing patterns or a history of prolonged emotional neglect, particularly in an environment of overindulgence

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Organic and neurological causes must first be ruled out
(2) conduct a comprehensive medical examination and consult specialists to avoid misdiagnosis
(3) pay attention to combinations of Hy with Hs, D, and K/L (high K/L scores are common in individuals with strong feelings of repression)
(4)Be vigilant for exaggerated responses, secondary gains (such as seeking attention or avoiding responsibility), and the relationship between symptom timelines and specific situations
(5) if only Hy scores are elevated, retesting after one month is recommended to determine whether the high score reflects temporary feelings of grievance or an emotional reaction
(6) when Hy > 67, this indicates current feelings of grievance, narrow-minded thinking, immature behavior, and a need for reassurance
(7) interpretation should be based on a comprehensive assessment of the individual’s living environment

♦ Recommendations
(1)Establishing a therapeutic alliance should be the primary goal
(2)Employ psychoeducation, CBT targeting somatization and coping skills training, functional rehabilitation, and gradual exposure to reduce symptom avoidance
(3) family therapy and physician-psychologist collaboration (coordinated follow-up, limiting unnecessary tests) help reduce overutilization of medical services
(4) for patients with severe functional impairment due to conversion disorder, consider short-term inpatient rehabilitation and collaboration with neurology/rehabilitation departments
(5) if depression or anxiety is comorbid and affects functioning, adjunctive medication may be used

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Hy: Extremely high
(2) patients primarily present with multiple chronic physical complaints and dramatic emotional expressions, seek repeated medical care, and experience impaired functioning
(3) necessary medical examinations have been completed to rule out organic lesions
(4) it is recommended to establish a unified primary care follow-up plan and initiate CBT for somatization and functional recovery, along with family education.


▲Pd(4) Psychopathy:T105   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Pd Scale assesses impulsivity, antisocial and manipulative tendencies, lack of responsibility, emotional indifference toward others, and the impact of these traits on social, occupational, and legal functioning
(2)Interpretation should be accompanied by validity checks (L/F/K/consistency items), a detailed behavioral history (adolescent behavioral problems, criminal or disciplinary records), third-party information (judicial records, statements from employers or family members), and assessments of substance use and comorbidity (addiction, mood disorders, personality disorders).

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research has shifted the Pd construct from a categorical diagnosis to a dimensional personality spectrum
(2) it is recommended to report both traditional Pd scores and the MMPI-RF/RC reconstructed indices simultaneously to enhance construct validity and cross-study comparability
(3)Longitudinal cohort studies show that high Pd scores are associated with adolescent behavioral violations, substance use, impulsivity, and recidivism risk
(4) however, their predictive power is influenced by sample type, comorbidity, and environmental factors. Therefore, they should be interpreted in conjunction with behavioral history, judicial/school/work records, and third-party data to complete risk stratification
(5)Neurocognitive and biological evidence suggests that extremely high Pd scores are often accompanied by executive function deficits (inhibitory control, working memory), increased reward sensitivity, and difficulties with emotional regulation. During assessment, it is advisable to incorporate executive function tests such as the WCST and Stroop test, as well as emotional regulation tasks, to quantify impulsivity and decision-making deficits
(6)In terms of psychometrics, one must be vigilant regarding the impact of interaction effects between scales (e.g., combinations of Pd with Ma, D, Hs, and Hy) and response styles (exaggeration, masking, and social desirability) on interpretation
(7) priority should be given to using multi-source information and localized norms to reduce cross-cultural bias
(8)Evidence from intervention practice supports long-term management strategies centered on structured behavioral interventions, motivational interviewing, and cognitive-behavioral techniques, supplemented by vocational rehabilitation, skills training, and standardized responsibility allocation to improve social functioning and reduce the risk of recidivism. Pharmacological treatment is primarily used for comorbid conditions or symptoms and should be part of a comprehensive treatment plan
(9)Research limitations include the fact that existing evidence is largely based on clinical or forensic samples, and there is a lack of cross-cultural longitudinal and randomized intervention studies. Future research should integrate studies on neurocognitive factors, biomarkers (such as the HPA axis and inflammatory markers), environmental variables, and intervention mechanisms to elucidate pathological mechanisms and optimize individualized intervention pathways.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Highly positive scores on the scale, reflecting a history of chronic avoidance of responsibility, lying, manipulation, infringement of others’ rights, or criminal behavior
(2) often accompanied by substance abuse and multiple disciplinary or judicial records

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Emotional detachment and lack of empathy
(2) self-centeredness
(3) high impulsivity
(4) low sense of responsibility
(5) shallow emotions beneath a charismatic exterior, potentially manifesting as narcissism and manipulation
(6) may occasionally be compliant or show interest in others, but this is often for exploitative purposes and is short-lived and impulsive
(7) some highly intelligent individuals are cynical, prone to infringing on others’ rights, and prone to getting into trouble

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common patterns include repeated legal violations, occupational instability, broken interpersonal relationships, and poor cooperation with treatment
(2) individuals with high scores often present as outgoing, sociable, and charismatic, yet they are also insincere, self-important, hedonistic, and attention-seeking
(3)They exhibit poor judgment, are deliberately provocative, aggressive, and prone to causing trouble
(4) marital and family relationships are often strained, and their intractable personality issues are difficult to address
(5) under stress, they may exhibit retaliatory or aggressive behavior, and often have a history of rule-breaking dating back to adolescence (before age 15)

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Judicial records, third-party evidence, and substance use testing must be considered in tandem
(2) conduct a structured risk assessment (violence, self-harm, recidivism) and evaluate defensive or exaggerated responses
(3) be careful to distinguish between situational law-breaking and personality stability
(4) prioritize the development of safety and legal referral plans for those with high scores

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize risk management and safety (judicial/community supervision, restrictive measures)
(2) behavior-oriented interventions (CBT targeting impulse and aggression management, emotion regulation, skills training, reinforced contracts, and behavioral correction)
(3) concurrent addiction treatment and vocational rehabilitation
(4) medication for impulse control or comorbid psychotic/mood symptoms
(5) long-term follow-up and coordination between the judicial and rehabilitation systems are critical

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Pd: Extremely high
(2) the patient has a long history of deception, impulsivity, and multiple criminal records, accompanied by severe substance abuse and manipulative interpersonal behavior
(3) it is recommended to concurrently verify criminal records, initiate a risk management plan, and arrange for the integration of behavioral correction and addiction treatment.


▲Mf(5) Feminine Masculinity:T62   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Mf scale assesses the degree to which an individual deviates from cultural gender norms in terms of gender roles, interests, and self-expression
(2) feminized masculinity refers to a tendency among female test-takers to exhibit behaviors, interests, temperament, or self-expression that differ from traditional female roles and lean toward traditional masculine traits.Interpretation should be conducted in conjunction with validity checks (L/F/K/consistency items), a detailed developmental history, an assessment of family and cultural background, a history of career and interests, and third-party information to distinguish between gender role preferences, the influence of vocational training, personality style, or response style

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research suggests that the Mf scale is useful for indicating gender role orientation and vocational interests, but sexual orientation or gender identity cannot be determined based on this scale alone. Methodological recommendations suggest cross-referencing the Mf scale with other scales such as the Pd, Si, Ma, and D scales, and combining this with clinical interviews and cultural context to improve interpretive accuracy. Clinically, the Mf scale is best suited as a reference indicator for assessing an individual’s gender role orientation, personality style, and vocational fit.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasionally prefers independent or goal-oriented activities, but this does not affect social functioning or self-identity
(2) is able to switch between different roles and adapt to career and family demands

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Well-balanced and highly adaptable, demonstrating both decisiveness and empathy, with moderate emotional expression. In interpersonal interactions, she is capable of both taking on task-oriented responsibilities and providing emotional support

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These are primarily manifestations of personality or interest diversity
(2) the individual adapts well in most social and occupational contexts
(3) when necessary, they can assume both leadership and caregiving roles

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document the history of interests and role development and interpret it in conjunction with the individual’s occupational background
(2) conduct routine psychological screening concurrently to rule out co-occurring mood or adjustment issues

♦ Recommendations
(1)If there is no functional impairment, routine follow-up and psychoeducation are sufficient
(2) if needed, support for career development or interpersonal relationships may be provided

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Mf Norms
(2) the female participant switches seamlessly between professional and family roles, demonstrating a balanced combination of effectiveness and empathy. Regular follow-up is recommended, with career or relationship support provided as needed.


▲Pa(6) Paranoia:T63   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Pa Scale assesses feelings of victimization, suspicious attributions, a tendency toward negative interpretations of others’ motives, hostility, and interpersonal distrust, as well as their impact on judgment, communication, and social functioning
(2)Interpretation should be informed by concurrent validity tests (L/F/K/consistency items), structured psychotic and personality assessments, cognitive and executive function tests, screening for substance use and somatic causes, third-party data (family members, employers, judicial records), and longitudinal follow-up to distinguish between paranoid personality disorder, paranoid psychosis, post-traumatic hypervigilance, and situational suspicion.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research situates Pa-related constructs within the paranoia continuum and cognitive-social interaction models, emphasizing that paranoid manifestations may stem from personality traits or reflect psychotic processes. It is recommended to present both raw Pa scores and related RC/reconstructed indices in reports to enhance conceptual precision
(2)Longitudinal studies indicate that high Pa scores are associated with early trauma, social isolation, attribution biases, and higher rates of medical and legal service utilization
(3) however, its predictive validity is moderated by comorbidity, substance use, and environmental stressors. Therefore, risk stratification should be conducted by integrating longitudinal medical history, third-party data, and functional assessments
(4)Neurocognitive and biological evidence suggests that some individuals with high Pa exhibit deficits in attention and executive function, a bias in threat processing, and abnormalities in stress response systems (such as the HPA axis)
(5) therefore, assessments should incorporate cognitive tests and emotional processing tasks to quantify the cognitive mechanisms associated with paranoia
(6)In terms of measurement, caution is needed regarding the moderating effects of response styles (exaggeration, concealment, social desirability) and interactions between scales (e.g., combinations of Pa with Pd, Ma, D, Hy, and Sc) on clinical phenotypes
(7) priority should be given to using multi-source information and localized norms to reduce cultural bias
(8)Evidence for interventions supports a focus on cognitive-behavioral strategies (targeting attribution and trust biases), social skills training, and multidisciplinary management
(9) psychotic symptoms require a combination of medication and intensive psychiatric follow-up
(10) research limitations include sample bias and insufficient cross-cultural evidence
(11) future studies should conduct longitudinal, cross-cultural, and mechanism-oriented randomized intervention trials to optimize assessment and individualized treatment pathways.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional suspicion regarding others’ motives or sensitivity to perceived injustice
(2) may briefly exhibit defensiveness in situations involving offense or conflict

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Cautious and vigilant but not extreme
(2) tends to protect personal boundaries and seek support when necessary
(3) may at times appear sensitive or argumentative

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Mostly situational suspicion or a reasonable response to specific interpersonal conflicts
(2) overall functioning is maintained, and the patient demonstrates some ability to adjust in response to feedback
(3) moderate psychological resilience

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and the chronology of symptoms
(2) conduct a brief psychotic screening and substance/sleep assessment concurrently
(3) if symptom frequency or intensity increases, further assess cognitive function and risk of psychosis

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, stress management, and training in communication and conflict resolution
(2) short-term supportive psychotherapy or problem-solving therapy
(3) provide reality testing exercises and follow-up as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Pa norm
(2) the patient exhibits transient suspicion and vigilance following a recent interpersonal conflict, with overall functioning maintained
(3) communication training and stress management are recommended, with reassessment as needed.


▲Pt(7) Neurasthenia:T99   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Pt scale assesses chronic anxiety and tension, emotional instability, fatigue, attention and sleep disturbances, somatization symptoms, and tolerance to daily stress
(2)Interpretation should be conducted in parallel with validity tests (L/F/K/consistency items), a Structured Interview for Anxiety and Mood Disorders, sleep assessment, physical medical examination, history of medication/substance use, and third-party functional data to distinguish between generalized anxiety disorder, chronic stress reaction, somatization disorder, chronic fatigue syndrome, and comorbid depression

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Modern research suggests that Pt is associated with long-term stress exposure, neuroendocrine stress responses, sleep deprivation, and inflammatory markers
(2) Pt is sensitive to identifying vulnerability to chronic stress and functional impairment, but its specificity is influenced by cultural expressions, occupational stress, and response styles
(3)Methodological recommendations suggest cross-referencing the Pt with scales such as the D, Hs, and Hy, and combining this with longitudinal follow-up and biological or sleep indicators to improve the accuracy of diagnosis and intervention
(4) clinically, the Pt is best suited as a tool for screening chronic stress vulnerability, guiding stress management, and stratifying psychomedical interventions.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Highly positive on the scale, with persistent anxiety, extreme fatigue, severe sleep disturbances, difficulties with attention and memory, somatization symptoms (headaches, chest tightness, muscle tension, gastrointestinal discomfort), and emotional instability
(2) frequently reports avoidance of work and interpersonal activities

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Tendency toward perfectionism, low tolerance for uncertainty, poor emotional regulation, and a tendency toward self-blame and guilt
(2) often an excessive focus on order and detail, cautious but lacking in creativity
(3) under stress, may exhibit rigidity and high tension

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Prone to losing enthusiasm, leading to emotional burnout
(2) more susceptible to feeling stressed at work and exhibiting marked irritability, anxiety, and complaints
(3) difficulty persisting with tasks, lack of patience, and indecisiveness—particularly evident in service-oriented roles such as nursing
(4) high risk of resignation or functional impairment
(5) often accompanied by depression or obsessive thoughts, increasing the risk of diminished self-care ability

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Immediately conduct a physical examination and necessary laboratory tests to rule out organic causes of fatigue or endocrine/metabolic disorders
(2) assess sleep quality, medication/substance use, and a timeline of life events
(3) review the D, Hs, and Hy scales and sleep questionnaires to identify patterns of comorbidity
(4) assess the risk of self-harm or suicide and determine whether short-term hospitalization or intensive support is needed

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize restoring safety and sleep
(2) employ a comprehensive intervention: CBT—coping skills and insomnia modules, behavioral activation, progressive physical activity and fatigue management, relaxation training, and vocational rehabilitation
(3) short-term medication may be used for severe insomnia or anxiety symptoms, but anxiolytics alone have limited effectiveness in addressing adaptive issues caused by long-term stress
(4) recommend approaches aimed at enhancing psychological resilience to improve long-term recovery
(5) provide concurrent family support and workplace accommodations

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Pt: Extremely high
(2) the patient reports chronic extreme fatigue, sleep disturbances, and decreased attention, with a significant decline in work capacity accompanied by multiple physical complaints and recurrent grievances
(3) basic medical examinations have been completed, and interventions for sleep and mood stabilization have been initiated
(4) it is recommended to concurrently implement CBT—insomnia/coping modules and a vocational rehabilitation plan.


▲Sc(8) Schizophrenia:T108   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Sc scale assesses the organization of thought and perception, reality testing ability, social withdrawal and emotional flatness, bizarre beliefs and psychotic-like experiences, as well as their impact on cognitive, communication, and socioprofessional functioning
(2)Interpretation should be informed by concurrent validity tests (L/F/K/consistency items), structured psychosis interviews, cognitive and executive function tests, sleep and substance use history, neurological and endocrinological screening, and third-party data to distinguish between primary psychosis spectrum disorders, transient substance- or somatically induced psychosis, severe mood disorders with psychotic features, and schizotypal personality traits

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research situates Sc-related constructs within the psychosis spectrum and personality dimensional frameworks, emphasizing that high Sc scores may reflect both psychotic processes and spectrum characteristics characterized primarily by delusions, social avoidance, and impaired reality testing. It is recommended to present Sc raw scores, F-scores, and related RC/reconstructed indices simultaneously in reports to enhance conceptual precision
(2)Longitudinal studies show that high Sc scores are associated with social isolation, functional decline, increased use of medical and social services, and comorbid depression or anxiety
(3) however, their predictive validity is moderated by sample type, comorbidities (e.g., Pt, D), and environmental stressors. Therefore, risk stratification should be conducted in conjunction with longitudinal medical history, third-party data, and cognitive assessments
(4)Neurocognitive and biological evidence suggests that some individuals with high Sc scores exhibit deficits in attention and executive function, reality testing difficulties, and difficulties with emotional regulation
(5) therefore, assessments should incorporate cognitive tests, memory and executive function evaluations, and, where necessary, neuroimaging or physiological measures to quantify pathological mechanisms
(6)In terms of measurement, one must be vigilant regarding the modifying effects on clinical phenotypes of concurrent elevations in F and Sc, response styles (exaggeration, concealment), and interactions between scales (e.g., combinations of Sc with Pa, Pt, and D). Priority should be given to using multi-source information and localized norms to reduce cultural bias
(7)Intervention studies support the concurrent use of pharmacotherapy (targeted at specific psychotic symptoms) and comprehensive programs centered on reality testing, social skills training, supportive psychotherapy, and functional rehabilitation. Treatment should include reminder and follow-up systems to compensate for difficulties with memory and adherence
(8) research limitations include sample bias and insufficient cross-cultural longitudinal evidence. Future studies should focus on mechanism-oriented and randomized intervention trials to optimize assessment and individualized treatment pathways.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Highly positive findings reflecting persistent or recurrent hallucinatory-like experiences, delusional-like beliefs, disorganized thought processes, emotional flatness, and social withdrawal
(2) subjects often exhibit a strong tendency toward idealization, with thoughts that are disconnected from reality and internally contradictory
(3) they frequently immerse themselves in a fantasy world and engage in daydreams lacking a basis in reality
(4) such disorganized thinking can lead to significant distress and dissatisfaction and suggests the possibility of a severe mental disorder

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Social withdrawal, blunted affect, rigid or highly bizarre thinking, and resistance to counterevidence
(2) often accompanied by paranoid or schizoid personality traits

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common history includes emergency room visits or hospitalizations, loss of employment or academic performance, family dysfunction, or involvement with the legal system
(2) patients often struggle to remember commitments made to others or advice from therapists, and are prone to forgetting assessments and guidance during psychotherapy, which affects treatment outcomes
(3) it is recommended to establish a reminder system and structured support for such patients
(4) if Sc is high and F is also high (>65), this indicates the pervasiveness and severity of symptoms
(5)If only the Sc score is high while the F score remains normal, this often indicates schizotypal personality traits: few friends, a strong sense of loneliness, a tendency to be misunderstood, and avoidance of emotional interactions and new environments
(6) when scores are extremely high (>95), erratic or feigned negative behavior may occur during the assessment, and one must be vigilant for inconsistencies in responses or behavior

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Immediately conduct a structured psychotic assessment, toxicology screening, comprehensive medical and neurological examinations, cognitive testing, and an assessment of the risk of self-harm or violence
(2) distinguish between primary psychosis, substance-induced psychosis, or somatic causes
(3) pay attention to exaggerated, confused, or defensive response patterns
(4) prioritize cognitive and functional support for individuals exhibiting delusional beliefs and impairments in memory or executive function

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize safety and symptom stabilization
(2) initiate psychiatric consultation, short-term antipsychotic medication, or mood stabilizers to control acute symptoms
(3) concurrently implement cognitive rehabilitation, CBT-P (reality testing training), family education, and long-term psychiatric follow-up
(4) design reminder and external support systems for patients with impaired memory and executive function to improve treatment adherence
(5) address comorbid conditions (depression, addiction, sleep disorders) to reduce the risk of relapse

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Sc: Extremely high
(2) the patient is immersed in delusions and reports persistent hallucination-like experiences and persecutory beliefs
(3) impaired ability to remember commitments and follow treatment instructions
(4) toxicology and medical screenings have been completed
(5) it is recommended to initiate an emergency psychiatric evaluation, medication treatment, cognitive rehabilitation, and a reminder system, and to arrange intensive follow-up.


▲Ma(9) Mild Mania:T45   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Ma Scale assesses mania or irritability, increased activity and energy, reduced sleep requirements, increased talkativeness, impulsive and risky behaviors, and tendencies toward grandiose self-evaluation and goal-directed behavior
(2)Interpretation should be informed by concurrent validity tests (L/F/K/consistency items), the Structured Interview for Affective Disorders, a history of bipolar spectrum disorders, a history of medication and substance use, thyroid and metabolic testing, and third-party data (family and employer records) to distinguish between transient elevated mood, hypomania, manic episodes, or personality-related extroversion

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research situates the Ma construct within the framework of emotional regulation and the bipolar spectrum, emphasizing that high Ma scores may reflect either healthy, high-energy personality traits or indicate pathological mania or affective psychosis. It is recommended to present both the raw Ma score and scores from related scales (e.g., Sc, D, Pd, Pt) alongside the clinical history in reports to enhance interpretive accuracy
(2)Longitudinal studies show that high Ma scores are associated with impulsive behavior, substance use, fluctuations in occupational and interpersonal functioning, and the risk of developing bipolar disorder
(3) however, its predictive power is moderated by comorbidity, sleep disturbances, and environmental stressors, so risk stratification should be conducted in conjunction with longitudinal medical history and third-party data
(4)Neurobiological and cognitive research suggests that high Ma scores are often accompanied by increased reward sensitivity, transient executive dysfunction, and difficulties with emotional regulation
(5) therefore, assessments should incorporate sleep evaluations, cognitive tests, and substance use screening. From a psychometric perspective, one must be mindful of the modifying effects on clinical phenotypes resulting from concurrent elevations in Ma and Sc, response styles (exaggeration, concealment), and interactions between scales
(6) priority should be given to using multi-source information and localized norms to reduce cultural bias
(7)Evidence supports the role of mood stabilizers (e.g., lithium) in bipolar disorder or affective psychosis
(8) psychosocial interventions (emotional regulation training, impulse control, and functional rehabilitation) and multidisciplinary management are particularly important for improving long-term functioning
(9) research limitations include sample bias and insufficient cross-cultural longitudinal evidence
(10) future studies should focus on mechanism-oriented and randomized intervention trials to optimize individualized treatment pathways.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional increases in energy, short-term reductions in sleep, or increased talkativeness
(2) may briefly exhibit high energy in stressful or exciting situations
(3) subjects are typically cheerful, optimistic, have wide-ranging interests, and are sociable
(4) they view situations from a positive perspective and can lift others’ spirits
(5) they maintain a wide social network but with limited depth

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Outgoing, positive, well-adjusted, and able to regain balance when needed
(2) marked sense of humor and social charm

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These are mostly personality-related extroversion or short-term emotional fluctuations
(2) overall work and social functioning is maintained
(3) during psychotherapy, they may forget some recommendations, but the use of reminders and written records can improve treatment efficacy
(4) they are able to channel high energy into goal-oriented activities and demonstrate good self-regulatory abilities

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal trends
(2) conduct simple emotional screening and sleep assessments in parallel
(3) if symptom frequency or intensity increases, further evaluate risk for bipolar spectrum disorders

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, sleep and lifestyle adjustments, short-term stress management, or skills training
(2) emotional regulation training and follow-up monitoring can be provided as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Ma Norms
(2) the patient appears outgoing and energetic but is functionally stable. It is recommended to provide advice on sleep and stress management and to conduct a re-evaluation if necessary.


▲Si (0) Social Introversion:T63   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Si scale assesses an individual’s social interest, extraversion, social avoidance, and comfort with interpersonal contact
(2) interpretation should incorporate concurrent validity tests (L/F/K/consistency items), structured personality interviews, history of social functioning and vocational adaptation, cross-interpretation of anxiety and depression scales, and third-party data (family members, colleagues) to distinguish between socially avoidant personality disorder, introverted temperament, social anxiety, and situational withdrawal

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research situates Si within the framework of the introversion-extraversion dimension of personality and the socialization process, emphasizing that high Si scores are often associated with strict, traditional upbringing, long-term caregiving roles, or the internalization of rules, whereas low Si scores are often associated with a permissive upbringing, being an only child, or a tendency toward innovation
(2)The combination of Si with other scales (such as Sc, D, Hy, and Pd) significantly influences clinical phenotypes and functional outcomes
(3) therefore, it is recommended to present Si raw scores, percentile ranks, and key comorbidity scales simultaneously in reports to enhance interpretive accuracy. Longitudinal studies suggest that high Si is associated with chronic depression, social avoidance, and cognitive sluggishness, while low Si is associated with impulsivity, opportunistic behavior, and higher levels of social activity
(4)Neurocognitive research indicates that individuals with high Si may exhibit psychomotor retardation and slower information processing speeds
(5) therefore, reaction time and executive function tests should be incorporated into assessments to quantify differences in cognitive rhythm
(6)In terms of measurement, caution is needed regarding the influence of response styles (masking or exaggeration) and cultural and upbringing differences on Si distribution
(7) priority should be given to using multi-source information and localized norms. Intervention practices support progressive social exposure, cognitive flexibility training, and behavioral activation for individuals with high Si to improve functioning, while for those with low Si exhibiting impulsive or noncompliant behaviors, the focus should be on impulse control, vocational guidance, and structured behavioral contracts
(8)Research limitations include a lack of cross-cultural norms and limited longitudinal evidence of intervention effectiveness
(9) future studies should conduct cross-cultural longitudinal and mechanism-oriented research to optimize individualized assessment and intervention pathways.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional shyness or a preference for solitude, but able to communicate and collaborate effectively in familiar environments or necessary situations
(2) test subjects typically demonstrate balance and adaptability, capable of working independently as well as contributing within a team
(3) they are conscientious, reliable, and trustworthy, working at a moderate pace with a high success rate

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Balanced, pragmatic, and highly adaptable
(2) capable of working independently as well as contributing effectively within a team
(3) exhibits selective preferences regarding social interactions

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most are introverted by nature or exhibit situational avoidance, but generally maintain work and interpersonal functioning
(2) they can undertake social tasks when necessary and have some ability to adjust based on feedback
(3) these individuals are typically cautious and conservative, rarely taking the initiative, but often achieve personal success when participating in tasks

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and social patterns
(2) conduct a brief social functioning screening concurrently
(3) if there is persistent functional decline or signs of social anxiety, further evaluation and consideration of psychological intervention are warranted
(4) if the patient’s score is high and ranks in the top three or four with a score of ≥60, be vigilant that stress or anxiety may be masking their positive traits

♦ Recommendations
(1)Health education, short-term social skills training, stress management, and emotional support
(2) provide vocational or interpersonal support resources as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Si norm
(2) the patient occasionally withdraws in unfamiliar or high-pressure situations but demonstrates overall good social functioning. It is recommended to provide emotional and stress management advice and to reassess as necessary.

D1	D2	D3	D4	D5	D_O	D_S
75	51	70	75	53

High
Low

▲Subjective Depression (D1):T75   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Subjective Depression Subscale D1 assesses an individual’s subjectively perceived depressive mood and the intensity of emotional experiences, covering sadness, helplessness, hopelessness, loss of interest or pleasure, reduced motivation, and their impact on sleep, appetite, attention, decision-making, and social functioning.D1 reflects the emotional burden at the level of subjective experience, rather than being judged solely by overt behavior or physical symptoms
(2) interpretation must be combined with clinical interviews, longitudinal medical history, third-party reports, and physical medical examinations to enhance diagnostic validity.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research examines D1 within the framework of “emotional experience—functional impairment—chronicity/suicide risk.” Key findings include: D1 is positively correlated with clinical depression severity, functional decline, and suicidal ideation
(2) when used alone, the scale has limited sensitivity and specificity and must be interpreted in conjunction with other scales (D‑o, D2‑D5, Hy, Ma, Si) or structured interviews
(3)Culture, gender, age, chronic physical illness, and medication use influence self-reporting tendencies
(4) high scores over time indicate a risk of chronicity or relapse. Psychometric recommendations include concurrent objective functional assessments, sleep and endocrine screening, and evaluations of medication history and substance use to distinguish situational low mood from pathological depression.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequent selection of items such as “I feel hopeless,” “I have lost interest in things,” “I often think about death or suicide,” and “I lack motivation” on the scale
(2) responses indicate persistent and pervasive low mood.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Low self-esteem, intense self-blame, feelings of helplessness, perfectionism or excessive sense of responsibility, and dependent or avoidant-dependent interpersonal styles
(2) internalized emotional experiences, with a tendency to feel shame or hopelessness.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common presentations include moderate-to-severe depressive episodes, chronic depression, or depression comorbid with physical illness
(2) patients often exhibit social withdrawal, a significant decline in work or academic performance, sleep and appetite disturbances, and impaired attention and executive function. Rates of seeking medical help are high, and a history of self-harm or a family history of suicide is common.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Immediately assess intentions, plans, and accessible means for self-harm or suicide
(2) concurrently conduct a comprehensive physical examination (including thyroid function, anemia, metabolic status, and inflammatory markers) and review medication and substance use history
(3) inquire about the timeline of changes in sleep, appetite, energy levels, and cognition
(4) and assess social support and life events.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize safety management and psychiatric evaluation
(2) initiate tiered interventions: crisis intervention/hospitalization assessment (if high risk), evidence-based psychotherapy (CBT, behavioral activation, interpersonal therapy), antidepressant medication or combination therapy as needed
(3) incorporate sleep, nutrition, exercise, and functional rehabilitation plans
(4) mobilize family/social support and arrange intensive follow-up.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D1 scored extremely high, reported persistent despair and loss of interest, exhibited recurrent thoughts of death, and showed significant functional decline
(2) an immediate psychiatric evaluation, self-harm risk management, and the initiation of evidence-based interventions are recommended.


▲Psychomotor retardation (D2):T51   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Psychomotor Slowness Subscale (D2) assesses slowed thought processing and motor execution, including slowed speech, motor sluggishness, prolonged reaction times, and decision-making delays. The D2 captures two types of manifestations: a genuine decline in processing speed and decision-making delays resulting from a heavy information load.The former is commonly seen in depression, neurological disorders, or medication side effects
(2) the latter is common in individuals with high information integration (e.g., those with high Si scores), who exhibit “slowness but deep thought” when weighing multiple factors. Interpretation must be combined with longitudinal history, third-party reports, screening for medication and somatic causes, and objective cognitive/motor tests to improve accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places D2 within the “cognitive processing speed—motor execution—emotional drive” framework. Psychomotor retardation is associated with depression severity, suicide risk, treatment response (particularly the speed of response to antidepressants), and the time to functional recovery.Research emphasizes distinguishing between reversible somatic or medication-related causes and reduced affective drive, and recommends concurrent neurology evaluations, cognitive testing, and functional assessments. For participants with high Si scores, caution is warranted to avoid misinterpreting “information overload-related slowness” as pathological slowness. If a participant has suicidal thoughts—even if only as an idea—heightened vigilance is warranted, and safety assessment should be prioritized, especially when D2 scores are high.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional sluggishness or short-term delays occur, but these can be resolved through rest or support
(2) scale scores fall within the mid-range.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Emotional regulation and resilience are moderate
(2) decision-making ability and executive function are largely preserved.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These are mostly situational reactions or brief periods of fatigue, with minimal and reversible functional impact.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if sluggishness persists or worsens, initiate further evaluation.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, sleep and lifestyle recommendations, short-term stress management, or problem-solving training.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D2 is normal
(2) occasionally exhibits slowed reactions during periods of high stress but recovers
(3) recommended to maintain healthy lifestyle habits and undergo follow-up.


▲Physical Discomfort (D3):T70   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Physical Discomfort Subscale D3 assesses the intensity and breadth of an individual’s subjectively experienced physical discomfort and somatic symptoms, primarily including pain, fatigue, indigestion, headache, dizziness, and general malaise.D3 focuses on reflecting the extent to which depression or emotional distress is expressed through physical symptoms (somaticization), but it may also capture genuine physical conditions or medication side effects unrelated to depression. When interpreting the results, it is essential to distinguish subjective reports from medical examinations, medical history, medication history, sleep and lifestyle factors, and scales such as the Hypochondriasis Scale (Hs).

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places D3 within the “emotion–somatic interaction—functional impairment—healthcare utilization” framework. Key findings include: D3 is highly correlated with depression, anxiety, chronic pain, sleep disorders, and healthcare-seeking behavior
(2) culture and gender significantly influence somatization
(3)D3 alone has limited sensitivity and specificity
(4) it is recommended to interpret it in conjunction with D1, D-o, Hy, Hs, Ma, Si, and validity indicators, along with concurrent medical screening (thyroid function, inflammatory markers, anemia, metabolism, etc.) and objective functional assessments. Clinically, it is necessary to distinguish among three types of drivers: physiological causes, emotional somatization, and secondary gain or behavioral maintenance factors, and to develop tiered interventions based on this distinction.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequently reports headaches, gastrointestinal discomfort, muscle aches, or persistent fatigue
(2) scores on relevant scale items are elevated but not as widespread as in the “extremely high” category.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Individuals who are sensitive to bodily sensations, prone to converting emotional experiences into physical symptoms, have a strong sense of responsibility, or are perfectionists tend to be overly concerned about their health.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These may represent stress-related somatic reactions, sleep deprivation, or early manifestations of chronic disease
(2) patients are generally willing to seek relief but have varying levels of acceptance of psychological explanations.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Inquire about sleep, medication use, history of chronic illness, and work/family stress
(2) rule out reversible physical causes and assess symptoms of depression and anxiety
(3) evaluate frequency of healthcare utilization and secondary gains
(4) if Si is high, be aware that decision-making procrastination and excessive information processing may amplify symptom preoccupation.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Lifestyle and sleep interventions, symptom management (pain education, relaxation training), short-term CBT or somatization-oriented psychotherapy, stress management, and gradual return to activity
(2) if accompanied by depression or sleep disorders, consider concurrent medication and schedule follow-up appointments.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D3 scored relatively high and reported recurrent headaches and gastrointestinal discomfort in recent months, along with high work stress and poor sleep
(2) it is recommended to rule out physical causes and implement sleep and stress management as well as short-term CBT interventions.


▲Psychological Burden (D4):T75   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Psychological Burden Subscale D4 assesses an individual’s subjective experience of feeling mentally burdened or overwhelmed by responsibilities or worries, encompassing feelings of being overwhelmed, mental exhaustion, persistent worry, an excessive sense of responsibility, pessimistic expectations about the future, and insufficient coping resources.D4 reflects an imbalance between subjective psychological burden and available coping resources, rather than merely low mood or physical symptoms. Interpretation should be combined with scales such as D1 (Subjective Depression), D2 (Psychomotor Retardation), D3 (Physical Discomfort), D5 (Worry), D-o (Generalized Depressive Symptoms), Hy, Ma, and Si, as well as longitudinal history and third-party information, to enhance accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places D4 within the “stress load—coping resources—functional impairment” framework. High D4 scores may be caused by specific external stressors (major life events, long-term caregiving responsibilities, occupational overload) or, in the absence of obvious external triggers, may indicate internal emotional disturbances or biological factors (such as depression-related neurotransmitter or endocrine abnormalities).D4 is associated with depression severity, anxiety, burnout, sleep disturbances, and functional impairment. Psychometric guidelines recommend conducting structured clinical interviews, functional assessments, and physical medical examinations in parallel to distinguish situational stress reactions from pathological depression or chronic stress reactions. Clinically, priority should be given to assessing the risk of self-harm or suicide, coping resources, and social support networks, and developing a tiered intervention plan based on these findings.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequent selection of items such as “feel overwhelmed,” “often feel crushed by worry,” and “find it difficult to complete daily tasks” on the scale
(2) responses exhibit characteristics of persistent and pervasive feelings of heaviness.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Personality traits such as low self-esteem, perfectionism, excessive sense of responsibility, people-pleasing tendencies, or dependent personality traits
(2) long-term caregivers or individuals in high-responsibility roles are at higher risk.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Commonly observed in moderate-to-severe depression, chronic stress exposure, emotional reactions following major life events, or as a complication of physical illness. Patients may exhibit decreased work or academic performance, social withdrawal, sleep and appetite disturbances, and difficulty making decisions. Rates of seeking medical help are high, and a history of functional decline or self-harm is common.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Prioritize assessment of self-harm and suicide risk, documenting specific intentions and plans
(2) conduct a concurrent physical examination to rule out reversible causes
(3) distinguish between understandable distress caused by clear external stressors and pathological distress without an obvious trigger
(4) assess sleep, medication/substance use, and social support.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Immediately initiate tiered interventions, including safety management, psychiatric evaluation, evidence-based psychotherapy (cognitive-behavioral therapy, behavioral activation, interpersonal therapy), and medication when necessary
(2) integrate sleep and lifestyle interventions, mobilization of social support, and functional rehabilitation
(3) in the short term, employ crisis intervention and frequent follow-ups to reduce risk.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D4 scored extremely high and reported being overwhelmed by persistent feelings of responsibility and worry, with significantly impaired daily functioning and passive thoughts of self-harm
(2) a psychiatric evaluation, self-harm risk management, and the initiation of evidence-based interventions are recommended as soon as possible.


▲Worry (D5):T53   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Worry Subscale D5 assesses an individual’s tendency toward persistent anxiety and repetitive thinking regarding actual or potential problems, with core manifestations including repeated predictions of negative events, excessive analysis of mistakes, and persistent concern about future uncertainty.D5 reflects the intensity and frequency of “rumination” and “anticipatory anxiety” in the cognitive-emotional cycle, which not only affect subjective mood but also interfere with attention, decision-making, and daily functioning.For accurate interpretation, it should be used in conjunction with D1 (subjective depression), D4 (psychological distress), D2 (psychomotor retardation), the anxiety subscale, and validity indicators.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places D5 within the “rumination–anticipatory anxiety–emotional maintenance” framework. High D5 scores are often associated with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), cognitive maintenance mechanisms of depression, sleep disturbances, and decision-making difficulties
(2) ruminative thinking amplifies negative emotions and impairs problem-solving abilities.Evidence-based interventions include cognitive restructuring and exposure in cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), metacognitive therapy (MCT), mindfulness-based stress reduction (MBCT), behavioral activation, and problem-solving training
(3) short-term medication (e.g., SSRIs) may be used as an adjunct when significant anxiety or depression is present.Assessment recommendations suggest combining behavioral observation, third-party reports, and longitudinal follow-up to distinguish situational worry from pathological, uncontrollable, and recurrent worry.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Short-term worry occurs when faced with real stressors but can be resolved through action or support
(2) scale scores fall within the middle range.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses some coping resources and resilience, and is able to maintain activity levels in most situations.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Mostly adaptive worry or short-term stress reactions, with minor and reversible impact on functioning.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Focus on triggering events and support systems, and document longitudinal stability
(2) if anxiety persists or worsens, reassessment is needed.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, stress management, time and task reorganization, or short-term supportive psychotherapy
(2) teach simple relaxation and distraction techniques.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D5 scored within the normal range
(2) has recently experienced brief anxiety due to work-related stress but was able to recover independently
(3) psychological education and follow-up are recommended.


▲Depressive Symptoms (D-o):T   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The D‑o (Depression Broad Symptoms) assesses a set of broad symptoms associated with depression, including persistent feelings of sadness, hopelessness, or emptiness
(2) loss of interest or pleasure in activities
(3)changes in appetite or weight
(4) sleep disturbances
(5) lack of energy or drive
(6) feelings of worthlessness or excessive guilt
(7) difficulties with thinking, concentration, or decision-making
(8) and recurrent thoughts of death or suicide. The D-o reflects both emotional experiences and the impact of these emotions on daily functioning (work, study, interpersonal relationships, and activities of daily living).High scores may indicate emotional pathology (such as a major depressive episode or chronic depression), but may also be influenced by physical illness, medications, life events, or personality traits. Interpretation should be based on multiple sources of information: structured clinical interviews, other subscales of the D-series, Hy, Ma, Si, physical medical examinations, and third-party reports.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places D‑o within the framework of “emotional severity—functional impairment—chronicity and suicide risk.” Key conclusions include: D‑o is positively correlated with depression severity, reduced social functioning, frequency of medical help-seeking, and suicide risk
(2) the scale alone has limited sensitivity and specificity, but combining it with subscales or a restructured scale along with clinical interviews can significantly improve discriminative power
(3)culture, gender, age, and chronic physical illness can influence self-reporting tendencies
(4) consistently high scores over time indicate a risk of chronicity or relapse. Psychometric recommendations include concurrent screening for physical medical conditions (thyroid disorders, anemia, metabolic disorders, etc.), sleep assessment, history of medication/substance use, and objective functional testing to distinguish situational low mood from pathological depression.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Denial of low mood or loss of interest on scales and in interviews, possibly accompanied by reduced sleep, impulsivity, or high energy
(2) indifference to negative emotional reactions.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High energy, thrill-seeking, or intense defensiveness
(2) may also manifest as emotional numbness or denial-based defensiveness. Tends to maintain external functioning to mask internal distress.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)If accompanied by elevated mood or impulsivity, be alert for bipolar disorder or hypomanic states
(2) if accompanied by a history of trauma or chronic suppression, assess for emotional numbness and unexpressed depression.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Conduct a concurrent assessment using the Ma scale, other D-series subscales, and a longitudinal history evaluation to rule out bipolar spectrum disorders or denial bias
(2) verify medication use, substance use, and sleep patterns.

♦ Recommendations
(1)If hypomanic-like symptoms are present, a psychiatric evaluation and mood-stabilizing treatment are recommended
(2) if denial or emotional numbness is present, employ emotional awareness training, trauma-informed interventions, and psychoeducation
(3) if the individual is in good health, provide follow-up care and stress management advice.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D-o scored extremely low, denied depression, and exhibited reduced sleep and high energy
(2) it is recommended to conduct a Ma review and psychiatric evaluation concurrently to rule out bipolar spectrum disorders or emotional masking.


▲Anger and Aggression Inhibition (D-s):T   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Anger and Aggression Inhibition Subscale (D-s) assesses an individual’s tendency to inhibit or control anger, hostility, and aggressive impulses, covering dimensions such as anger awareness, emotional regulation, expression, and impulse control. High scores indicate a tendency to chronically suppress anger, internalize dissatisfaction, and express it passively or indirectly (e.g., cold shoulder, sarcasm, passive-aggression)
(2)low scores indicate higher levels of overt anger or impulsivity, suggesting the individual may express dissatisfaction more directly or engage in confrontational behavior. The interpretation of the D-s subscale should be integrated with other D-series subscales, the Hy, Ma, and Si scales, the Impulsivity and Violence Risk Assessment Scale, and third-party information (from family members, colleagues, and historical records) to distinguish between mature self-control and pathological repression or loss of impulse control.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places anger and aggression inhibition within a framework of the interaction between emotional regulation, impulse control, and social functioning, emphasizing that high D‑s scores may reflect mature self-control and social adaptation, or may indicate the cumulative effects of long-term emotional suppression and internal conflict
(2)Longitudinal studies show that chronic anger suppression is associated with depression, somatization, sleep disturbances, and cardiovascular risk
(3) however, its predictive power is moderated by comorbidity scales (e.g., D1, D2, D3, Si, Pa, Sc), substance use, and social support
(4)Neurobiological evidence suggests that anger suppression is often accompanied by functional differences in emotional regulation networks (prefrontal cortex–limbic system) and abnormal responses in stress systems (e.g., the HPA axis)
(5) therefore, assessments should incorporate impulsivity tests, sleep evaluations, and physical examinations to quantify these mechanisms
(6)From a psychometric perspective, caution is warranted regarding the moderating effects of response styles (masking, exaggeration) and interactions between scales on interpretation
(7) therefore, it is recommended to present D-s raw scores, rank order, and key comorbidity scales simultaneously in reports to enhance interpretive accuracy
(8) clinical integration should follow a four-step process:Identify and document anger-triggering situations and modes of expression
(9) assess the impact of suppressed or overt expression on functioning and interpersonal relationships
(10) concurrently conduct safety and self-harm/harm-to-others risk assessments (if violent or self-harming thoughts are present, prioritize safety management)
(11)Combine medical and substance use screening to determine whether further neurological or endocrine evaluation is needed
(12) prioritize interventions aimed at restoring healthy emotional expression and reducing risk, with a focus on emotion recognition and expression training, anger management (cognitive restructuring, behavioral alternatives), impulse control, and family/social skills training
(13) when D-s scores are abnormal and accompanied by significant depression or functional impairment, a psychiatric evaluation should be conducted as soon as possible, and medication and interdisciplinary management should be considered
(14)Follow-up should utilize multi-source information (self-reports, family members, medical and legal records) to regularly monitor anger-related issues, functional recovery, and safety risks, and adjust the intensity of interventions based on changes in comorbidity scales.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Scales and interviews frequently report outbursts of anger, arguments, or impulsive behavior
(2) third-party reports often indicate escalating conflicts or interpersonal breakdowns.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Impulsivity, thrill-seeking, low frustration tolerance, or hostile tendencies
(2) may be accompanied by a history of substance use or impulsive behavioral patterns.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)May be accompanied by impulse control disorders, hypomanic-like symptoms, or personality disorder traits (e.g., antisocial or borderline traits)
(2) cases where occupational and interpersonal relationships are significantly affected, or where there are legal or safety risks, should be prioritized for assessment.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Concurrently administer other subscales from the Ma and D series and the Impulsivity/Violence Risk Assessment
(2) assess risk of self-harm or harm to others, legal history, substance use history, and third-party reports
(3) document triggering situations and patterned behaviors.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize safety assessments and crisis intervention
(2) provide training in emotional stability and impulse control, DBT, or cognitive-behavioral interventions targeting impulsivity/aggression
(3) conduct concurrent psychiatric evaluations and medication treatment as necessary
(4) in high-risk situations, family or legal collaboration and intensive supervision are required.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D-s scored extremely low
(2) frequently erupts directly during conflicts and exhibits verbal or physical aggression, which has already affected work and family relationships
(3) immediate impulse and risk assessment is recommended, along with the initiation of emotional stability and impulse control interventions.

HY1	HY2	HY3	HY4	HY5	HY_O	HY_S
61	46	83	85	70

High
Low

▲Denial of Social Anxiety (Hy1):T61   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Denial of Social Anxiety Subscale (Hy1) is used to assess an individual’s tendency to deny, suppress, or mask social anxiety and discomfort in social situations
(2)High scores often manifest as superficial extroversion, self-disclosure, and social confidence, but may represent defensive denial or self-presentation strategies
(3) low scores indicate social avoidance, tension, or pronounced social anxiety
(4) interpretation must be combined with Si (social introversion), Ma (hypomania), the D-scale, the K-scale, validity indicators, longitudinal history, and third-party data to enhance accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places Hy1 within the “self-presentation—emotional regulation—interpersonal functioning” framework
(2) high scores may be beneficial in the short term for maintaining social functioning and obtaining support, but in the long term may mask underlying anxiety or lead to emotional exhaustion
(3) the combined pattern of Hy1 with Si and Ma is most valuable for clinical differentiation
(4)Culture, gender roles, attachment styles, and occupational environments significantly moderate the baseline levels and manifestations of Hy1
(5) longitudinal studies suggest that extreme denial (very high scores) or extreme avoidance (very low scores) are both associated with depression, anxiety, impulsivity, or impaired interpersonal functioning
(6) psychometric guidelines recommend a multi-source, integrated interpretation and caution against misdiagnosing hypomania or defensive denial when high scores are accompanied by elevated Ma scores or abnormalities on validity scales.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Both moments of confidence and moments of nervousness were observed in the scales and interviews
(2) brief discomfort may occur under stress or in new situations

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate levels of extraversion and self-monitoring ability, with the capacity to balance one’s own needs with those of others in most situations

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Functioning is stable
(2) responds well to short-term social skills training and stress management
(3) may experience short-term imbalances during major life events but typically recovers

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Focus on triggers, support resources, and longitudinal stability
(2) use third-party information to confirm whether this represents a stable trait or a situational reaction

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, stress management, short-term social skills training, or problem-solving therapy
(2) encourage practicing direct expression and boundary-setting within secure relationships

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Hy1’s scores fall within the normal range
(2) experiences occasional anxiety in large social settings but can alleviate it through preparation and practice
(3) short-term social skills training and follow-up are recommended.


▲Emotional Needs (Hy2):T46   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Emotional Needs Subscale (Hy2) is used to assess an individual’s need for emotion, attention, and recognition from others
(2) this subscale reveals the subject’s degree of dependence on reassurance and validation, concerns that revealing their true self may lead to rejection, and a tendency to evaluate others positively while denying negative emotions toward them
(3)High scores indicate a strong need for care and validation, while low scores suggest a low need for external emotional validation or emotional self-sufficiency
(4) interpretation must be combined with other Hy subscales, the D series, the K scale, Si, validity indicators, longitudinal family history, and third-party data to improve accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)The study situates Hy2 within the framework of attachment style—emotional regulation—interpersonal functioning
(2) high Hy2 scores are often associated with insecure attachment, depression, and interpersonal conflict
(3)Culture, family structure (e.g., only-child background), and socioeconomic changes can influence Hy2 norms
(4) Hy2 is generally positively correlated with overall Hy, but exceptions exist
(5) analysis of other Hy subscales is necessary to distinguish hysteric-like expressions from genuine emotional deprivation
(6) longitudinal studies suggest that high scores, if left unmet over the long term, can lead to chronic emotional distress and increased medical/psychological help-seeking
(7)Psychometric recommendations include a multi-source, integrated interpretation, with particular attention to the Ma scale and validity measures to rule out hypomania or defensive presentations
(8) clinically, one should first assess the gap between objective social support and subjective needs and develop a tiered intervention plan based on this assessment.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Both scale scores and interview data indicate a desire to seek support as well as the ability for self-regulation
(2) help-seeking behavior may temporarily increase when facing major life events or relationship crises.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate attachment style and emotional regulation ability
(2) able to balance personal needs with those of others in most situations.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Overall functioning is stable
(2) responds well to short-term interpersonal therapy or stress management
(3) medical or psychological help-seeking behaviors are within manageable limits.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Focus on triggering events, support resources, and longitudinal stability
(2) for relatively high scores, verify family background and cultural factors.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, emotion recognition training, short-term interpersonal therapy, or problem-solving therapy
(2) encourage strengthening of real-life support networks and self-soothing strategies.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject’s Hy2 score falls within the normal range
(2) experiences loneliness and a short-term increase in help-seeking behavior following a recent bereavement
(3) overall functioning is stable
(4) short-term interpersonal therapy and connection to community resources are recommended.


▲Burnout–Discomfort (Hy3):T83   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Burnout-Discomfort Subscale (Hy3) measures the degree of an individual’s physical and emotional fatigue, lack of energy, and decreased vitality
(2) high scores indicate subjective or objective exhaustion, reduced motivation, narrowed attention, and excessive focus on negative experiences, which may be associated with depression, chronic stress, or somatic illness
(3)Low scores indicate high energy levels, strong stress tolerance, or denial of fatigue
(4) interpretation must be combined with other Hy subscales, the D series, Si, Ma, physical symptom screening, validity indicators, and longitudinal medical history to improve accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places Hy3 within the “chronic stress—emotional regulation—somatization” framework
(2) high Hy3 scores may reflect genuine physiological/psychological fatigue, or they may reflect excessive focus on or pathological magnification of discomfort
(3) Hy3 often overlaps with depression scales, chronic fatigue syndrome studies, and somatization scales
(4)Culture, occupational stress, sleep quality, and chronic illness significantly moderate Hy3 scores
(5) longitudinal studies suggest that persistently high scores are associated with functional decline, increased use of medical services, and an elevated risk of depression
(6) psychometric guidelines recommend concurrent physical medical evaluations, sleep and lifestyle assessments, and the integration of multi-source data to distinguish pathological fatigue from emotional or cognitive exaggeration.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequent selection of items such as “feel exhausted,” “lack motivation,” and “get tired easily” on the scale, with responses indicating persistent and widespread fatigue.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)This may be accompanied by perfectionism, excessive self-monitoring, or a strong focus on negative experiences
(2) it may also manifest as avoidant coping and low activity levels.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Commonly seen in moderate-to-severe depression, chronic fatigue syndrome, prolonged exposure to stress, or somatic diseases (e.g., hypothyroidism, anemia, chronic inflammation)
(2) patients frequently seek medical help but may respond slowly to treatment, with marked declines in work efficiency, social withdrawal, and reduced daily activities.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)A physical medical examination (complete blood count, thyroid function, inflammatory markers, sleep assessment, etc.) must be conducted in parallel
(2) depression, anxiety, and sleep disorders should be evaluated
(3) the physiological, medication-related, and emotional components of fatigue should be distinguished
(4) attention should be paid to social support, workload, and lifestyle factors
(5) and vigilance is required regarding the possibility of secondary gain or symptom exaggeration.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize comprehensive intervention, beginning with medical evaluation to identify and treat reversible physical causes
(2) if emotional fatigue is predominant, prioritize evidence-based psychotherapy (behavioral activation within CBT, sleep interventions, and stress management)
(3) gradually incorporate activity and physical recovery plans, as well as nutritional and exercise prescriptions
(4) if necessary, concurrently administer antidepressants or short-term sleep medications
(5) recommendations for social functional rehabilitation and occupational adjustments should be included in the treatment plan.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Hy3 scored extremely high
(2) the chief complaints are persistent lack of energy, decreased interest, and sleep disturbances, with significant limitations in daily work and social functioning
(3) it is recommended to begin with a physical examination and initiate behavioral activation and depression assessment, with concurrent psychiatric evaluation and medication as needed.


▲Somatic Complaints (Hy4):T85   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Somatic Complaints (Hy4) measures an individual’s tendency to express emotional distress through physical symptoms
(2)A high score suggests that the individual often uses physical discomfort, pain, or complaints of illness to seek attention or avoid responsibility, while a low score indicates that the individual rarely expresses psychological distress through physical symptoms
(3) this subscale reflects both genuine physical discomfort and medical needs, as well as emotional expression patterns and psychological maturity. Interpretation must be based on a combination of medical history, physical examination findings, and third-party information to distinguish between organic causes and psychological expression.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research situates somatic complaints within an interactive framework of emotional expression patterns—attachment and family interactions—and healthcare utilization, emphasizing that high Hy4 scores may reflect either objective physical discomfort or chronic pain, or psychological distress expressed primarily through somatization
(2)Longitudinal studies show that persistently high somatic complaints are associated with high healthcare utilization, functional decline, comorbid depression/anxiety, and the risk of interpersonal conflict
(3) however, their predictive power is moderated by the quality of family support, cultural background, other Hy subscales (e.g., Hy2, Hy1), and D-scale measures. During assessment, it is advisable to conduct necessary medical examinations (to rule out organic causes), sleep and pain assessments, as well as behavioral analysis of the impact on healthcare-seeking behavior and functioning
(4)In terms of psychometrics, caution is needed regarding the impact of exaggeration, denial, or socially expected response styles on scores
(5) it is recommended to present Hy4 raw scores, rank order, related scales, and third-party information in reports to enhance interpretive accuracy
(6) clinical integration should follow these steps: first, complete medical screening and document healthcare-seeking patterns and the degree of functional impairment
(7)distinguish between the functions of the complaints (seeking attention, avoiding responsibility, or genuine pain) and assess motivation for change
(8) concurrently conduct suicide and safety risk assessments (if there are thoughts of despair or self-harm, prioritize safety management)
(9) interventions should be primarily interdisciplinary, combining medical treatment with CBT to address somatization, restore function, and promote behavioral alternatives, as well as emotional awareness and family/interpersonal therapy to improve support systems and interaction patterns
(10)When Hy4 is high and accompanied by significant functional impairment or comorbidity, an interdisciplinary assessment should be conducted as soon as possible, and a long-term follow-up and rehabilitation plan should be developed as needed
(11) follow-up should utilize multiple sources of information (self-reports, family members, medical records) to periodically monitor the intensity of somatic complaints, healthcare utilization, and psychological functioning, and adjust the intensity of intervention based on changes in comorbidity scales.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequent selection of items related to pain, fatigue, digestive issues, or unexplained physical discomfort on the scale
(2) diverse and persistent chief complaints, often accompanied by a history of frequent medical visits or test results that are disproportionate to the symptoms

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)They tend to seek sympathy and attention, express emotions primarily through somatization, and may exhibit dependent or avoidant-dependent mixed interpersonal styles, with relatively poor emotional awareness

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Commonly seen in somatization disorder, chronic pain complicated by depression, or against a background of prolonged stress
(2) patients may become immersed in descriptions of their discomfort, have low motivation for change, and be resistant to psychological explanations
(3) they frequently utilize medical resources with limited treatment outcomes

♦ Assessment Results
(1)A comprehensive medical evaluation must be conducted first to rule out reversible physical causes
(2) a detailed history of medical visits and tests should be obtained to identify patterns of healthcare utilization
(3) secondary gains (e.g., avoidance of responsibility, seeking care) and motivation for change should be assessed
(4) and concurrent evaluations of depression, anxiety, and trauma history should be conducted to identify comorbidities

♦ Recommendations
(1)Treatment should focus on comprehensive intervention, beginning with addressing reversible physical causes and establishing a coordinated medical-psychological treatment plan with the patient
(2) psychotherapy should primarily consist of cognitive-behavioral therapy (focused on cognitive restructuring and exposure related to somatization), psychoeducation, and training in emotional awareness and expression
(3) family or systemic interventions should be used to reduce secondary gains and improve support systems
(4) antidepressants or pain management strategies should be used concurrently as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Hy4 scored extremely high
(2) the chief complaint was chronic pain in multiple areas and digestive discomfort. Previous multiple medical consultations and examinations failed to identify any clear organic pathology. Family members reported that the patient frequently used physical discomfort as an excuse to avoid family or work responsibilities
(3) it is recommended to first conduct a comprehensive medical examination and implement somatization-oriented CBT and family intervention under the guidance of a multidisciplinary team


▲Inhibition of Aggression (Hy5):T70   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Aggression Suppression Subscale (Hy5) is used to assess an individual’s tendency to suppress, internalize, or passively express aggression and anger emotionally, physically, or in fantasies.High scores indicate a tendency to suppress anger, avoid direct conflict, and maintain relationships through people-pleasing or self-censorship, which may result in passive-aggressive or anger-internalizing behavioral patterns. Low scores indicate a tendency to express anger and dissatisfaction more directly and decisively, with more overt conflict resolution. Interpretation must be combined with other Hy subscales, Si, Ma, the D series, the K scale, longitudinal history, and third-party data to improve accuracy

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places Hy4 within the “somaticization–emotional expression–secondary gain” framework
(2)High Hy4 scores may reflect genuine somatic causes or chronic pain, or they may reflect the somatization of emotional distress or pathological exaggeration
(3) Hy4 often overlaps with somatization, depression, and anxiety scales, and its expression is significantly moderated by culture, gender roles, access to medical care, and family interaction patterns
(4) longitudinal studies suggest that persistently high scores are associated with increased use of medical resources, functional impairment, and low motivation for change
(5)Psychometric recommendations include conducting parallel medical evaluations, taking a detailed history of sleep and medication use, and integrating data from multiple sources to distinguish between physiological causes, emotional somatization, and secondary gain.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)On the questionnaire, the subject tends to select items such as “I usually control my anger” and “I avoid direct conflict with others”
(2) during the interview, the subject avoids arguments but displays signs of dissatisfaction within relationships

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High level of compliance, emphasis on relationship stability, limited emotional expression but some capacity for self-control

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)May exhibit complaining, accusatory speech, passive-aggressive behavior, or low mood
(2) under prolonged stress, this may easily lead to somatization or emotional exhaustion

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess anger-triggering situations and expression channels
(2) combine findings from other Hy subscales and the D series to determine whether internalized emotions or a risk of depression exist
(3) pay attention to punitive reactions to anger expression in family interactions

♦ Recommendations
(1)Emotional recognition and assertiveness training, conflict resolution skills training, interpersonal therapy, and stress management
(2) encourage practice in direct expression and boundary-setting within safe environments

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)The subject’s Hy5 score is relatively high
(2) they report avoiding arguments but frequently feel dissatisfied and respond with complaints or coldness. Assertiveness training and interpersonal communication interventions are recommended


▲Hysteria—Overt (Hy-o):T   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Hysteria–Overt (Hy-o) subscale is part of the Hysteria (Hy) clinical scale and is used to assess an individual’s tendency to express emotional distress through physical symptoms or somatization
(2)High scores indicate that the subject frequently uses physical discomfort as the primary means of expression to gain attention or avoid responsibility, while low scores indicate a tendency to express distress less frequently through physical symptoms or a preference for direct emotional expression
(3) interpretation must be combined with other Hy subscales, the D series, the K scale, Si, physical medical examinations, validity indicators, and longitudinal history to improve accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places Hy-o within the “somaticization–emotional expression–secondary gain” framework
(2)High Hy-o scores may reflect either genuine somatic causes or the somatization of emotional distress or the magnification of discomfort
(3) Hy-o overlaps with scales measuring depression, anxiety, chronic fatigue, and somatization, and its manifestation is significantly moderated by culture, access to healthcare, family interaction patterns, and occupational stress
(4) longitudinal studies suggest that persistently high scores are associated with increased use of medical resources, impaired functioning, and low motivation for change
(5)Psychometric recommendations include conducting parallel medical evaluations, taking a detailed history of sleep and medication use, and incorporating third-party data to distinguish between physiological causes, emotional somatization, and secondary gain.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Denial or very infrequent reports of physical discomfort on scales and in interviews
(2) activity levels and emotional expression may be elevated or unaffected.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Direct emotional expression, extroversion, or emotional suppression to maintain functioning may be accompanied by a high drive for achievement or emotional avoidance strategies.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)If accompanied by elevated mood or reduced sleep, be alert for hypomania or mood disorders
(2) if accompanied by a history of trauma or depression, assess for unrecognized distress resulting from emotional numbness and denial.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Concurrently administer D-scale, Ma-scale, and trauma history assessments to rule out denial or hypomania
(2) verify sleep, medication, and lifestyle factors
(3) and be mindful of the influence of cultural factors on “minimal physical complaints” behavior.

♦ Recommendations
(1)If hypomanic-like symptoms are present, recommend a psychiatric evaluation and mood-stabilizing treatment
(2) if denial or emotional numbness is present, use trauma-informed therapy and emotional awareness training
(3) if the individual is in good health, provide stress management and self-monitoring recommendations

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)The subject has an extremely low Hy-o score
(2) if they deny or rarely report physical discomfort, accompanied by reduced sleep or elevated mood, screen for hypomania or denial of emotional distress
(3) concurrent Ma re-evaluation and psychiatric assessment are recommended.


▲Hysteria-Subtle (Hy‑s):T   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Hysteria–Subtle Subscale (Hy‑s) is used to assess an individual’s tendency to express emotional distress in subtle, indirect, or implicit ways
(2) high scores indicate a tendency to repress or deny direct anger and conflict, expressing dissatisfaction through subtle channels such as excessive socializing, people-pleasing, suggestive complaints, or somatization
(3) low scores indicate that anger and hostility are more overt, direct, or characterized by distrust of others.Interpretation should be combined with other Hy subscales, Hy-o/Hy1–Hy5, Si, Ma, the D series, the K scale, longitudinal history, and third-party information to enhance accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places Hy‑s within the “emotional inhibition—interpersonal presentation—conflict resolution” framework
(2) high Hy‑s scores may represent adaptive self-regulation to maintain relationships, but may also lead to long-term emotional accumulation, passive aggression, or somatization
(3)Hy-s is closely related to attachment styles, family upbringing patterns, cultural gender norms, and interpersonal functioning
(4) psychometric evidence suggests that combined patterns of Hy-s with Hy-o, Hy5, and the D-scale are most valuable for differential diagnosis
(5) clinical and longitudinal studies emphasize the use of multi-source data to distinguish healthy self-control from pathological repression, and highlight the risk of high-scoring individuals shifting toward passive-aggression or emotional breakdown under stress

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Scales and interviews frequently report outbursts of anger, arguments, or impulsive behavior
(2) third-party reports often indicate escalating conflicts or interpersonal breakdowns.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High impulsivity, low self-monitoring, irritability, or use of aggression to enforce boundaries
(2) may be accompanied by hostility or high extraversion.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)May be accompanied by impulse control disorders, hypomanic-like symptoms, or personality disorder traits
(2) occupational and interpersonal relationships are significantly affected
(3) cases posing legal or safety risks require priority assessment.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Concurrently conduct Ma and D scale assessments along with impulsivity/violence risk assessments
(2) evaluate risk of self-harm or harm to others, legal history, and substance use history
(3) gather third-party and longitudinal history to identify patterns and triggers.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize safety assessments and crisis intervention
(2) provide training in emotional stability and impulse control, DBT, or cognitive-behavioral interventions targeting impulsivity/aggression
(3) if necessary, conduct concurrent psychiatric evaluations and medication treatment to stabilize emotions and impulsivity
(4) family or legal collaboration is essential in high-risk situations.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Hy-s scored extremely low
(2) frequently erupts directly during conflicts and exhibits verbal or physical aggression, which has already affected work and family relationships
(3) immediate impulse and risk assessment is recommended, along with the initiation of emotional stability and impulse control interventions.

PD1	PD2	PD3	PD4	PD5	PD_O	PD_S
68	77	58	70	82

High
Low

▲Family Dysfunction (Pd1):T68   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Pd1 (Family Disharmony) assesses an individual’s subjective perception of internal family conflict, lack of support, and tense interactions. It encompasses feelings of not being understood or cared for by family members, frequent arguments with family members, resistance to family rules or customs, and emotional distress or functional impairment resulting from family relationships.This subscale reflects both objective situations of family conflict and the individual’s role in family interactions (victim, provocateur, or conflict instigator)
(2) therefore, interpretation must be informed by longitudinal history, third-party reports, and a family systems assessment.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places Pd1 within the “family interaction patterns—individual behavior—functional consequences” framework. High scores may stem from a long-term dysfunctional family environment or reflect an individual’s conflict-generation style (e.g., defiance, provocation, or rule-breaking). Pd1 is closely associated with personality traits (antisocial tendencies, insecure attachment, borderline characteristics), stress responses, family functioning, and social support.Psychometric Recommendations: Interpret Pd1 in conjunction with the total Pd scale, other Pd subscales, Hy, Ma, Si, and reports from third parties (family members, spouses)
(2) for individuals with high scores, distinguish between the two pathways of “passive victimization/neglect” and “active provocation/violation of family rules,” and assess risks related to legal, occupational, or parenting issues.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)On the questionnaire, the subject tended to select items such as “I often disagree with my family,” “I feel my family doesn’t understand me,” and “I withdraw when the family atmosphere is tense”
(2) repeated complaints or accusations were common during the interview.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Prone to conflict, stubborn, low tolerance, or self-centered
(2) may also be accompanied by passive-aggressive or avoidant interaction styles.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)This may stem from poor communication, intergenerational value conflicts, mismatched role expectations, or individual behavioral issues
(2) functional impairment manifests as difficulties fulfilling family roles, parenting conflicts, or emotional distress.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess the situations that trigger conflict, its duration, third-party observations, and family members’ coping strategies
(2) inquire about potential secondary gains (such as gaining attention or avoiding responsibility through conflict)
(3) evaluate comorbidity with substance use and mood disorders.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Family communication training, conflict resolution skills, assertiveness training, and individual psychotherapy (CBT, emotion regulation training)
(2) if parenting conflicts are present, incorporate parenting guidance or family systems intervention
(3) concurrently treat substance use or mood disorders as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pd1 scored high on the scale and reported frequent arguments with parents or a spouse, as well as feeling misunderstood
(2) it is recommended to conduct family communication and conflict resolution training and to assess for co-occurring substance use or mood disorders.


▲Authority Issues (Pd2):T77   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Pd2 Authority Issues Subscale assesses an individual’s attitudes and behavioral tendencies toward authority, rules, and institutions, reflecting the likelihood and patterns of conflict with authority figures (parents, teachers, supervisors, judicial or institutional authorities). High scores indicate resistance, defiance, or contempt toward authority, which may manifest as violations of social norms, challenges to rules, or conflicts with administrative or law enforcement agencies
(2) low scores indicate compliance or high deference to authority.Interpretation should be based on a combination of longitudinal history, third-party information (family, school, and judicial records), the Pd Total Score and other Pd subscales, Ma, Si, Hy, and validity indicators to distinguish between situational defiance, a personality-based anti-authority style, and reactive behavior resulting from external oppression.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)This study places Pd2 within the “Authority Relationships—Socialization—Functional Consequences” framework. High scores may stem from objective experiences of conflict with authority (domestic violence, abuse of authority, institutional injustice) or may reflect an individual’s antisocial or norm-defying personality traits. Diverse attitudes toward authority in modern society, as well as differences in educational approaches and intergenerational values, can influence the scale’s distribution
(2)It is relatively common for younger individuals (especially those under 25) to score higher on authority-related items
(3) therefore, interpretation thresholds must be age-adjusted. Clinical and legal practice recommends concurrently reviewing behavioral history, legal records, and functional assessments to distinguish between creative rebellion (which may lead to adaptive innovation) and destructive anti-authority behavior (which carries legal or occupational risks).

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)On the scale, there are numerous selections of items such as “I do not obey rules,” “I often have conflicts with superiors/parents,” and “I do not respect authority”
(2) in interviews, this manifests as open defiance, contempt, or systematic violations of norms.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High hostility, low empathy, impulsivity or thrill-seeking, disregard for rules, and external attribution (shifting blame)
(2) in some individuals, accompanied by strong egocentrism and a tendency to challenge authority.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)This may stem from a reaction to long-term exposure to injustice or abuse of authority, or it may reflect antisocial, impulsive, or personality disorder traits
(2) it commonly co-occurs with substance abuse, criminal behavior, or disruption in work or school.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Prioritize reviewing criminal records, history of violence or abuse, occupational/academic consequences, and third-party testimonies
(2) concurrently conduct Ma, Si, and impulse/violence risk assessments along with substance use screening
(3) distinguish between reasonable resistance (a legitimate response to injustice) and pathological anti-authority behavior.

♦ Recommendations
(1)If safety or legal risks are present, prioritize coordination with safety and legal authorities
(2) psychological interventions should be primarily behavior-oriented (conflict management, impulse control, legal awareness education, motivational interviewing, DBT skills)
(3) when antisocial or personality disorder traits are present, employ long-term structured psychotherapy in collaboration with judicial and vocational rehabilitation services
(4) when necessary, concurrently administer medication to address comorbid conditions (e.g., substance dependence, mood instability).

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pd2 scored extremely high, has repeatedly engaged in intense conflicts with superiors and family members, and has a criminal record
(2) it is recommended to conduct an immediate risk assessment and coordinate with legal and social services to implement impulse control and behavioral correction interventions.


▲Social Instability (Pd3):T58   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Pd3 (Social Instability) assesses an individual’s ability to maintain stability, cooperation, and empathy in social contexts, focusing on sensitivity to others’ emotional needs, tendencies toward manipulation or exploitation, and levels of conflict and coldness. High scores suggest displays of coldness, manipulativeness, or aggression in social settings, and may indicate a lack of need for or pursuit of others’ affection and approval
(2) low scores suggest greater reliance on others, a search for approval, or emotional investment.Pd3 may reflect personality traits (such as antisocial or narcissistic tendencies) but may also be influenced by environmental, cultural, and current stress factors. Interpretation should be based on a longitudinal behavioral history, third-party reports (family members, colleagues, judicial records), the Pd total score and other Pd subscales, Ma, Si, Hy, and validity indicators to distinguish between stable personality traits and situational behavioral imbalances.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places Pd3 within the “social functioning—interpersonal strategies—risk consequences” framework. High Pd3 scores are associated with interpersonal exploitation, low empathy, frequent conflicts, occupational/legal problems, and substance abuse
(2) simultaneously, in certain contexts, individuals with high scores may exhibit self-confidence and leadership, but at the cost of interpersonal relationships.Research recommends using Pd3 in conjunction with behavioral observations, third-party information, assessments of impulsivity and violence risk, and functional indicators
(3) when interpreting results, consider how age, culture, and social roles influence the interpretation of “indifference” or “independence.”

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Scale results and interviews indicate the individual is capable of demonstrating empathy and cooperation when necessary, while also maintaining boundaries and independence when required.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate emotional regulation and social adaptability, with moderate self-affirmation and empathy.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)The interpersonal style is largely adaptive, and social functioning and occupational/family roles are generally stable.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if frequent exploitative or cold behavior occurs, further evaluation is warranted.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, social skills training, or short-term supportive therapy
(2) provide career counseling in organizational settings.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pd3 scored within the normal range and is able to balance their own needs with the feelings of others in most situations
(2) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Social Withdrawal (Pd4):T70   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Pd4 Social Alienation assesses an individual’s subjective experience of feeling misunderstood, excluded, or unable to integrate into society. It encompasses feelings of isolation, rejection, detachment from group norms, and difficulties in establishing and maintaining relationships with others. High scores may reflect objective social exclusion or traumatic interpersonal experiences, or they may indicate a tendency toward active rejection of social norms, disregard for group rules, or self-isolation.Individuals with high scores often perceive themselves as different from others and believe that others cannot understand their value or talents
(2) consequently, they reduce their identification with and utilization of external resources, leading to weak social support networks and functional limitations. Interpretation must be combined with longitudinal history, third-party reports, social functioning indicators, and other Pd subscales to enhance accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places Pd4 within the “sense of social belonging—self-identity—functional consequences” framework. Key findings include: social disengagement is associated with depression, hostility, personality disorder traits, reduced social functioning, and patterns of medical/legal utilization
(2) culture, age, and social roles significantly influence the expression and consequences of disengagement
(3) high scores may be associated with creativity and autonomy, but may also lead to reduced ability to identify resources and engage in interpersonal cooperation.Psychometric recommendations suggest interpreting Pd4 in conjunction with the Pd total score, Pd1, Pd3, Ma, Si, the D series, and third-party data, while also assessing social support, occupational/academic functioning, and potential motivations for self-isolation.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequently reported statements include “I feel that others do not understand my thoughts” and “I do not fit in well with the group”
(2) in social settings, this manifests as aloofness, selective avoidance, or hints of self-superiority.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High self-esteem but low trust in others
(2) a tendency to focus on others’ shortcomings
(3) difficulty recognizing others’ strengths or resources.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)This may stem from generational or cultural differences, early interpersonal setbacks, or a mismatch between the individual’s values and those of the group
(2) functional impairment manifests as a narrow social circle, reduced opportunities for collaboration, or limited career development.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess whether there are remediable deficits in social skills or cognitive biases
(2) inquire about a history of trauma or prolonged experiences of exclusion
(3) and conduct parallel third-party observations to determine whether the behavior is generalized.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Social skills training
(2) empathy and resource identification training
(3) cognitive restructuring to reduce victimization thinking
(4) interpersonal therapy or group therapy to provide a safe setting for social practice
(5) and vocational or educational support to improve opportunities for social participation.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pd4 scored above average and reported difficulty integrating into the circle of colleagues and frequently feeling underestimated
(2) it is recommended to conduct social skills and empathy training and assess whether early interpersonal trauma is present.


▲Inner Turmoil (Pd5):T82   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Pd5: Inner Turmoil assesses an individual’s internal emotional experiences, such as dissatisfaction with life, feeling misunderstood, guilt, self-criticism, and regret
(2) its core lies in the intensity and direction of self-denial.Individuals with high scores tend to blame themselves for problems, repeatedly engage in self-blame, and become trapped in ruminative thinking
(3) this self-blame may manifest as depressive-style “I am incompetent” or as achievement-oriented “I am capable but have failed to achieve/perform poorly.” Chronically high scores lead to a tendency to focus on negative information, reduced problem-solving ability, and decreased utilization of psychological functioning.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Pd5 is often associated with low self-esteem (LSE), deep worry (D5), perfectionism, and chronic depression. When interpreting the score, LSE, D5, D-o (generalized depressive symptoms), and the longitudinal history should be considered in parallel to distinguish situational self-blame (which can be alleviated through support and problem-solving) from pathological self-blame (which requires systematic psychotherapy or pharmacological intervention).Assessing the risk of self-harm or suicide is a priority for individuals with high scores.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequent selection of items such as “I always blame myself,” “I repeatedly blame myself for past mistakes,” and “I feel I have let others down”
(2) LSE and D5 scores are often elevated simultaneously.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High levels of self-criticism, perfectionism, a strong sense of responsibility, and extreme sensitivity to failure.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Attention is dominated by negative self-evaluation, leading to a significant decline in work or academic efficiency, accompanied by social avoidance or overcompensation.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Immediately assess intentions and plans for self-harm or suicide
(2) concurrently review LSE, D5, D‑o, and longitudinal history
(3) check for sleep disturbances, changes in appetite, and somatic symptoms.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize safety management
(2) CBT (cognitive restructuring, behavioral activation), metacognitive therapy, or ACT
(3) concurrently administer antidepressants as needed
(4) train in self-compassion and attention redirection.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pd5 scored extremely high, exhibits persistent self-blame and repeatedly dwells on past mistakes, with significant declines in attention and work efficiency
(2) immediate assessment of self-harm risk is recommended, along with initiation of CBT/ACT intervention and a psychiatric evaluation.


▲Psychopathic Deviation—Marked (Pd-o):T   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Pd‑o (Psychopathic General Deviation) reflects an individual’s overall tendencies regarding antisocial behavior, impulse control, sense of responsibility, empathy, and social adaptation
(2) high scores indicate impaired personality functioning, manifested as disregard for rules, emotional coldness, and manipulative or exploitative behavior, which may lead to interpersonal conflicts, occupational/legal consequences, and functional decline
(3) low scores indicate compliance, dependence, or high levels of socialization.Interpretation must be based on a combination of longitudinal behavioral history, third-party information, and the Pd subscales (Pd1–Pd5), Ma, Si, D series, and validity indices.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Pd-o is associated with antisocial behavior, substance abuse, impulsive criminality, occupational instability, and interpersonal exploitation
(2) in certain contexts, individuals with high scores may exhibit superficial charm or leadership but at the cost of long-term interpersonal consequences
(3) scale results should be considered as risk indicators rather than evidence for a standalone diagnosis
(4) for young participants, developmental factors and age-adjustments must be taken into account.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Denial of rule-breaking or manipulative tendencies
(2) may be accompanied by excessive compliance or elevated mood.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Highly dependent
(2) emotionally withdrawn or highly accommodating
(3) may be accompanied by emotional numbness.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)If accompanied by elevated mood or impulsivity, screen for hypomania or bipolar spectrum disorders
(2) if accompanied by a history of trauma, assess for emotional numbness or avoidant coping.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Conduct a concurrent assessment of the Pd subscale, D-series, and longitudinal history to rule out denial, hypomania, or emotional masking
(2) verify daily functioning and third-party observations.

♦ Recommendations
(1)If the issue is dependency, conduct assertiveness training and self-efficacy enhancement
(2) if denial or emotional numbness is present, use emotional awareness and trauma-informed interventions
(3) if hypomania is suspected, a psychiatric evaluation is recommended.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pd-o scored extremely low, exhibiting high compliance or emotional dependence
(2) it is recommended to conduct parallel third-party interviews and review the longitudinal history to rule out emotional masking or hypomanic-like symptoms.


▲Psychopathic Deviation—Covert (Pd-s):T   BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Pd-s (Subtle Psychopathy) assesses an individual’s covert or subtle tendencies toward antisocial behavior, manipulative behavior, and emotional coldness
(2) individuals with high scores often appear well-adjusted or charismatic in superficial social interactions but may exhibit strategic manipulation, a lack of empathy, or emotional deprivation in deeper interpersonal interactions
(3) this covert nature makes it difficult to identify risks through a single observation, and interpretation must rely on longitudinal behavioral history and third-party data.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)The study places Pd‑s within the framework of “surface adaptation—covert exploitation—long-term functional consequences”
(2)High Pd‑s scores are associated with workplace manipulation, breach of interpersonal trust, emotional exploitation, and ethical/professional issues
(3) psychometric guidelines recommend interpreting Pd‑s in conjunction with Pd‑o, Pd3, Pd2, Ma, Si, and third-party evidence
(4) in forensic or organizational assessments, scale results serve as risk indicators rather than standalone evidence.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Denies tendencies toward coldness or manipulation
(2) may be accompanied by excessive compliance or elevated mood.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Highly accommodating or dependent
(2) rich emotional expression or emotional numbness
(3) may be accompanied by impulsivity or high-energy behavior.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Appears harmonious on the surface but may be masking underlying issues
(2) if accompanied by reduced sleep or impulsivity, be alert to hypomania or bipolar spectrum disorders
(3) if accompanied by a history of trauma, assess for emotional numbness or avoidant coping.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Conduct concurrent assessments using other subscales in the Pd series, the D series, and longitudinal history to rule out denial, hypomania, or emotional masking
(2) verify daily functioning and third-party observations.

♦ Recommendations
(1)If the issue involves dependency or compliance, conduct assertiveness training and self-efficacy enhancement
(2) if denial or emotional numbness is present, use emotional awareness and trauma-informed interventions
(3) if hypomania is suspected, recommend a psychiatric evaluation.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pd‑s scored extremely low, denied manipulation or emotional detachment, and exhibited high levels of compliance or emotional numbness
(2) it is recommended to conduct parallel third-party interviews and review the longitudinal history to rule out emotional masking or hypomanic-like symptoms.

SC1	SC2	SC3	SC4	SC5	SC6
73	120	86	95	72	86

High
Low

▲Social Withdrawal (Sc1):T73   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Sc1 (Social Withdrawal) is a subscale of the MMPI-2 Schizophrenia (Sc) Scale, reflecting a lack of trust in others, a tendency to withdraw from meaningful social interactions, emotional detachment, and a propensity for introverted fantasy
(2)High scores indicate social avoidance, limited perception of reality, and impaired interpersonal functioning
(3) low scores indicate high levels of social engagement and a strong sense of trust in others. This subscale is often used as a clinical clue to identify social withdrawal, a sense of being misunderstood, and a tendency to fill the void in reality with fantasies.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Sc1 is positively correlated with features associated with the schizophrenia spectrum (social withdrawal, cognitive style differences, and weakened reality testing)
(2)High Sc1 scores are often accompanied by elevated scores on depression, anxiety, or paranoid scales
(3) in clinical interpretation, Sc1 provides a sensitive indicator of the “social withdrawal/alienation” dimension, but must be combined with longitudinal history, third-party observations, and functional evidence to distinguish between personality-related alienation and pathological social withdrawal.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Often selects items such as “I don’t trust strangers very much,” “I prefer to be alone,” and “I sometimes immerse myself in a world of my own imagination.”

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Low level of trust in others
(2) limited emotional expression
(3) tendency to turn to introspection and fantasy to cope with loneliness
(4) social avoidance leading to a weak support network.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Displays coldness or detachment within teams or families
(2) conflicts may arise due to misunderstandings or lack of communication
(3) social withdrawal worsens under stressful situations.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess the triggers and duration of withdrawal
(2) concurrently screen for depression/anxiety and substance use history
(3) inquire about any history of passive dependence or being taken advantage of.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Social skills training and gradual exposure
(2) cognitive restructuring to improve misinterpretations of others’ intentions
(3) supportive therapy and group therapy to rebuild social connections
(4) if depression is present, combine medication with psychotherapy.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Sc1 scored above average
(2) exhibits social withdrawal and low trust in others, which affects interpersonal relationships
(3) social skills training and supportive interventions are recommended.


▲Emotional Detachment (Sc2):T120   BACK

※ General Description
(1)SC2 (Emotional Detachment) is a subscale of the MMPI-2 Schizophrenia (Sc) Scale that measures an individual’s tendency to derive emotional satisfaction from life events rather than from others
(2) it reflects emotional blunting, apathy, restricted emotional expression, and difficulties with self-acceptance
(3) high scores indicate emotional withdrawal, internal conflict, and a disconnect between reality and emotional understanding
(4)low scores suggest rich emotional responsiveness and high levels of self- and other-acceptance. Emotional detachment can be observed not only in the psychotic spectrum but also in individuals with personality immaturity, post-traumatic avoidance, or depressive withdrawal
(5) therefore, interpretation must be based on longitudinal history and multi-source data.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)SC2 is positively correlated with the cognitive/emotional subscale, impaired social functioning, and depression/emotional flatness indicators in the Sc summary table
(2)Emotional detachment may co-occur with Sc1 (social detachment), but the distinction between the two lies in the fact that Sc1 emphasizes distrust of others and social withdrawal, whereas SC2 emphasizes deriving emotional fulfillment from life events rather than from others, as well as internal emotional withdrawal
(3) methodologically, high SC2 scores require concurrent screening for depression, trauma history, and cognitive function to distinguish pathological emotional blunting from emotional suppression or denial.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequent selection of items such as “I am rarely moved by others,” “I rely more on events or ideas to derive meaning,” and “I find it difficult to express or accept my own emotions”
(2) the Sc total score and depression/dissociation subscales may be elevated concurrently.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Restricted emotional expression
(2) tendency to fill emotional voids with ideas or fantasies
(3) low self-acceptance and intense internal criticism
(4) delayed or avoidant emotional responses to others.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common manifestations include emotional detachment in intimate relationships, emotional isolation, and impaired occupational or family functioning
(2) may be accompanied by long-term self-denial, internal conflict, and fantasized compensation
(3) risk of emotional breakdown or passive self-harm under stress.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Screen for a history of depression, trauma, and dissociation
(2) conduct concurrent cognitive function screening to rule out organic causes
(3) gather third-party observations to assess the quality of intimate relationships and daily emotional interactions.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize assessing safety and self-care abilities
(2) use emotional awareness and expression training, Emotion-Focused Therapy (EFT), or psychodynamic interventions to address self-acceptance issues
(3) integrate cognitive-behavioral techniques with trauma-informed approaches
(4) if necessary, concurrently prescribe antidepressants or anti-anxiety medications to improve emotional reactivity.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Significant emotional withdrawal and blunting, with a disconnect between reality and emotional understanding
(2) it is recommended to assess history of trauma and depression and initiate training in emotional awareness and expression.


▲Lack of self-control and cognition (Sc3):T86   BACK

※ General Description
(1)SC3 (Lack of Self-Control—Cognitive) is a subscale of the MMPI-2 Sc (Schizophrenia) scale, primarily reflecting cognitive impairment resulting from intrusive thoughts, repetitive thinking, or distractibility
(2) core manifestations include memory difficulties, inattention, susceptibility to interference, racing thoughts, and impaired executive function. Unlike D4 (Mental Slowness)
(3)D4 focuses more on general slowness and lack of motivation when performing mental tasks
(4) whereas SC3 emphasizes the characteristic of cognition being interrupted by internal or external disturbances, i.e., “thought-interference-type” cognitive impairment. A high score indicates impaired cognitive control and inhibitory mechanisms
(5) a low score indicates good cognitive control and stable attention.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)SC3 is often moderately correlated with tests of attention and executive function, ruminative/obsessive-compulsive thought scales, and symptoms of anxiety and depression
(2)In clinical samples, high SC3 scores are observed not only in the psychotic spectrum but also in cases of severe anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder, cognitive interference caused by post-traumatic rumination, or chronic sleep deprivation
(3) methodologically, distinguishing between SC3 and D4 is clinically significant for determining whether cognitive problems are of the “dynamic/sluggish” or “interference/distraction” type.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequent selection of items such as “I find it hard to concentrate on one thing,” “My mind is often interrupted by unrelated thoughts,” and “I often forget what I was just about to do”
(2) D4 scores may be elevated concurrently or show a distinct pattern (if accompanied by psychomotor retardation, this suggests a mixed-type problem).

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Attention is easily distracted and difficult to sustain
(2) recurrent intrusive thoughts or a tendency toward rumination
(3) difficulty switching tasks and a tendency to forget details
(4) emotions are easily triggered by cognitive frustration.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Significant impairment in work or academic performance
(2) frequent careless errors, unfinished tasks, or repetitive checking behaviors
(3) symptoms are more intractable when accompanied by anxiety, obsessive-compulsive tendencies, or post-traumatic rumination
(4) sleep deprivation or substance abuse may exacerbate symptoms.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Concurrently administer objective cognitive tests (attention, working memory, executive function)
(2) review sleep patterns, medication/substance use history, and potential thyroid or neurologic causes
(3) assess risks of self-harm, harm to others, and occupational safety hazards.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize addressing reversible factors (sleep, substance use, medication side effects)
(2) cognitive-behavioral interventions should focus on identifying and suppressing intrusive thoughts (CBT techniques, exposure and response prevention as appropriate)
(3) attention training and executive function training
(4) mindfulness/attention training to reduce rumination
(5) if necessary, conduct a psychiatric evaluation to consider medication (for anxiety, depression, or obsessive-compulsive symptoms), combined with occupational/educational support and functional rehabilitation.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject SC3 scored extremely high
(2) significant intrusive thoughts and distractibility were present, affecting task completion and daily functioning
(3) it is recommended to conduct concurrent cognitive screening, sleep, and substance use assessments, and to initiate interventions oriented toward real-world functioning.


▲Lack of self-control, impulsivity (Sc4):T95   BACK

※ General Description
(1)SC4 (Lack of Self-Control—Lack of Initiative) is a subscale of the MMPI-2 Sc (Schizophrenia) scale, reflecting deficits in behavioral initiation, maintenance of motivation, and volitional energy
(2) high scores indicate mental fatigue, weak willpower, lack of drive, and difficulties in task initiation
(3) low scores indicate high initiative, good executive function, and strong goal orientation.SC4 is closely related to but clearly distinct from SC2 (Emotional Withdrawal) and SC3 (Cognitive Interference): SC2 tends toward emotional withdrawal, SC3 toward disrupted attention/thinking, while SC4 focuses on the lack of behavioral initiation and sustained drive.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)SC4 is often associated with depressive psychomotor retardation, chronic fatigue symptoms, and deficits in willpower or behavioral activation
(2)There is overlap but not equivalence in the correlations with D4 (mental sluggishness) and SC3—D4 emphasizes slowness in task completion, SC3 emphasizes cognitive problems caused by intrusive thoughts, and SC4 emphasizes “difficulty initiating” and “difficulty sustaining” goal-directed behavior
(3) methodologically, distinguishing among these three helps in developing targeted rehabilitation and intervention strategies (behavioral activation vs. attention training vs. cognitive-emotional processing).

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequent selection of items such as “I find it hard to start new tasks,” “Even when I want to, I can’t stick with it,” and “I often procrastinate to the point of not being able to complete tasks”
(2) the SC total score and depression/fatigue subscales often increase in parallel.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Patients exhibit mental exhaustion and low willpower
(2) they have difficulty initiating actions and are prone to giving up
(3) they struggle with goal-setting and have poor follow-through
(4) they feel overwhelmingly helpless when faced with daily tasks.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common manifestations include long-term unemployment, interruption of education, and neglect of family responsibilities
(2) patients subjectively feel “I want to do it but can’t,” accompanied by self-blame and a sense of helplessness
(3) if self-harm or suicidal ideation is present, these risks must be managed as a priority.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Immediately assess the severity of depression, sleep patterns, and potential physical causes
(2) maintain functional records (activity diaries, attendance records) alongside third-party observations
(3) evaluate the risk of self-harm or harm to others and assess the patient’s support system.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize addressing reversible factors (sleep, endocrine issues, anemia, medication side effects)
(2) implement behavioral activation and step-by-step task initiation training
(3) use motivational interviewing to enhance engagement
(4) evaluate short-term antidepressants or psychostimulants as needed
(5) provide vocational and daily functioning rehabilitation along with family support interventions.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject SC4 scored extremely high
(2) significant lack of willpower and initiation difficulties, affecting daily and occupational functioning
(3) recommend concurrent assessment for depression and physical causes, and initiate behavioral activation and functional rehabilitation.


▲Lack of self-control, deficits in inhibition (Sc5):T72   BACK

※ General Description
(1)SC5 (Deficit in Self-Inhibition—Insufficient Inhibitory Control) is a subscale of the MMPI-2 Sc (Schizophrenia) scale that measures deficits in impulse control, emotional regulation, and behavioral inhibition
(2) core manifestations include fear of losing control, self-alienation, hyperactivity, emotional instability, irritability, and transient memory or amnesic-like symptoms
(3) high scores indicate weak inhibitory control, a risk of impulsive behavior, and significant emotional fluctuations
(4)low scores indicate good self-control, emotional stability, and effective behavioral inhibition. SC5 complements SC3 (Cognitive Interference) and SC4 (Initiation/Motivational Deficits): SC3 emphasizes the interference of intrusive thoughts on attention
(5) SC4 emphasizes deficits in initiation and volitional energy
(6) SC5 emphasizes the failure of inhibitory mechanisms and loss of impulse/emotional control.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)SC5 is often positively correlated with impulsive personality traits, emotional instability, acute stress reactions, and certain substance abuse conditions
(2)Individuals with high scores are more prone to emotional outbursts or behavioral loss of control under stress or sleep deprivation
(3) methodologically, distinguishing SC5 from SC3/SC4 and the D-scale (depression/lethargy) helps determine whether the issue is of the “inhibitory deficit” or “motor/cognitive impairment” type, thereby guiding medication, behavioral, and safety management strategies.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequently reports items such as “I get angry easily over small things” and “Sometimes I make impulsive decisions and then regret them”
(2) SC3 or Ma items may show mild abnormalities concurrently.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Emotional reactions are intense and highly fluctuating
(2) impulsivity is moderately high
(3) ability to reflect on consequences is limited but remorse is present
(4) behavior can be partially controlled under external supervision.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Outbursts are likely to occur during interpersonal conflicts, work-related stress, or sleep deprivation
(2) this may lead to relationship friction or short-term functional decline.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess triggers (stress, sleep, substances)
(2) administer scales measuring emotional stability and impulsivity
(3) inquire about the frequency and consequences of impulsive behaviors.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Emotional regulation training (DBT skills, mindfulness)
(2) impulse management and problem-solving skills
(3) sleep and substance use interventions
(4) consider short-term medication to stabilize mood if necessary.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject SC5 scored above average
(2) exhibits insufficient inhibitory control and emotional volatility, leading to interpersonal conflicts or functional limitations
(3) emotional regulation training and concurrent substance use/sleep assessment are recommended.


▲Paranoid Experiences (Sc6):T86   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Sc6 (Bizarre Sensory Experiences) measures self-reported abnormal perceptions and bizarre experiences
(2) it includes hallucination-like experiences, thoughts influenced by external sources, strange tactile/auditory/kinesthetic distortions, and depersonalization
(3)High scores suggest the presence of somatic or perceptual delusional-like experiences (best termed “somatic delusions/perceptual delusions”), which may be accompanied by impaired reality testing
(4) low scores indicate denial of or absence of such perceptual changes and depersonalization experiences. High scores are commonly observed in individuals with poor health or neuropathological causes
(5) high scores are occasionally seen in young participants, which may reflect developmental immaturity or difficulty understanding the questions rather than pathological delusions.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Sc6 has a correlation coefficient of ≈ 0.78 with the Wiggins Organic Symptoms Scale
(2) ≈ 0.65 with hypomania
(3) and ≈ 0.65 with the Wiggins Psychosis Scale
(4)These correlations suggest that Sc6 is associated with organic lesions, perceptual abnormalities during periods of elevated mood, and psychotic features
(5) methodologically, Sc6 is more suitable for assessing somatic/perceptual delusions rather than neurotic somatization
(6) when scores are high, priority should be given to ruling out somatic/neurological causes, substance/medication effects, and sleep deprivation.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Repeated reports of “hearing nonexistent voices,” “feeling that the body is being altered or controlled by an external force,” or “sometimes feeling that one is not one’s true self”
(2) the Sc total score and organic/psychotic indices are often elevated in parallel.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Persistent and abnormal perceptual experiences
(2) impaired reality testing with strong external attribution
(3) significant emotional and cognitive fluctuations
(4) severe distress due to symptoms and marked functional impairment.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)A history of frequent neurological or psychiatric outpatient visits, hospitalizations, or legal/safety incidents is common
(2) patients may exhibit abnormal behavior, impaired judgment, or a risk of self-harm or harm to others
(3) if accompanied by fever, altered consciousness, or neurological signs, prioritize an emergency or neurological evaluation.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Immediately assess vital signs and neurological signs
(2) conduct concurrent substance/medication screening and investigation of acute causes
(3) gather recent medical records and third-party observations
(4) assess the risk of self-harm or harm to others and consider hospitalization or close follow-up.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize medical and neurological evaluation (e.g., infection, metabolic disorders, medications, epilepsy)
(2) conduct a psychiatric evaluation to consider antipsychotic medications or mood stabilizers
(3) concurrently provide reality testing training and supportive psychological interventions
(4) implement crisis management and hospitalization as necessary.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Sc6 has extremely high scores
(2) exhibits persistent hallucinations or a sense of being controlled
(3) has impaired reality testing and severely limited functioning
(4) immediate medical/psychiatric evaluation and safety management are recommended.

MA1	MA2	MA3	MA_O	MA_S
45	40	56

High
Low

▲Lack of Moral Consciousness (Ma1):T45   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Ma1 (Lack of Morality) measures an individual’s indifference toward their own and others’ motives and goals, as well as their utilitarian orientation
(2) core characteristics include blunt or strategic honesty (to lower others’ guard), denial of responsibility or guilt, and a tendency to prioritize self-interest.High scores may reflect a lack of moral sensitivity or manifest as flexible, pragmatic, and highly adaptive strategic thinking
(3) low scores indicate sensitivity to others’ motives, a strong sense of responsibility, and altruistic tendencies. When interpreting Ma1, cultural, occupational, and situational factors must be considered: in certain professions (e.g., lawyers, salespeople, negotiators) or cultural contexts, high scores may represent adaptive strategies rather than personality pathology.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Ma1 is associated with impulsivity, antisocial traits, and dominant and utilitarian decision-making
(2) high scores often emerge in situations involving power imbalances or competition. Cultural, occupational, and social norms significantly moderate the clinical implications of this dimension
(3) a single high Ma1 score cannot serve as direct evidence of moral judgment or criminal responsibility and must be interpreted in conjunction with behavioral history, third-party records, and situational evidence.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Below Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Tends to select items such as “I often worry about others’ feelings” and “I feel guilty about my mistakes.”

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High sense of responsibility
(2) strong empathy and tendency toward self-blame
(3) weak boundaries and susceptibility to being taken advantage of
(4) high emotional investment.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Prone to taking on excessive responsibilities or trying to please others
(2) over time, this may lead to emotional exhaustion or being taken advantage of.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Concurrently assess D, Hy, and Si to evaluate risk of dependency or emotional exhaustion
(2) inquire about history of being taken advantage of and ability to set boundaries.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Assertiveness training, boundary-setting, and rebuilding self-worth
(2) focus on emotional exhaustion and building a support network.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Ma1 scored low
(2) exhibits a strong sense of responsibility and sensitivity to others’ motives
(3) requires attention to risks of boundary issues and emotional exhaustion
(4) assertiveness training and supportive interventions are recommended.


▲Psychomotor Acceleration (Ma2):T40   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Ma2 (psychomotor acceleration) measures an individual’s increased activity, accelerated thinking, and inner restlessness
(2) high scores indicate increased talkativeness, racing thoughts, easily distracted attention, impulsive decision-making, and sensation-seeking behavior, often accompanied by reduced sleep and impaired judgment
(3) low scores indicate a steady rhythm of thought and activity, caution, and strong self-control.Ma2 is a sensitive indicator in the assessment of the hypomanic/manic spectrum
(4) however, a single mild elevation (T < 70) typically represents situational variation. When T ≥ 70, the risk of mania/hypomania and functional impairment should be further evaluated. Interpretation must be based on longitudinal mood history, sleep and substance use history, and the parallel patterns observed on the Ma total score and other Ma subscales.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Ma2 is highly correlated with hypomania/mania spectrum disorders, impulsivity, energy levels, and reduced sleep
(2) concurrent elevation with Sc5 (inhibitory deficits) suggests a failure of inhibitory mechanisms
(3) concurrent elevation with Ma-O and Ma-S suggests overt hypomanic features
(4) it is necessary to distinguish between situational (sleep deprivation, medication) and persistent pathological thought acceleration
(5) longitudinal consistency and third-party evidence are key to interpretation.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Energy and speech are within manageable limits
(2) may increase briefly during periods of stress or short-term sleep deprivation.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Normal thought rhythms
(2) moderate speech and activity levels
(3) demonstrated self-regulation
(4) ability to return to baseline under stress.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most individuals fall within this range, exhibiting adaptive energy or situational excitement
(2) no special intervention is required in the absence of persistent functional impairment.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document longitudinal stability
(2) if recent or progressive fluctuations occur, retesting and longitudinal observation are required.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, sleep hygiene guidance, and routine follow-up.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Ma2 has normal scores
(2) rhythms of thought and activity are balanced, and overall functioning is stable
(3) follow-up and verification of sleep and substance use history are recommended.


▲Composure (Ma3):T56   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Ma3 (Imperturbability) measures an individual’s emotional stability, low reactivity to stimuli, and degree of emotional expression inhibition
(2) high scores are often characterized by emotional flatness, outward calmness, emotional blunting, or emotional inhibition
(3) low scores indicate emotional expressiveness, strong reactions, or excitability. The clinical implications of Ma3 are influenced by culture, occupation, and context:In professions such as emergency medicine, the military, or crisis management, high scores may be adaptive traits
(4) in intimate relationships or situations requiring emotional expression, high scores may lead to functional impairment or interpersonal misunderstandings. When interpreting Ma3, it should be considered in conjunction with the Ma total score, other Ma subscales, D (Depression), Sc (Psychoticism), and validity indices, and a history of medication, sleep, trauma, and dissociation should be verified.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Ma3 is associated with emotional inhibition, dissociative tendencies, depressive emotional blunting, and certain personality traits (emotional restraint, rationalization)
(2) a high score may reflect either good emotional regulation (calmness, composure) or pathological emotional blunting or suppression
(3) longitudinal history and third-party observations help distinguish adaptive calmness from pathological blunting.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Able to remain calm under stress
(2) capable of expressing emotions appropriately in intimate situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Emotional responses are appropriate to the situation
(2) possesses emotional awareness and expression
(3) maintains reality testing and interpersonal interaction in most situations
(4) has moderate emotional regulation ability.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Emotional balance facilitates interpersonal cooperation and task completion
(2) there is no systematic emotional blunting or excessive emotional display.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if abnormal fluctuations occur, conduct retesting and longitudinal observation in parallel.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, communication skills training, and short-term support
(2) provide family or group interventions as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Ma3 scored within the normal range
(2) emotions are stable and reactions are moderate, with overall functional stability
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Mild Mania—Pronounced (Ma-o):T   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Ma‑O (Mild Mania—Overt) measures overt hypomanic-like behavior and deficits in impulse control
(2) high scores indicate exaggerated speech and behavior, thrill-seeking, impulsive decision-making, and a tendency to exploit others
(3) low scores indicate denial of impulsivity or behavioral lack of control, as well as cautious and pragmatic behavior.The Ma‑O emphasizes overt psychopathological components
(4) its clinical significance must be interpreted in conjunction with sleep patterns, substance use, longitudinal mood history, and third-party records.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Ma-O correlates with Sc5 (inhibitory deficits) r ≈ .80, Ma2 (psychomotor agitation) r ≈ .79, Ma total score r ≈ .71, Wiggins Psychosis r ≈ .69,Ma4 (Grandiosity) r ≈ .69, Wiggins Marked Hostility r ≈ .67, and Wiggins Hypomania r ≈ .66. These high correlations indicate that this subscale reflects a more pathological condition than general Ma indicators
(2) high scores are often accompanied by excess energy, impaired judgment, and interpersonal conflicts. When interpreting results, priority should be given to ruling out substance-induced effects, sleep deprivation, and cyclical mood fluctuations.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Strongly denies impulsive or thrill-seeking behavior
(2) speech and activity are restricted.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Highly self-disciplined
(2) emotions and behavior are well-controlled
(3) may be accompanied by emotional suppression or avoidance.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Distinguish between genuine low energy and defensive responses or depressive psychomotor retardation
(2) confirm through concurrent longitudinal history and third-party observation.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Conduct concurrent D, validity scales, and third-party verification
(2) assess emotional expression and functional impact.

♦ Recommendations
(1)If this is a healthy presentation, continue follow-up
(2) if accompanied by depression or functional impairment, conduct a depression assessment and implement rehabilitation interventions.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Ma-O score is extremely low
(2) lacks overt hypomanic features and exhibits high self-control
(3) recommend conducting a longitudinal history and third-party observation in parallel to confirm authenticity.


▲Mild Mania—Mild (Ma-s):T   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Ma‑S (Mild Mania—Subtle) measures extraversion, social ease, and preference for stimulation
(2) high scores often manifest as social nonchalance, extraversion, insensitivity to others’ emotions, and thrill-seeking behavior
(3) low scores suggest shyness, lack of self-confidence, and indecisiveness.In the general population, the Ma-S typically reflects extroversion, but in a psychopathological context, it may indicate emotional detachment toward others or blurred social boundaries. Interpretation should be based on the Ma total score, other Ma subscales, Pd3, Hy1, Si, as well as longitudinal and third-party data.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)The Ma-S is highly correlated with the Ma total score (r ≈ 0.83)
(2) it shows moderate correlations with Ma3 (perseverance) and Pd3 (social perseverance)
(3) moderate correlations with Ma2 (psychomotor acceleration) and Ma4 (grandiosity)
(4) and a negative correlation with Si (social introversion)
(5)In contexts without functional impairment, it often serves as an indicator of extraversion
(6) when accompanied by impulsivity, exploitative behavior, or interpersonal conflict, it suggests pathological insensitivity. Interpretation requires distinguishing between occupational/culturally adaptive extraversion and pathological social insensitivity.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Strong denial of thrill-seeking or extroverted behavior
(2) minimal social participation.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Significant social avoidance
(2) extremely low self-confidence
(3) withdrawal in group settings
(4) may be accompanied by anxiety or avoidant behaviors.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Commonly seen in social anxiety or avoidant personality traits
(2) requires concurrent assessment for anxiety/depression and functional interventions.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Concurrent anxiety, depression, and third-party observation to assess functional impairment
(2) note any long-term occupational or academic impacts.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Exposure therapy, social skills training, cognitive-behavioral therapy, and assertiveness training
(2) if accompanied by severe anxiety or depression, psychiatric or psychotherapeutic treatment is recommended.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Ma-S scored extremely low
(2) significant social avoidance and low self-confidence
(3) concurrent assessment of anxiety/depression and exposure therapy are recommended.

PA1	PA2	PA3	PA_O	PA_S
75	72	30

High
Low

▲Persecutory Ideation (Pa1):T75   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Pa1 assesses an individual’s tendency to perceive being harmed, misunderstood, or targeted by others
(2) high scores indicate systematic external attribution, projection, and suspicion
(3) low scores indicate a sense of trust or denial of persecutory thoughts
(4) Pa1 and Pa‑O together represent the most pathological paranoid/persecutory dimensions on the Pa scale
(5) interpretation must be based on longitudinal history, third-party evidence, and validity indicators.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Pa1 is associated with paranoid cognitions, social withdrawal, depression, and prejudice
(2) the correlation coefficient between Pa1 and Pa-O is approximately 0.87
(3) the correlation coefficient with Wiggins’ Psychosis Scale is approximately 0.80
(4)the correlation coefficient with prejudice is approximately 0.69
(5) the correlation coefficient with Pd4 (social alienation) is approximately 0.69
(6) and the correlation coefficient with Wiggins Depression is approximately 0.68
(7) these correlations suggest that Pa1 often coexists with social isolation and negative emotions, but remains an independent dimension of persecutory ideation.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequent selection of items such as “Someone is trying to harm me,” “No one can be trusted,” and “Someone is plotting against me behind my back”
(2) Pa‑O, Pd4, and Ma are often elevated concurrently.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Low empathy
(2) systematic projection and blaming others
(3) high hostility and defensiveness
(4) intense and easily externalized emotional reactions
(5) tendency to rationalize harmful behavior.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)At initial assessment, speech is sharp and highly defensive
(2) follow-up often reveals third-party complaints, escalating conflicts, or legal disputes
(3) high vigilance and hostility in the short term lead to the breakdown of interpersonal relationships and loss of occupational functioning in the long term.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Immediately assess reality testing
(2) evaluate intentions and plans for self-harm or harm to others
(3) verify judicial or personnel records and third-party victim statements
(4) rule out substance-induced factors and organic causes.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize safety management and crisis intervention
(2) conduct a short-term psychiatric evaluation and stabilize medication
(3) use cognitive therapy focused on reality testing and evidence evaluation
(4) implement family or systemic interventions to repair relationships
(5) arrange intensive follow-up and multidisciplinary consultations.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pa1 scored extremely high
(2) persistent feelings of persecution and systematic projection
(3) impaired reality testing with risk of self-harm or harm to others
(4) immediate psychiatric evaluation and crisis intervention are recommended.


▲Sharpness (Pa2):T72   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Pa2 assesses an individual’s high sensitivity to stimuli, tension and irritability, strong subjectivity, and tendency to interpret others’ behaviors as targeted or offensive
(2) individuals with high scores often exhibit rapid and intense emotional reactions, excessive subjectivity, and a tendency to act on their feelings
(3) those with low scores feel less easily offended, have a stronger sense of trust, and are less prone to impulsivity.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Pa2 has a correlation coefficient of approximately 0.73 with overall paranoia (Pa‑O)
(2) approximately 0.71 with the Wiggins Psychopathy Scale
(3) approximately 0.68 with dependency
(4) and approximately 0.68 with the Welsh Anxiety Scale
(5)Pa2 is regarded as a key indicator of “thin-skinned” or “subtle paranoia” within the paranoia spectrum, capable of sensitively capturing the subjectivity and behavioral tendencies associated with feelings of being offended.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Often selects items such as “I am sensitive to criticism” and “I react to feelings of being offended”
(2) Pa-O or anxiety scores may be moderately elevated.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Rapid emotional reactions
(2) tendency toward subjective interpretations
(3) high defensiveness
(4) seeking stimulation or expressing dissatisfaction through action
(5) insufficient attention to others’ emotions.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common interpersonal friction, teamwork issues, or tension in intimate relationships
(2) symptoms worsen in situations involving power imbalances or stress
(3) highly defensive toward feedback.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess triggering situations and coping strategies
(2) administer Pa-O, Pd4, D-scale, and validity indicators concurrently
(3) inquire about any history of impulsivity or substance use.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Cognitive restructuring, emotion recognition training, and conflict resolution skills
(2) mindfulness and relaxation training to reduce overreactions
(3) behavioral contracts and gradual exposure to reduce impulsive actions
(4) if accompanied by anxiety or depression, combine medication with psychotherapy.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pa2 scored above average
(2) emotionally sensitive and easily offended, with a tendency to express dissatisfaction through actions
(3) cognitive and emotional regulation training is recommended, along with an assessment for comorbid conditions.


▲Immaturity (Pa3):T30   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Pa3 assesses an individual’s idealized trust in others, naive self-confidence, and tendency to deny hostility
(2) those with high scores tend to view themselves and others as trustworthy, honest, and morally upright, exhibiting a direct, goal-oriented behavioral style
(3) those with low scores are more suspicious of others, acknowledge hostility and resentment, and exhibit higher social vigilance.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)The correlation coefficient between Pa3 and Pa‑s (covert psychopathy) is approximately .84
(2) with the Wiggins Hostility Scale, approximately −.81
(3) with Hy2 (emotional neediness), approximately .72
(4) with prejudice, approximately −.69
(5) and with Hy‑S, approximately .65
(6)These correlations suggest that Pa3 primarily measures the dimension of trust in/idealization of others
(7) it is negatively correlated with hostility and positively correlated with emotional dependence or need, serving as an important indicator of the “idealization/naivety” aspect within the paranoid spectrum.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Denies others’ trustworthiness and frequently reports feeling hurt or harboring resentment
(2) Hy-S or Pd4 may be concurrently abnormal.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Highly suspicious and hostile
(2) strong emotional defensiveness
(3) tendency to maintain social distance
(4) may be accompanied by resentment or a tendency toward retaliation.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common features include long-standing interpersonal conflicts, vindictive thinking, or emotional detachment
(2) may be accompanied by depression, anger management issues, or chronic distrust.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Use concurrent Pa-O, Pd4, D-scale, and validity indices to rule out paranoia or pathological hostility
(2) assess the risk of self-harm or harm to others, as well as legal and social consequences.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Anger management, trauma-informed interventions, and cognitive restructuring
(2) if accompanied by severe paranoia or delusional beliefs, a psychiatric evaluation and medication are recommended
(3) coordinate with legal and social services as appropriate based on risk.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pa3 scored extremely low
(2) acknowledged high levels of suspicion and hostility, with long-standing interpersonal conflicts or resentment
(3) concurrent psychiatric evaluation and anger management interventions are recommended.


▲Paranoia—Marked (Pa-o):T   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Pa‑O (Paranoia—Overt) measures overt, pathologized paranoia and feelings of persecution within the paranoia spectrum
(2)High scores indicate persistent persecutory-like beliefs, intense suspicion and hostility, impaired reality testing, and significant impairment in interpersonal and occupational functioning
(3) low scores indicate trust, openness, or denial of paranoid tendencies
(4) interpretation must be based on longitudinal history, third-party information, and validity indicators to avoid misinterpreting situational vigilance as pathological paranoia.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Pa‑O, together with subscales such as Pa1, Pa2, and Pa3, constitutes the overt facet of the paranoia dimension
(2) it is often moderately to highly correlated with psychotic symptoms, social withdrawal, hostility, and depression
(3) high Pa‑O scores are associated with judicial/violence risk, loss of occupational functioning, and long-term interpersonal breakdown
(4) the scale serves as a risk indicator rather than sole diagnostic evidence and must be verified in conjunction with clinical interviews and real-world evidence.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Denies any victimization or suspicion
(2) may be accompanied by excessive compliance or impulsive behavior.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Highly accommodating or dependent
(2) emotionally expressive or emotionally numb
(3) low vigilance toward potential threats
(4) may be accompanied by seeking stimulation or impulsive behavior.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)If accompanied by a history of trauma or emotional numbness, be alert to avoidant coping
(2) if accompanied by reduced sleep or impulsivity, screen for hypomania or bipolar spectrum disorders.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Conduct parallel Ma and D scale assessments along with a longitudinal history evaluation to rule out denial, hypomania, or emotional masking
(2) verify third-party observations and functional fluctuations.

♦ Recommendations
(1)If the trust is healthy, maintain follow-up and stress management
(2) if there is emotional numbness or denial, implement emotional awareness and trauma-informed interventions
(3) if hypomania is suspected, recommend a psychiatric evaluation.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pa‑O scored extremely low
(2) denies paranoia and exhibits high trust or emotional numbness
(3) concurrent longitudinal history and emotional assessment are recommended.


▲Latent Paranoia (Pa-s):T   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Pa‑s (Paranoid‑Subtle) measures the positive aspects of covert, idealized, and schizoid object relations within the paranoid spectrum—namely, naive trust in others, idealization, and the resulting potential feelings of victimization or disappointment
(2) high scores indicate schizoid “good object” idealization (Pa‑s/Pa3 represents the good object), while low scores indicate resentment, distrust, and punitive tendencies (the negative aspects of paranoia)
(3)In individuals without obvious paranoid tendencies, Pa‑s and Pa3 assess normal levels of trust
(4) in those with paranoid tendencies, Pa‑s and Pa3 reflect the schizoid aspect of idealization (the “good object/bad object” dichotomy).

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Correlation coefficient between Pa‑s and Pa3 (Naivety) ≈ 0.84
(2) correlation coefficient with Wiggins’ Authority Conflict ≈ −0.62
(3) correlation coefficient with total Pa ≈ 0.57
(4) correlation coefficient with Hy2 (Emotional Needs) ≈ 0.52
(5) correlation coefficient with Hy‑S ≈ 0.47
(6)These correlations suggest that Pa‑s is closely related to trust/idealization, emotional needs, and schizoid object relations
(7) within the paranoid spectrum, Pa‑s manifests as “positive schism”—the idealized good object stands in opposition to the hated bad object (Pa‑O/Pa1)
(8)High T scores may manifest as “avoidance of harm”: despite internal dissatisfaction, individuals with high scores tend to be more rational and deliberately conceal negative emotions, suggesting “latent paranoia.”

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Denies the trustworthiness of others and frequently reports feeling hurt or resentful
(2) Pa‑O, Pa1, or Pd4 may also be abnormal.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Highly suspicious and hostile
(2) strong emotional defensiveness
(3) tendency to maintain social distance
(4) may be accompanied by resentment or a tendency toward retaliation.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common features include long-standing interpersonal conflicts, vindictive thinking, or emotional detachment
(2) may be accompanied by depression, anger management issues, or chronic distrust.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Use concurrent Pa-O, Pd4, D-scale, and validity indices to rule out paranoia or pathological hostility
(2) assess the risk of self-harm or harm to others, as well as legal and social consequences.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Anger management, trauma-informed interventions, and cognitive restructuring
(2) if accompanied by severe paranoia or delusional beliefs, a psychiatric evaluation and medication are recommended
(3) coordinate with legal and social services as appropriate based on risk.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)High levels of suspicion and resentment, chronic interpersonal conflict, or a tendency toward retaliation
(2) concurrent psychiatric evaluation and anger management interventions are recommended.

SI1	SI2	SI3
49	60	63

High
Low

▲Shyness/Self-Consciousness (Si1):T49   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Si1 (Shyness/Self-Consciousness) measures an individual’s level of discomfort, avoidance, and self-focus in social situations
(2) high scores indicate shyness, social avoidance, high sensitivity to others’ evaluations, and restricted speech or behavior
(3) low scores indicate extroversion, self-confidence, and social initiative.When interpreting Si1, it is essential to distinguish between low self-esteem (low self-efficacy) and anxiety (fear of negative evaluation), while also considering the influence of depressive withdrawal, cultural background, and occupational context on social style. High scores may reflect either chronic social anxiety or avoidant personality traits, or they may represent a temporary situational response (e.g., recent stress, loss, or physical illness).

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Si1 correlates with the Social Anxiety Scale, avoidance/dependence traits, depressive symptoms, and self-esteem indicators
(2) high scores are often accompanied by reduced speech, social avoidance, and functional impairment
(3) distinguishing between “shyness stemming from low self-esteem” and “shyness stemming from anxiety” is crucial for determining the intervention pathway
(4) response patterns (proportion of “no” answers, contradictory responses) and third-party observations help identify denial or masking.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Experiences nervousness in new situations or important occasions but is able to complete tasks and return to baseline functioning.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Situational nervousness but preserved functioning
(2) able to perform normally in familiar environments
(3) possesses basic social coping strategies.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most adults fall within this range, exhibiting healthy caution or culturally-based introversion
(2) no special intervention is required, but longitudinal changes should be monitored.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal stability
(2) if recent deterioration occurs, retesting and further evaluation are required.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, stress management, and short-term skills training as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Si1 scored within the normal range
(2) socially cautious but generally functionally stable
(3) routine follow-up and psychoeducation are recommended.


▲Social Avoidance (Si2):T60   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Si2 (Social Avoidance) assesses the extent to which an individual actively avoids social situations in daily life, work, and interpersonal relationships
(2) high scores are often manifested as avoiding gatherings, reducing social contact, refusing group activities, and preferring solitude. Avoidant behavior may be part of a long-term personality trait (avoidant personality) or a situational response (recent loss, trauma, depressive episode, or social anxiety).

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Si2 is correlated with the Social Anxiety Scale, depression scales, self-esteem indicators, and functional withdrawal
(2) response patterns (proportion of negative items, contradictory responses) and third-party observations help distinguish between masking, denial, or exaggeration
(3) cultural and occupational backgrounds significantly influence the functional implications of “avoidance.”

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Feels uncomfortable in specific situations (e.g., large gatherings) but is able to complete tasks and return to baseline functioning.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Situational avoidance but preserved functioning
(2) performs normally in familiar environments
(3) possesses basic social coping strategies.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most adults fall within this range, exhibiting healthy caution or culturally-based introversion
(2) no special intervention is required, but longitudinal changes should be monitored.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal stability
(2) if recent or progressive deterioration occurs, retesting and further evaluation are required.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, stress management, and short-term skills training as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Si2 scores are normal
(2) social avoidance is situational or a preference for solitude, with overall stable functioning
(3) follow-up and psychoeducation are recommended.


▲Dissociation—Self and Others (Si3):T63   BACK

※ General Description
(1)Si3 (Alienation—Self and Others) measures an individual’s sense of alienation in their self-experience and relationships with others
(2) high scores indicate a separation between the self and emotional experience, emotional detachment from others, emotional numbness, or passive withdrawal
(3) low scores indicate strong emotional connection, sensitivity to others’ feelings, and engaged interaction.High scores on Si3 may reflect post-traumatic dissociation, chronic emotional numbness, or personality defenses, and may also occur in cases of prolonged isolation, depression, or certain psychopathological conditions. Interpretation should incorporate longitudinal history, trauma history, dissociative symptoms, social functioning, and third-party observations to distinguish between adaptive isolation and pathological detachment.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Si3 is associated with dissociation, post-traumatic emotional numbness, depressive emotional blunting, and impaired social functioning
(2) high scores are often accompanied by avoidant or introverted components of Si1/Si2
(3) when co-occurring with Ma3 (Composure), it may indicate emotional blunting
(4) when co-occurring with Pd and Sc indicators, it suggests broader interpersonal isolation or psychopathological components.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Able to sense and respond to others’ emotions in most situations
(2) occasional brief detachment occurs but does not impair functioning.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Good emotional connection
(2) able to express and accept emotions in intimate relationships
(3) possesses emotional regulation skills.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)This is typical for most people
(2) if new detachment emerges, attention should be paid to triggering events or the effects of medication.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document longitudinal stability
(2) if progressive deterioration occurs, retesting and further evaluation are required.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, relationship communication training, and routine follow-up.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Si3 scores are within the normal range
(2) a balanced connection with self and others, and overall functional stability
(3) follow-up and psychoeducation are recommended.