HS(1)	D(2)	HY(3)	PD(4)	MF(5)	PA(6)	PT(7)	SC(8)	MA(9)	SI(0)
80	72	77	81	67	78	75	91	74	55

High
Low

▲Hs(1) Hypochondriasis:T80    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  (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:T77  (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:T81  (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:T67  (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)The profile indicates a preference for competitive, independent, and goal-oriented activities, with less dependence or emotional expressiveness
(2) the individual often assumes task-oriented roles within teams or prefers technical/physical activities

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Independent, pragmatic, goal-oriented, highly resilient to stress, moderately competitive and adventurous, and relatively restrained in emotional expression. May also present as direct, pragmatic, and less reliant on emotional support from others

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)The examinee typically exhibits preferences in career or interest choices that differ from those of women of the same age
(2) she may perform well in male-dominated environments but feel conflicted regarding emotional or family roles
(3) this is sometimes accompanied by self-doubt or avoidance of traditional female roles
(4) if this is the result of professional training, it should be distinguished during interpretation

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Consider parallel developmental history, occupational background, and third-party verification
(2) assess the impact of social role conflict on emotions and functioning
(3) pay attention to interactions with scales such as D, Pt, and Si to determine whether emotional or social costs are present

♦ Recommendations
(1)Counseling on career and interpersonal fit
(2) training in emotional expression and intimate relationships
(3) if accompanied by emotional symptoms, provide psychotherapy as needed
(4) encourage the use of masculine traits for positive career development and learning to balance the needs of intimate relationships

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Mf score is relatively high
(2) female participants prefer independent and goal-oriented activities, perform well in male-dominated environments but experience conflict in intimate relationships
(3) it is recommended to provide career and relationship compatibility counseling and assess emotional state.


▲Pa(6) Paranoia:T78    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:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Highly positive on this item, with persistent reports of feelings of victimization, negative interpretations of others’ motives, and sensations of thought theft or surveillance
(2) highly sensitive to criticism and often responds with blame or retaliation
(3) frequent thought-referencing, jealousy, or a tendency to resort to legal action

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Rigid, obstinate, suspicious, with strong feelings of resentment and distrust toward others
(2) may appear upright or highly moral on the surface, but often uses projection to absolve themselves of guilt and responsibility
(3) may lie during conversations and fabricate different narratives for different investigators

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Frequent interpersonal conflicts, social withdrawal, or hostility toward authority
(2) frequent litigation, confrontational behavior, or repeated complaints
(3) prone to intense reactions or retaliatory behavior in stressful or frustrating situations
(4) significant resistance to treatment and limited psychological resilience
(5) high vigilance is required regarding violence, self-harm, harm to others, and psychotic conversion

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Immediately conduct a structured psychotic assessment, toxicology testing, and medical screening in parallel to rule out substance- or somatic-related causes
(2) obtain third-party accounts and historical records to verify behavioral and legal history
(3) assess reality testing, intent/planning/access to means, and risk of self-harm or harm to others
(4) note the interaction between Sc and F (simultaneously high scores suggest formal thought disorder or depressive mood)
(5) high L/K scores may indicate defensiveness or distrust in responding

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize risk management
(2) in the short term, aim for safety and stability
(3) if necessary, arrange a psychiatric consultation and prescribe low-dose antipsychotics to control delusions or high levels of hostility
(4) psychotherapy should focus primarily on CBT-P (reality testing, cognitive restructuring) and long-term treatment centered on building trust
(5) family/systemic interventions, social skills training, and legal/vocational support should proceed in parallel
(6) intensive follow-up and multidisciplinary collaboration are essential

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Extremely high risk (Pa)
(2) the patient persistently reports feelings of being monitored and victimized and exhibits high levels of suspicion toward colleagues and superiors, accompanied by repeated acts of defiance
(3) toxicology screening and a structured psychosis assessment have been completed
(4) it is recommended to initiate risk management, psychiatric consultation, and CBT-P, and to arrange for intensive follow-up.


▲Pt(7) Neurasthenia:T75  (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:T91  (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:T74    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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)The entry indicates elevated mood or irritability, increased energy and activity, reduced need for sleep, increased talkativeness, and distractibility
(2) often accompanied by impulsive decision-making, risky behavior, or excessive dedication to work
(3) the individual often appears friendly, sociable, humorous, and extroverted, able to attract attention in social settings but often lacking patience and depth
(4) thinking is active and wide-ranging, but at times disorganized and chaotic, affecting judgment

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Extroverted, decisive, and charismatic, but judgment may be impaired
(2) may at times exhibit grandiosity, impatience, or irritability

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Work efficiency increases in the short term but is difficult to sustain
(2) the individual is prone to conflicts with others or making hasty decisions
(3) alcohol abuse, exaggeration, or unrealistic plans may occur
(4) if the D score is also high, be alert for a mixed state
(5) some individuals can channel high energy into creativity or productivity, but this may also lead to interpersonal and occupational problems

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Conduct concurrent assessments of the bipolar spectrum, substance use screening, sleep history, and functional status
(2) document symptom duration and triggers
(3) assess the risk of progression to a manic or mixed state

♦ Recommendations
(1)For patients with impaired functioning or persistent symptoms, consider short-term mood stabilizers or low-dose antipsychotics
(2) psychological interventions should focus on psychoeducation, CBT—emotional regulation, sleep hygiene, and impulse management
(3) encourage a regular daily routine and restrict high-risk behaviors
(4) for those willing to cooperate, provide vocational and interpersonal support to channel energy in a positive direction

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Ma score is elevated
(2) the patient has recently exhibited a significant increase in energy and activity, reduced sleep, and has displayed impulsive behavior and social hyperactivity. It is recommended to complete a bipolar assessment, conduct substance use screening, and initiate sleep and impulse management interventions.


▲Si (0) Social Introversion:T55  (Please interpret this score with caution)  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
58	57	85	66	47	71	53

High
Low

▲Subjective Depression (D1):T58  (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional short-term low mood or emotional fluctuations occur, but these can be resolved through rest, support, or problem-solving
(2) there is no persistent loss of interest or thoughts of self-harm.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate emotional regulation and resilience, with some coping resources and social support.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Reactions are mostly situational or brief stress responses, with minimal and reversible impact on functioning
(2) re-evaluation is warranted if symptoms persist or worsen.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events, support systems, and longitudinal stability
(2) if symptoms persist for more than two weeks or functioning declines, initiate further evaluation.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, stress management, problem-solving training, or short-term supportive psychotherapy
(2) encourage maintaining good sleep, exercise, and social activities.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D1’s scores fall within the normal range
(2) they have recently experienced a brief low mood due to work-related stress but were able to recover on their own
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Psychomotor retardation (D2):T57    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):T85    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:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Patients select a large number of items on the scale related to pain, extreme fatigue, indigestion, dizziness, and general malaise
(2) symptoms are widespread, persistent, and affect multiple areas of life.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Weak emotional awareness
(2) dependent or avoidant-dependent interpersonal styles
(3) perfectionism and high levels of self-censorship
(4) a tendency to seek attention or avoid responsibility through physical symptoms.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Commonly seen in depression with severe somatization, chronic pain syndromes, and physical symptoms associated with prolonged stress or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
(2) patients may be preoccupied with describing their discomfort, have low motivation for change, and exhibit high utilization of medical resources.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Conduct a comprehensive medical workup first (complete blood count, thyroid function, liver and kidney function, inflammatory markers, metabolic tests, and pain-related tests)
(2) collect a detailed history of medical visits and tests to identify patterns of healthcare utilization
(3) assess secondary gain, sleep, and medication and substance use
(4) and concurrently administer the D1, Hy, and Hs scales along with validity measures to distinguish between emotional somatization and organic causes.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize interdisciplinary collaboration (internal medicine, rheumatology, neurology, pain medicine, and psychiatry)
(2) establish a consistent medical-psychological treatment plan
(3) psychotherapy should focus on somatization-oriented CBT, pain management, and training in emotional awareness and expression
(4) behavioral activation and progressive return to activity
(5) family or systemic interventions to reduce secondary gain
(6) if necessary, concurrent use of antidepressants or pain management medications with close monitoring.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D3 scored extremely high and reported chronic pain in multiple areas along with fatigue. Previous multiple medical evaluations revealed no clear organic pathology, and family members reported that the patient used their physical complaints to avoid work or family responsibilities. It is recommended to first conduct a comprehensive medical evaluation and then implement somatization-oriented CBT and pain management under the guidance of an interdisciplinary team.


▲Psychological Burden (D4):T66  (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Participants commonly report feeling overwhelmed by stress, prone to fatigue, or worried about the future, with symptoms worsening when work or family burdens increase.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Strong sense of responsibility, self-criticism, sensitivity to failure, or tendency to blame oneself
(2) symptoms are more pronounced when social support is insufficient.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)May represent early manifestations of an adjustment disorder, work-related burnout, or depression
(2) without intervention, some individuals may progress to chronic mood disorders or functional decline.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess the triggering event, duration, and extent of functional impairment
(2) inquire about sleep, appetite, medication history, and social support
(3) monitor thoughts of self-harm and record changes.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Short-term psychological interventions (CBT, stress management, problem-solving training), sleep and lifestyle adjustments, behavioral activation, and connection to social resources
(2) consider short-term medication treatment if necessary and schedule follow-up.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D4 scored above average and reported feeling overwhelmed and easily fatigued due to recent work and family pressures
(2) short-term CBT, sleep and lifestyle interventions are recommended, along with follow-up appointments.


▲Worry (D5):T47    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):T71  (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Participants commonly report low mood, diminished interest, lack of energy, changes in sleep or appetite, and reduced attention and decision-making ability, though they are still able to complete some daily tasks.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Strong sense of responsibility, tendency toward guilt, sensitivity to failure, and tendency toward self-criticism
(2) symptoms are more pronounced when support is insufficient or under prolonged stress.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)This may represent a short-term depressive episode, an adjustment disorder, or early signs of depression
(2) without intervention, some individuals may progress to chronic depression or functional deterioration.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess symptom duration, triggering events, extent of functional impairment, and social support
(2) inquire about sleep, medication history, and physical symptoms
(3) monitor thoughts of self-harm and document changes.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Short-term psychological interventions (CBT, behavioral activation, problem-solving training), sleep and lifestyle adjustments, and stress management
(2) if symptoms moderately impair functioning, consider antidepressant medication and schedule a follow-up
(3) encourage behavioral activation and mobilization of social support.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D‑o scored slightly high
(2) has experienced low mood and reduced motivation in recent months but is still able to complete some work
(3) recommend short-term CBT, sleep and lifestyle interventions, and schedule a follow-up.


▲Anger and Aggression Inhibition (D-s):T53    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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Scale scores and interviews indicate the ability to express dissatisfaction in appropriate situations and to exercise self-control to avoid unnecessary conflict
(2) there is neither chronic suppression nor impulsive externalization.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate emotional regulation and resilience, with adequate assertiveness and social support.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Functioning is stable, with moderate conflict resolution and emotional regulation abilities
(2) may experience brief imbalances during major conflicts but is able to recover.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Monitor triggers and support resources, and track longitudinal stability
(2) if persistent suppression or frequent outbursts occur, a reassessment is needed.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, short-term emotional regulation training, assertiveness training, or interpersonal therapy
(2) provide conflict resolution skills training in specific contexts.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D-s’s scores fall within the normal range
(2) they occasionally experience anger during work-related conflicts but can recover through communication and rest
(3) short-term assertiveness training and follow-up are recommended.

HY1	HY2	HY3	HY4	HY5	HY_O	HY_S
51	55	67	77	62	77	51

High
Low

▲Denial of Social Anxiety (Hy1):T51   (Please interpret this score with caution)  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):T55     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):T67     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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Fatigue, reduced motivation, or difficulty concentrating are commonly reported, with symptoms worsening under high-stress or demanding circumstances.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Patients tend to focus on physical discomfort or are sensitive to fatigue
(2) this may be accompanied by perfectionism or a strong sense of responsibility, leading to overexertion.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)This may represent a short-term stress response, sleep deprivation, lifestyle issues, or early manifestations of mild-to-moderate depression
(2) patients often seek strategies to improve their energy levels but may not undergo systematic medical evaluation.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Inquire about sleep, workload, medication history, and history of chronic conditions
(2) rule out reversible physical factors and assess symptoms of depression and anxiety
(3) be sure to distinguish between transient fatigue and persistent pathological fatigue.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Lifestyle adjustments (sleep hygiene, exercise prescription, nutritional assessment), short-term CBT or behavioral activation, stress management, and time management training
(2) if accompanied by depression or sleep disorders, consider concurrent medication or sleep medicine interventions.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Hy3 scored above average
(2) chief complaint is recent decline in energy, easy fatigue, and poor sleep quality
(3) recommend assessing sleep and lifestyle and implementing behavioral activation and sleep hygiene interventions, with depression screening as needed.


▲Somatic Complaints (Hy4):T77     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):T62   (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Scales and interviews indicate the ability to express dissatisfaction in appropriate situations, as well as self-control to avoid unnecessary conflicts

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate emotional awareness and expression
(2) possesses a certain sense of boundaries and self-protection abilities

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Functioning is stable
(2) conflict resolution and emotional regulation abilities are moderate
(3) may experience brief imbalances during major conflicts but is able to recover

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Monitor triggers and support resources, and track longitudinal stability
(2) if persistent suppression or frequent outbursts occur, a reassessment is needed

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, emotion regulation training, assertiveness training, or short-term interpersonal therapy
(2) provide conflict resolution skills training in specific situations

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Hy5 score falls within the normal range
(2) experiences occasional anger during work-related conflicts but recovers through communication and rest
(3) short-term assertiveness training and follow-up are recommended


▲Hysteria—Overt (Hy-o):T77     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 High

♦ Test Performance
(1)On the scale, there are numerous selections of items such as pain, fatigue, digestive discomfort, and dizziness
(2) symptoms are diverse and persistent, and subjective complaints are often disproportionate to objective findings.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Patients tend to seek sympathy and attention
(2) their emotional expression is primarily somatized
(3) they have poor emotional awareness
(4) and they may exhibit dependent or avoidant-dependent interpersonal styles.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Commonly seen in somatization disorders, chronic pain complicated by depression, or against a background of prolonged stress
(2) patients seek medical care frequently and are resistant to psychogenic explanations, and their motivation for change may be low.

♦ 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 examinations should be obtained to identify patterns of healthcare utilization
(3) secondary gains (e.g., avoidance of responsibility, receiving care) and motivation for change should be assessed
(4) and concurrent evaluations of depression, anxiety, and trauma history should be performed.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize interdisciplinary collaboration
(2) first address reversible physical causes and establish a coordinated medical-psychological plan
(3) psychotherapy should focus on somatization-oriented CBT, training in emotional awareness and expression, psychoeducation, and family intervention
(4) incorporate pain management, sleep interventions, and behavioral activation
(5) and, when necessary, administer antidepressants or symptom-management medications concurrently.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)The subject has an extremely high Hy-o score
(2) the chief complaint is chronic pain in multiple areas and digestive discomfort. Previous multiple medical consultations and examinations have revealed no clear organic pathology. Family members report that the patient often uses physical pain as an excuse to avoid work or family responsibilities. It is recommended to first conduct a comprehensive medical examination and then implement somatization-oriented CBT and family intervention under the guidance of a multidisciplinary team.


▲Hysteria-Subtle (Hy‑s):T51     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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Scale results and interviews indicate the ability to express dissatisfaction in appropriate situations, as well as the capacity for self-control to avoid unnecessary conflict.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Emotional awareness and expression are moderate
(2) the individual possesses a sense of boundaries and self-protection skills.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Functioning is stable, with moderate conflict resolution and emotional regulation abilities
(2) may experience brief imbalances during major conflicts but is able to recover.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Monitor triggers and support resources, and track longitudinal stability
(2) if persistent suppression or frequent outbursts occur, a reassessment is needed.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, emotional regulation training, assertiveness training, or short-term interpersonal therapy
(2) provide conflict resolution skills training in specific situations.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Hy-s’s score falls within the normal range
(2) they occasionally feel suppressed during family conflicts but can recover through communication and rest. Short-term emotional regulation training and follow-up are recommended.

PD1	PD2	PD3	PD4	PD5	PD_O	PD_S
80	53	52	54	53	65	63

High
Low

▲Family Dysfunction (Pd1):T80     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:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)On the scale, there are numerous selections of items such as “I often argue with my family,” “My family does not understand me,” and “The atmosphere at home is tense”
(2) during interviews, strong hostility, blame, or long-standing resentment are frequently evident.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High hostility, irritability, or provocativeness
(2) low empathy
(3) tendencies toward antisocial or borderline traits
(4) strong resistance to rules or authority
(5) may also manifest as a strong sense of victimization and attribution bias (shifting blame onto others).

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)This may stem from long-standing objective discord (domestic violence, divorce-related conflicts, intergenerational conflicts) or from conflicts caused by the individual’s behavior (provocation, rule-breaking, refusal to assume family responsibilities)
(2) it is commonly accompanied by mood disorders, substance abuse, or legal issues, and the family support system is weak.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Prioritize assessing domestic violence, risk of self-harm or harm to others, child-rearing safety, and legal history
(2) collect third-party testimonies and records (police, social workers, medical records)
(3) distinguish between victim narratives and the chain of evidence regarding perpetrator behavior or provocation
(4) assess substance use, psychotic symptoms, and impulsivity.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize cross-system interventions (crisis management, legal/social service interventions, family therapy, and individual psychotherapy)
(2) if violence or abuse is present, immediately initiate a safety plan and coordinate with judicial/social resources
(3) psychotherapy may include behavior-oriented conflict management, family systems therapy, DBT techniques (emotion and impulse management), and medication when necessary
(4) arrange for intensive follow-up and multidisciplinary collaboration.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pd1 scored extremely high
(2) he reported long-standing conflicts with his spouse and parents, along with a history of verbal and physical confrontations
(3) family members reported multiple police reports. It is recommended to immediately conduct a safety and risk assessment and initiate multidisciplinary intervention (family therapy, coordination with legal and social services).


▲Authority Issues (Pd2):T53     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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Scale scores and interviews indicate that the individual follows rules when necessary and can raise objections in reasonable situations
(2) overall functioning is stable.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Emotional regulation and social adaptability are moderate, with a reasonable degree of critical thinking and cooperativeness.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)The individual primarily exhibits adaptive social behavior and is able to fulfill roles and responsibilities within organizations or the family.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if frequent conflicts or functional decline occur, further evaluation is needed.

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

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pd2 scored within the normal range
(2) in most situations, they are able to balance obedience and independence, with occasional disputes that can be resolved
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Social Instability (Pd3):T52   (Please interpret this score with caution)  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):T54     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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional experiences of loneliness or feeling misunderstood occur, but these can be resolved through communication or support
(2) scale scores fall within the mid-range.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Emotional regulation and social adaptability are moderate
(2) the individual is able to identify and utilize social resources.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These are mostly situational loneliness or short-term social difficulties
(2) overall functioning is stable and reversible.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if feelings of alienation persist or are accompanied by functional decline, further evaluation is required.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, mobilization of social support, and short-term interpersonal or problem-solving therapy
(2) encourage participation in community or interest groups to enhance a sense of belonging.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pd4 scored within the normal range
(2) occasionally feels lonely during periods of life transition but is able to recover on their own
(3) psychological education and follow-up are recommended.


▲Inner Turmoil (Pd5):T53     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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Tends to blame themselves for mistakes but is able to take corrective action or seek support.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses moderate self-reflection abilities
(2) has moderate resilience and is able to learn from mistakes
(3) emotional regulation and problem-solving abilities are largely intact.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Adaptive self-reflection facilitates learning and growth
(2) overall functioning is stable.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if self-blame persists or worsens, reassessment is needed.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation
(2) short-term supportive therapy or problem-solving training
(3) encourage behavioral activation and social support.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pd5 scored within the normal range
(2) experiences occasional regret but is able to recover through behavioral adjustments
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Psychopathic Deviation—Marked (Pd-o):T65     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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)The individual tends to select items related to questioning authority, self-centeredness, and low sensitivity to others’ emotions
(2) this may be accompanied by a partial elevation in Pd2 or Pd3.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High degree of independence
(2) stubbornness
(3) low compliance
(4) strong critical thinking skills.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common manifestations include intergenerational conflict, occupational mismatch, or early antisocial behavior
(2) this may lead to interpersonal tension or disciplinary issues.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess conflict situations and their persistence
(2) distinguish between reasonable defiance and pathological anti-authority behavior
(3) conduct concurrent screening for substance use and mood disorders.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Assertiveness training
(2) conflict resolution skills
(3) vocational/educational placement
(4) CBT or emotion regulation training.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subjects with elevated Pd‑o scores frequently challenge authority and cause interpersonal tension
(2) assertiveness training, conflict resolution, and vocational suitability assessments are recommended.


▲Psychopathic Deviation—Covert (Pd-s):T63     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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Scales and interviews indicate the ability to demonstrate empathy and cooperation when necessary, as well as to maintain boundaries when required
(2) no record of systematic victimization.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate emotional regulation and social adaptability
(2) demonstrates moderate empathy
(3) maintains a good balance between boundaries and goals.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Occasional conflicts arise but are resolved
(2) workplace and family functioning are generally stable
(3) strategic behavior may occur under short-term stress but is not persistent.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if frequent exploitation or breaches of trust occur, further verification of third-party evidence is required.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation
(2) social skills enhancement or short-term supportive therapy
(3) career counseling and team communication training.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)The subject’s Pd-s score is within the normal range
(2) they are able to balance their own needs with others’ feelings in most situations
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.

SC1	SC2	SC3	SC4	SC5	SC6
73	67	61	59	65	72

High
Low

▲Social Withdrawal (Sc1):T73   (Please interpret this score with caution)  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):T67     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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Often selects statements such as “I am more easily moved by thoughts or memories than by others’ comfort” and “I sometimes feel emotionally out of sync with others.”

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Emotional responsiveness is limited but not entirely absent
(2) there is a tendency to compensate for emotional needs through one’s inner world or activities
(3) self-criticism is present but some capacity for reality testing remains
(4) there is a tendency to avoid intimate interactions.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Appears calm or distant in intimate relationships
(2) misunderstandings or conflicts may arise due to insufficient emotional expression
(3) tends to internalize or withdraw under stress.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess the triggers and persistence of emotional withdrawal
(2) conduct concurrent assessments of depression, trauma, and personality
(3) inquire about daily emotional regulation strategies and support networks.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Training in emotional awareness, social, and communication skills
(2) psychodynamic or supportive therapy to explore issues of self-acceptance
(3) if depression is present, combine medication with psychotherapy.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject SC2 scored above average
(2) exhibits emotional detachment and restricted expression, which affects intimate relationships
(3) emotional awareness and social skills training are recommended.


▲Lack of self-control and cognition (Sc3):T61   (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional distractions or brief lapses in memory occur, but these can be compensated for through strategies (such as note-taking and reminders)
(2) there is no persistent functional impairment.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Attention and executive function are balanced
(2) effective compensatory strategies are in place
(3) emotional fluctuations have limited impact on cognition
(4) able to maintain task completion in most situations.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Attention and memory are sufficient to support work and interpersonal functioning
(2) may be temporarily affected under extreme fatigue or stress.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if fluctuations or recent deterioration occur, retesting and longitudinal observation should be conducted concurrently.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, time management, and attention strategies
(2) provide short-term support or skills training as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject SC3 scored within the normal range
(2) cognitive control and attention are within the normative range
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Lack of self-control, impulsivity (Sc4):T59   (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional procrastination or fatigue, but able to compensate through strategies (planning, reminders)
(2) no persistent functional impairment.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Initiation and execution abilities are balanced
(2) possesses basic motivation and task management strategies
(3) emotional fluctuations have limited impact on behavior
(4) able to maintain functioning in most situations.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Daily and occupational functioning is generally stable
(2) may experience temporary declines during periods of extreme stress or short-term depression.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if a recent or progressive decline occurs, conduct concurrent retesting and longitudinal observation.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, time management, and short-term skills training
(2) provide vocational/academic support as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject SC4 scored within the normal range
(2) initiation and maintenance abilities are normal, and functioning is generally stable
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Lack of self-control, deficits in inhibition (Sc5):T65     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):T72     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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Reports of occasional or context-dependent auditory or tactile abnormalities, a sense of being affected, or bodily sensations
(2) may be accompanied by a history of sleep deprivation or substance use.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Prone to bizarre perceptual experiences
(2) highly preoccupied with abnormal experiences and prone to anxiety
(3) reality testing ability is partially preserved but fragile
(4) symptoms may be partially alleviated with external support.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Symptoms worsen under stress, insomnia, or the influence of substances
(2) may lead to anxiety, social avoidance, or reduced work efficiency.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Review history of substance/medication use and sleep patterns
(2) conduct concurrent neurological screening and psychological assessment
(3) inquire about symptom onset, duration, and triggers.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Rule out reversible factors (medications, sleep, metabolism)
(2) provide short-term psychiatric intervention and reality testing training
(3) if anxiety or depression is present, combine psychotherapy with medication management.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Sc6 scored above average
(2) exhibits bizarre sensory experiences or brief hallucination-like phenomena. Recommend substance/sleep and medical screening, along with reality testing and supportive interventions.

MA1	MA2	MA3	MA_O	MA_S
54	45	69	69	55

High
Low

▲Lack of Moral Consciousness (Ma1):T54     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):T45     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):T69     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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Often selects items such as “I usually remain calm” and “I am not easily swayed by my emotions”
(2) may be accompanied by mild depressive or dissociative symptoms.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Emotionally stable and restrained in reactions
(2) adept at remaining calm under pressure
(3) limited but highly functional emotional expression
(4) tends to rationalize emotional experiences.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Performs reliably in work or crisis situations
(2) may be misinterpreted as aloof in intimate relationships or situations requiring high emotional support
(3) individuals who suppress emotions over the long term are prone to somatization or chronic tension symptoms.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess whether emotional suppression is a coping strategy or the result of long-term repression
(2) concurrently evaluate relationship quality and emotional support networks
(3) note the presence of any somatization symptoms or chronic pain.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Training in emotional expression, empathy, and communication skills
(2) mindfulness and body awareness exercises
(3) if accompanied by depression or dissociation, combine psychotherapy with necessary medication.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Ma3 scored relatively high
(2) marked emotional inhibition and a tendency toward composure, which may affect intimate relationships
(3) emotional expression training and relationship interventions are recommended.


▲Mild Mania—Pronounced (Ma-o):T69     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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Reports items such as “I often behave inappropriately in social situations” and “I sometimes feel regret after acting impulsively”
(2) Ma2 and Sc5 may show mild concurrent elevations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Socially outgoing and attention-seeking
(2) impulsive decision-making often leads to consequences
(3) symptoms worsen under stress or with sleep deprivation.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These are often manifestations of a subclinical period of high energy or the early stages of a mood cycle
(2) if accompanied by substance use or reduced sleep, symptoms can rapidly worsen and lead to conflict.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess the frequency and consequences of impulsive episodes
(2) verify sleep and substance use history
(3) gather third-party observations to assess functional impact.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Behavioral interventions (impulse management, cognitive restructuring)
(2) education on sleep hygiene and substance use
(3) short-term psychiatric follow-up and medication evaluation as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Ma-O score is elevated
(2) overt impulsivity and a tendency toward sensation-seeking are evident, which may affect interpersonal or occupational functioning
(3) impulse management and sleep/substance use assessment are recommended.


▲Mild Mania—Mild (Ma-s):T55     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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Behaves naturally and is talkative in social settings, rarely causing conflict.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Extroverted and highly adaptable
(2) good social skills
(3) basic sensitivity to others’ feelings
(4) able to maintain cooperation in most situations.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most individuals fall within this range and are generally functioning stably
(2) no special intervention is needed in the absence of persistent interpersonal difficulties.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document longitudinal stability and triggering situations
(2) if recent fluctuations occur, retesting and third-party verification are required.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation and routine follow-up.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Ma-S scored within the normal range
(2) is outgoing and socially active, with generally stable functioning
(3) follow-up and verification of sleep and substance use history are recommended.

PA1	PA2	PA3	PA_O	PA_S
63	72	50	72	61

High
Low

▲Persecutory Ideation (Pa1):T63     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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Seeks explanations or reconciliation after conflicts
(2) perceptions of threats are generally consistent with actual evidence.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate awareness of self-protection
(2) balance between empathy and a sense of responsibility
(3) moderate emotional regulation ability
(4) seeks reconciliation after conflicts.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Moderate vigilance aids in self-protection
(2) no history of systematic victimization or complaints
(3) may temporarily increase under high-pressure situations.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if feelings of victimization persist or worsen, reassess and concurrently review the scale.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, communication training, and short-term support
(2) provide follow-up and problem-solving training during periods of stress.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pa1 scored within the normal range
(2) occasionally feels misunderstood but is able to correct these cognitions
(3) psychological education and follow-up 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):T50     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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Seeks clarification or reconciliation during conflicts or when misunderstood
(2) judgments of others’ motives generally align with empirical evidence.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Balance between trust and vigilance
(2) moderate emotional expression
(3) possesses basic boundary-setting and assertiveness skills
(4) able to maintain cooperation in most situations.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Moderate trust facilitates cooperation and task completion
(2) no history of systematic exploitation or trust breaches
(3) may temporarily increase or decrease during periods of stress.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if there are abnormal fluctuations in trust or suspicion, review using parallel scales.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, communication skills training, and role-playing exercises
(2) provide career and relationship counseling in team or family settings.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pa3 scored within the normal range
(2) exhibits moderate trust in others and maintains a balanced sense of boundaries
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Paranoia—Marked (Pa-o):T72     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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Often selects items such as “I am frequently targeted,” “Others cannot be trusted,” and “People are speaking ill of me behind my back”
(2) Pa1, Pa2, and Pd4 may be moderately elevated.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Persistent suspicion
(2) high defensiveness
(3) intense but not entirely fixed delusions
(4) a tendency to monitor others and maintain social distance
(5) a tendency to interpret others’ motives negatively.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Often leads to team friction, complaints, or the breakdown of intimate relationships
(2) symptoms worsen under stress or in power conflicts
(3) highly defensive toward feedback and prone to external attribution.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess the modifiability of beliefs and triggering situations
(2) administer Pa1–Pa3, the Pd scale, and the D scale concurrently to identify comorbidity
(3) verify history of substance use and sleep deprivation.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Cognitive-behavioral reality testing training
(2) social cognition and conflict resolution skills
(3) emotion regulation training (DBT techniques)
(4) short-term anti-anxiety or antipsychotic medication as needed to reduce symptom severity
(5) motivational interviewing to improve treatment adherence.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pa-O scored above average
(2) significant paranoia and persistent suspicion, leading to interpersonal conflicts and functional impairment
(3) cognitive reality-testing training and concurrent medication evaluation are recommended.


▲Latent Paranoia (Pa-s):T61     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:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Seeks clarification or reconciliation during conflicts or when misunderstood
(2) judgments of others’ motives generally align with empirical evidence.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Balanced trust and vigilance
(2) moderate emotional expression
(3) possesses basic boundary-setting and assertiveness skills
(4) able to maintain cooperation in most situations.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Moderate trust facilitates cooperation and task completion
(2) no history of systematic exploitation or trust breaches
(3) may temporarily increase or decrease during periods of stress.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal stability
(2) if there are abnormal fluctuations in trust or suspicion, review using parallel scales.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, communication skills training, and role-playing exercises
(2) provide career and relationship counseling in team or family settings.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Pa‑s score is within the normal range
(2) maintains moderate trust in others and balances boundaries effectively
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.

SI1	SI2	SI3
52	65	38

High
Low

▲Shyness/Self-Consciousness (Si1):T52   (Please interpret this score with caution)  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):T65     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:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Reports items such as “I feel uncomfortable around strangers” and “I avoid large gatherings but can attend small gatherings.”

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Social caution and selective avoidance
(2) relatively relaxed among familiar people
(3) concerned about being judged but able to participate when necessary
(4) prone to self-criticism.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Often presents as subclinical social avoidance or situational withdrawal
(2) symptoms worsen under stress or with sleep deprivation
(3) if accompanied by low self-esteem or depression, avoidance may evolve into a functional impairment.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess triggering situations and the extent of functional impairment
(2) conduct concurrent assessments of self-esteem and anxiety to distinguish the dominant mechanism.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Short-term CBT, assertiveness training, and behavioral exercises
(2) group therapy or social skills training can enhance practical application.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Si2 scored relatively high
(2) social withdrawal is pronounced but functioning is maintained in familiar situations
(3) CBT intervention and social skills training are recommended, with monitoring for comorbid depression and anxiety.


▲Dissociation—Self and Others (Si3):T38   (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:Below Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Tends to select items such as “I easily sense others’ emotions” and “I have close relationships with others.”

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Strong empathic ability
(2) high emotional investment
(3) boundaries may be weak
(4) easily influenced by others’ emotions.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)This is typically adaptive empathy, but individuals with weak boundaries are prone to emotional exhaustion or being taken advantage of.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Conduct parallel assessments of boundaries and empathy
(2) pay attention to whether emotional exhaustion or dependent interpersonal patterns are present.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Training in boundary-setting, assertiveness, and self-care strategies
(2) if accompanied by emotional exhaustion, provide emotional regulation training.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject Si3 scores are low
(2) strong emotional connection and high empathy
(3) boundary-setting training and self-care interventions are recommended, if applicable.

RCD	RC1	RC2	RC3	RC4	RC6	RC7	RC8	RC9
65	70	74	52	69	73	58	66	46

High
Low

▲Demoralization (RCd):T65     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The RCd (Low Morale) Scale is designed to assess an individual’s loss of motivation, anhedonia, hopelessness, and decreased life satisfaction
(2) this scale reflects the core concept of “demoralization” within the depression spectrum and may also indicate reduced energy associated with chronic fatigue, occupational burnout, or somatic illness
(3)Interpretation must integrate RCd scores with validity scales (L/F/K/Fb/S), other internalization scales (NEGE/RC7/RC2), a list of life events, results of physical medical examinations, and third-party functional reports
(4) a single high score indicates clinical concern but is insufficient to diagnose depression or a somatic cause
(5) a comprehensive assessment must be made in conjunction with functional impairment, medical history, and longitudinal data.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary literature regards RCd as a valid indicator of the “depression/anhedonia” dimension within the depression spectrum
(2) research shows that RCd is highly correlated with low extraversion and low positive affect in the Five-Factor Model
(3) neurobiological studies suggest that high RCd is associated with impaired function of the reward system (dopamine pathways) and the prefrontal-limbic circuit, as well as abnormal HPA axis stress responses
(4)Methodological evidence supports the combined use of RCd with other internalizing scales from the MMPI-2-RF/RC, as well as multi-source data (self-report, ratings by others, and behavioral activity monitoring) and longitudinal follow-up, to enhance predictive validity for chronic depression, functional impairment, and treatment response
(5) intervention studies indicate that behavioral activation, goal-oriented activity prescriptions, motivational interviewing, and exercise prescriptions have strong evidence for restoring positivity
(6)Clinical practice emphasizes ruling out somatic causes, assessing the risk of self-harm or suicide, and setting functional recovery as the primary treatment goal.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)The entry indicates frequent loss of interest, low energy, and reduced activity, but some daily functioning is still preserved

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Reduced resilience, tendency toward self-blame, decreased sensitivity to rewards, and avoidance tendencies

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common manifestations include decreased work efficiency, reduced interpersonal interaction, and short-term emotional relapse
(2) may represent situational depression or chronic stress

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess recent life events, sleep quality, substance use, and physical illnesses
(2) use a depression scale (e.g., PHQ-9) alongside a functional assessment to determine the intensity of intervention
(3) take care to distinguish between situational fatigue and chronic anhedonia

♦ Recommendations
(1)Recommend behavioral activation, goal setting, and short-term CBT
(2) encourage regular exercise, good sleep hygiene, and a gradual increase in social activities
(3) if symptoms persist or functioning is significantly impaired, consider antidepressant medication combined with psychotherapy

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)RCd score is slightly elevated
(2) the patient reports that reduced interest is affecting work performance. Behavioral activation is recommended, along with an assessment of sleep and substance use factors, with a reassessment of treatment response within six weeks.


▲Somatic Complaints (RC1):T70     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The RC1 primarily measures persistent physical discomfort, pain, fatigue, gastrointestinal or neuropathic symptoms, and their impact on daily functioning
(2) this scale can reflect the psychological burden associated with somatization disorder or chronic pain, but may also be influenced by depression, anxiety, medication side effects, or chronic diseases
(3)Interpretation should be conducted in conjunction with validity scales (L/F/K/Fb/S), relevant internalization scales (RCd/NEGE/RC7), a comprehensive medical history, and physical/laboratory examinations
(4) a single high score indicates clinical concern but is insufficient to confirm psychogenic somatization
(5) a comprehensive assessment based on third-party data and longitudinal records is required.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary literature demonstrates good convergent validity between RC1 and chronic pain, frequent medical visits, and somatization scales
(2) neurobiological research suggests that chronic pain and emotional regulation networks influence each other, and that reward and pain modulation circuits may be involved in symptom maintenance
(3) methodological evidence supports multi-source assessment (self-report, raters’ reports, medical records) and longitudinal follow-up to improve prediction of functional impairment and treatment response
(4)Intervention studies show that multidisciplinary management is the primary approach (medical evaluation + cognitive-behavioral therapy targeting somatization + pain rehabilitation and functional recovery training)
(5) clinical practice emphasizes ruling out organic causes first, then focusing on functional recovery as the core goal, and avoiding simplistically attributing the chief complaint to “malingering” or “psychologization.”

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Frequently reports headaches, gastrointestinal discomfort, chronic fatigue, or poor sleep
(2) symptoms are relatively stable but described less in detail than in the “Extremely High” group

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Health-conscious, prone to anxiety, and inclined to convert emotional distress into physical symptoms

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Increased frequency of medical visits, decreased work efficiency, and concerns about symptoms affecting daily decision-making
(2) symptom exacerbation is commonly associated with life events or stress

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Screen for a history of chronic diseases, medication use, and sleep problems
(2) conduct concurrent functional assessments and review a list of life events
(3) be sure to differentiate somatization manifestations caused by depression or anxiety

♦ Recommendations
(1)Focus primarily on symptom management and functional recovery
(2) recommend short-term CBT targeting somatization strategies, sleep and exercise interventions, progressive activity increase, and health education
(3) collaborate with primary care or specialists to adjust medication as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)RC1 is slightly elevated
(2) the patient reports long-standing gastrointestinal discomfort and fatigue, and previous examinations suggest mild functional gastrointestinal disorder. CBT is recommended, combined with lifestyle adjustments and follow-up with a gastroenterologist.


▲Low Positive Affect (RC2):T74     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The RC2 measures an individual’s intensity of positive emotions, interest/pleasure experiences, and behavioral initiative
(2) high scores reflect anhedonia, reduced motivation, and diminished response to rewards, while low scores reflect higher levels of positive emotions and engagement in activities
(3) this scale can indicate anhedonia and behavioral withdrawal within the depressive spectrum, but may also be influenced by personality (introversion/extraversion), physical illness, medication effects, or cultural/situational factors
(4)Interpretation must integrate the RC2 with validity scales (L/F/K/Fb/S), the RCd/NEGE, depression and anhedonia-specific scales (e.g., PHQ-9, SHAPS), a list of life events, and third-party functional reports to distinguish between stable personality traits, situational loss of interest, and pathological anhedonia.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary literature strongly links RC2 to extraversion/positive affect in the Five-Factor Model
(2) neurobiological research suggests that low positive affect is associated with impaired reward system function (mesencephalic-nucleus accumbens-prefrontal circuit, dopamine transmission) and reduced activity in the prefrontal regulatory network
(3) longitudinal studies show that persistently high RC2 scores are associated with depression relapse, decreased social functioning, and impaired occupational performance
(4)Methodologically, multi-source assessments (self-report + ratings by others + behavioral activity monitoring) combined with the use of a specific anhedonia scale can enhance discriminant validity
(5) intervention studies support behavioral activation, reward-based behavioral prescriptions, social skills training, and, when necessary, pharmacotherapy (such as medications with a relative advantage for treating anhedonia)
(6) clinical practice emphasizes functional recovery and the restoration of reward sensitivity as core goals, while also accounting for the influence of cultural differences on the expression of “positive emotion.”

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Entries primarily consist of statements regarding diminished interest and reduced activity, though intermittent, brief experiences of pleasure are still present

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Reduced resilience, decreased sensitivity to rewards, and a tendency toward introspection and avoidance of new situations

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common manifestations include decreased work efficiency, reduced interpersonal interactions, and lower life satisfaction
(2) symptoms are often associated with recent stress or sleep problems

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess recent life events, sleep quality, substance use, and medication history
(2) conduct a functional assessment alongside a specific scale for anhedonia to determine whether pharmacological intervention is necessary
(3) take care to differentiate between situational fatigue, occupational burnout, and depressive anhedonia

♦ Recommendations
(1)Recommend behavioral activation and structured activity plans, along with short-term CBT to rebuild interests and goals
(2) encourage regular exercise, good sleep hygiene, and social engagement
(3) if symptoms persist or functioning is significantly impaired, consider antidepressants combined with psychotherapy
(4) reward-oriented behavioral experiments may be introduced to gradually restore positive experiences

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)RC2 score is elevated
(2) the patient reports that decreased interest is affecting work performance. Behavioral activation is recommended, along with an assessment of sleep and substance use factors, with a follow-up evaluation within six weeks.


▲Cynicism (RC3):T52     BACK

※ General Description
(1)RC3 (Cynicism) assesses an individual’s suspicion of others’ motives, distrust of social norms and interpersonal goodwill, and a tendency to interpret others’ behavior as self-serving or hostile.Interpretation should be informed by concurrent validity tests (L/F/K/Fb/S), personality and mood scales (e.g., Pd, D, Sc/RCd/RC2), behavioral observations, and third-party data to distinguish between reasonable vigilance based on real-life experiences, chronic paranoid attribution styles, post-traumatic trust deficits, or emotional negative bias.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)RC3 is sensitive to identifying risks of interpersonal conflict, impaired social functioning, and difficulties in therapeutic alliance
(2) it is recommended to combine RC3 with clinical interviews, social history, and longitudinal follow-up to enhance discriminant validity and guide intervention strategies.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional suspicious or critical thinking, but able to revise attributions in light of evidence
(2) exhibits both wariness and a degree of trust regarding others’ motives.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Cautious, realistic, with moderate critical thinking, generally stable emotions, and able to adjust judgments in light of evidence. Able to maintain boundaries while establishing cooperative relationships in interpersonal interactions.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)This is mostly due to a cautious personality or reasonable vigilance based on experience
(2) overall functioning is maintained, though symptoms may temporarily worsen in the face of betrayal or stress.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal trends
(2) conduct routine psychological screening concurrently to rule out comorbid depression or anxiety
(3) if a persistent upward trend emerges, further evaluate interpersonal functioning and history of trauma.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Provide psychoeducation, emotional and conflict management skills, and short-term cognitive interventions as needed to improve attribution biases
(2) encourage participation in supportive social activities to enhance experiences of trust.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)RC3 Norms
(2) the patient exhibits vigilance in specific situations but has good overall trust capacity
(3) it is recommended to provide advice on emotion and conflict management and to reassess as necessary.


▲Antisocial Behavior (RC4):T69     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The RC4 is designed to measure an individual’s propensity for antisocial behavior, impulsivity, and disregard for social norms
(2) the scale reflects both persistent antisocial personality traits and behavioral patterns, as well as situational factors (such as substance abuse, peer influence, and acute stress)
(3)Interpretation should be conducted in conjunction with validity indicators (L/F/K/Fb/S), DISC/ASP, judicial records, behavioral profiles, and third-party reports to distinguish between stable antisocial personality tendencies, situational delinquency, and test masking or exaggeration.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Research indicates that RC4 demonstrates good convergent validity in predicting antisocial behavior, criminal records, and the antisocial dimension of psychopathology
(2) compared to traditional four-item clinical scales, RC4 exhibits superior discriminant validity in distinguishing antisocial behavior from emotional distress
(3) neurodevelopmental research suggests that antisocial behavior is associated with prefrontal function related to impulse control, sensitivity to rewards and punishments, and early adversity (abuse, neglect, peer violence)
(4)In judicial and correctional settings, combining the RC4 with behavioral records, substance use screenings, and multiple longitudinal assessments can significantly improve the accuracy of predicting recidivism and violence risk
(5) intervention studies emphasize comprehensive programs centered on structured supervision, behavioral contracts, cognitive-behavioral impulse management, and addiction treatment.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Entries indicate frequent rule-breaking, impulsive decision-making, or disregard for others’ rights
(2) prone to illegal or aggressive behavior under stress or peer influence

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate to high impulsivity, thrill-seeking, weak sense of responsibility, and susceptibility to peer influence
(2) low sensitivity to punishment

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common disciplinary issues, a short history of lawbreaking, or interpersonal conflicts
(2) increased friction at work or home
(3) may indicate an early antisocial trajectory or situational loss of control

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Concurrent assessment of substance use, sleep patterns, and peer networks
(2) verification of third-party records to determine frequency and severity of behavior
(3) evaluation of trainable impulse control deficits

♦ Recommendations
(1)Impulse management training, behavioral contracts, social and vocational skills training, and addiction intervention
(2) in judicial settings, combine supervision with conditional release programs

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)RC4 slightly elevated
(2) the patient has repeatedly engaged in fights under peer pressure and has a history of alcohol use
(3) impulse control training is recommended in collaboration with community correctional services.


▲Ideas of Persecution (RC6):T73     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The RC6 measures an individual’s suspicion of others’ motives, victim attribution, and hostile-paranoid tendencies
(2) this scale can reflect both pathological delusional-like thinking or paranoid personality traits and reasonable vigilance resulting from post-traumatic trust deficits, chronic stress, substance influence, or experiences of situational exploitation
(3)Interpretation must integrate the RC6 with validity scales (L/F/K/Fb/S), NEGE/RCd, CYN/INTR, behavioral and judicial records, third-party reports, and clinical interviews to distinguish between short-term situational paranoia, post-traumatic trust deficits, and persistent pathological persecutory beliefs
(4)A single elevated score indicates the need for further functional and risk assessment
(5) however, a diagnosis of a psychotic disorder or personality disorder must not be made based solely on scale scores.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Research places persecutory ideation at the intersection of the psychotic spectrum and the paranoid dimension of personality
(2)Cognitive models emphasize the central role of hostile attribution bias, overinterpretation of threats, and metacognitive dissonance in the formation of persecutory ideation
(3) neuroimaging and neurobiological studies suggest that excessive reactivity to threat signals in the limbic system (amygdala) and weakened prefrontal regulatory function are associated with paranoid thinking
(4) epidemiological and longitudinal studies show that childhood trauma, social exclusion, and chronic stress can increase paranoid tendencies in adulthood
(5)Methodologically, multi-source data (self-reports, ratings by others, and behavioral records) and ecological momentary assessment (EMA) enhance the identification of symptom fluctuations and triggers
(6) intervention evidence supports a tiered intervention strategy centered on cognitive-behavioral therapy (cognitive restructuring and reality testing for paranoia), trauma processing, rebuilding social support, and short-term antipsychotic medication when necessary
(7) clinical practice emphasizes risk management, establishing a therapeutic alliance, and considering cultural contexts.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)The item indicates frequent suspicion of others’ motives, sensitivity to criticism or rejection, and a tendency to attribute adverse events to others’ conspiracies

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High vigilance, strong criticality, defensiveness, and skepticism regarding others’ motives
(2) may manifest emotionally as anger or indifference

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common communication difficulties, interpersonal friction, or avoidance of intimacy
(2) defensive or confrontational behavior is likely to emerge in stressful or humiliating situations

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Conduct a parallel interview to identify triggers (e.g., history of deception or humiliation), verify third-party reports, and assess the actual impact on functioning
(2) note potential interactions with trauma history, substance use, or sleep deprivation

♦ Recommendations
(1)Short-term psychological interventions focused on rebuilding trust and cognitive attribution restructuring
(2) use behavioral experiments to test alternative explanations
(3) concurrently provide emotion regulation and social skills training
(4) if significant anxiety or depression comorbidities are present, consider combined treatment

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)RC6 is slightly elevated
(2) patients often interpret colleagues’ behavior in the workplace as directed at them, leading to team conflicts. Psychological interventions focused on attribution restructuring and trust-building are recommended, along with an assessment of workplace support.


▲Dysfunctional Negative Emotions (RC7):T58   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)RC7 assesses the intensity of an individual’s persistent negative emotions and their interference with daily functioning, covering chronic anxiety, fear, anger reactivity, difficulties with emotional regulation, and associated cognitive load
(2) high scores indicate that negative emotions not only occur frequently but have also interfered with work, social interactions, or self-care
(3)When interpreting results, RC7 must be used in conjunction with validity scales (L/F/K/Fb/S), NEGE/RCd, RC2, depression and anxiety-specific scales, life events, and substance use history to distinguish between situational stress reactions, chronic mood disorders, and test-taking strategies such as masking or exaggeration.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Review of modern research: Contemporary literature positions RC7 at the intersection of the internalization spectrum and deficits in emotional regulation
(2) neurobiological studies suggest that high RC7 is associated with excessive reactivity of the limbic system (amygdala) to threat signals, impaired prefrontal regulatory function, and abnormal HPA axis stress responses
(3) longitudinal studies show that persistently high RC7 predicts depression, anxiety disorders, chronic somatization, and functional decline
(4)Methodologically, multi-source assessments (self-reports, ratings by others, behavioral tasks, and ecological momentary assessments) combined with emotion regulation and functioning scales can enhance predictive validity for clinical outcomes and treatment response
(5)Intervention studies support the combined use of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), emotion regulation training (e.g., DBT skills), mindfulness-based interventions, behavioral activation, and, when necessary, pharmacotherapy (SSRIs/SNRIs/mood stabilizers) to improve symptoms and functioning.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional anxiety or mood fluctuations typically relate to specific stressors and can be self-regulated

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate emotional stability, with some coping strategies and resilience
(2) able to gradually adjust cognition and behavior in response to negative events

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These are mostly short-term stress reactions or periods of fatigue
(2) overall functioning is maintained, though symptoms may temporarily worsen during major life events

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal trends
(2) conduct brief screenings in parallel to rule out potential depressive or anxiety disorders
(3) monitor for signs of a gradually increasing risk

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, stress management, and recommendations for sleep and lifestyle
(2) short-term supportive therapy or skills training as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)RC7 Norms
(2) the patient has experienced short-term emotional fluctuations due to recent work-related stress. It is recommended to provide stress management strategies and reassess after four weeks.


▲Aberrant Experiences (RC8):T66     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The RC8 (Abnormal Experiences) assesses an individual’s tendency toward abnormalities in perception, thought, and reality testing, covering hallucinatory-like experiences, bizarre or paranoid beliefs, disorganized thinking, and perceptual distortions
(2) this scale can indicate risk for psychotic spectrum disorders (such as transient or persistent psychotic symptoms) as well as reflect temporary abnormal experiences under stress, post-traumatic dissociation, or drug-induced perceptual changes
(3)When interpreting results, RC8 scores must be considered in conjunction with validity scales (L/F/K/Fb/S), other RC scales (RC6, RC7, RC2, RC4), clinical interviews, third-party reports, and medical/legal records to distinguish between transient, situational abnormalities and persistent pathological psychotic processes
(4)A single elevated score indicates the need for further assessment of reality testing ability, the temporal nature of symptoms, and functional impact
(5) however, a diagnosis of psychotic disorder must not be made based solely on scale scores.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary literature classifies RC8 under the “Abnormal Thinking–Perception/Cognitive Dysfunction” dimension. Research indicates that RC8 has convergent validity with clinical psychotic symptoms, schizotypal personality traits, and high-risk psychotic states
(2) neurobiological studies suggest that abnormal experiences are associated with functional abnormalities in the limbic-prefrontal regulatory circuit, the sensory integration network, and dopamine/glutamate-related pathways
(3)Longitudinal studies indicate that persistent or recurrent high RC8 scores predict declines in social functioning, increased hospitalization rates, and the risk of conversion to psychotic disorders
(4) methodologically, multi-source data (self-reports, ratings by others, clinical observations, and medical records) and ecological momentary assessment (EMA) can enhance the identification of symptom fluctuations, triggers, and reality testing abilities
(5)Intervention studies support a tiered treatment strategy comprising early identification, reality-testing-oriented cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT-p), trauma-focused therapy, substance use interventions, and short-term antipsychotic medication when necessary
(6) clinical practice emphasizes safety assessment, non-confrontational communication, and the gradual restoration of reality testing as core elements.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)The entry indicates intermittent hallucination-like experiences, bizarre thoughts, or transient impairment in reality testing
(2) symptoms often worsen during times of stress or sleep deprivation

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Sensitive to uncertainty, prone to bizarre thinking, and moderately emotionally reactive
(2) may manifest as social withdrawal or defensive interpretations of others’ behavior

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Functioning is limited but partially preserved
(2) the patient may be able to perform reality testing with support but is susceptible to emotional or environmental triggers
(3) commonly accompanied by anxiety, depression, or substance use issues

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Rule out recent substance use, sleep deprivation, acute stress, or somatic causes
(2) conduct a clinical interview to assess reality testing ability, the timeline of symptoms, and triggering factors
(3) obtain third-party observations to determine symptom frequency and severity

♦ Recommendations
(1)Close follow-up and short-term psychological intervention are recommended (reality testing exercises and cognitive restructuring using CBT-p)
(2) if symptoms are frequent or function is impaired, consider short-term, low-dose antipsychotic medication or referral to psychiatry
(3) address comorbid anxiety, depression, or substance use issues
(4) use gradual exposure and coping skills training to reduce symptom distress

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)RC8 is elevated
(2) the patient experiences transient auditory abnormalities and feelings of being watched under extreme stress
(3) third-party reports indicate severe sleep deprivation recently. It is recommended to screen for substance use and sleep-related factors, conduct reality testing training, and provide close follow-up.


▲Hypomanic Activation (RC9):T46   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)RC9 measures an individual’s tendency toward arousal, impulsivity, elevated mood, and increased activity
(2) high scores indicate hypomanic or manic-like arousal (including excessive energy, reduced sleep needs, increased talkativeness, distractibility, and impulsive behavior), while low scores indicate stable mood and activity levels or low arousal
(3)Interpretation must integrate the RC9 with validity scales (L/F/K/Fb/S), externalizing scales (e.g., DISC/RC4), affective spectrum scales (RC2/RCd/RC7), medical history, history of medication and substance use, and third-party reports to distinguish between personality-related high energy, situational arousal (e.g., short-term stress or drug-induced), and pathological hypomania/mania
(4) a single elevated score indicates the need to assess functional impact, risks (impulsivity, financial/legal consequences), and the presence of a history of bipolar spectrum disorders.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research positions RC9 at the intersection of the externalizing and emotional regulation dimensions
(2) the scale demonstrates convergent validity with the activation characteristics of clinical hypomania and bipolar disorder, and is associated with impulse control, reward sensitivity, and prefrontal-basal ganglia circuit function
(3)Neurobiological research suggests a role for the dopamine/norepinephrine system in increased arousal, with sleep-wake rhythm disturbances and social rhythm dysregulation often serving as triggering or maintaining factors
(4) longitudinal studies indicate that recurrent high RC9 scores are associated with fluctuations in occupational and interpersonal functioning, risk of substance abuse, and risk of transition to bipolar disorder
(5)Methodologically, combining clinical interviews, ecological momentary assessments (EMA), behavioral logs, and third-party data can improve the identification of the nature, duration, and risk of episodes
(6) evidence for interventions supports a tiered treatment strategy centered on mood stabilizers, short-term antimanic medications, CBT for impulse management, social rhythm therapy (IPSRT), and sleep interventions.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional increases in energy or short-term excitement may occur, but these are typically self-regulated and do not result in significant functional impairment

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate energy levels
(2) good emotional and behavioral regulation

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These are mostly manifestations of short-term stress reactions, excitement, or work peaks
(2) symptoms may temporarily worsen with sleep deprivation or under the influence of substances

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations, sleep patterns, and substance use
(2) conduct a brief mood spectrum screening concurrently to rule out potential bipolar tendencies
(3) monitor for any gradually increasing trends or signs of functional decline

♦ Recommendations
(1)Provide psychoeducation, sleep hygiene guidance, and stress management
(2) if persistent arousal or functional decline occurs, promptly refer the patient for a psychiatric evaluation

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)RC9 Norms
(2) the patient has recently experienced a short-term increase in energy and reduced sleep due to project-related stress. Recommendations include improving sleep and stress management, with a follow-up evaluation in four weeks.

ANX	FRS	OBS	DEP	HEA	BIZ	ANG	CYN	ASP	TPA	LSE	SOD	FAM	WRK	TRT
61	65	50	60	76	64	53	53	56	50	70	63	62	59	64

High
Low

▲Anxiety (ANX):T61   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The ANX assesses subjective anxiety experiences and associated physiological responses
(2) high scores reflect a broad spectrum of anxiety symptoms, including persistent worry, panic-like episodes, sleep disturbances, palpitations, and shortness of breath
(3) low scores indicate low levels of anxiety or denial of anxiety experiences.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)ANX is significantly correlated with diagnoses of clinical anxiety disorders, generalized anxiety, panic disorder, and somatization symptoms
(2) high ANX scores are associated with reduced work/academic functioning, increased medical visits, and lower quality of life
(3) longitudinal studies suggest that high ANX serves as a risk marker for chronic anxiety or mood disorders, but its predictive power is influenced by comorbidity (depression, somatization), sleep disturbances, and substance use
(4)Interpretation should be based on a combination of validity scales (L/F/K), clinical interviews, and third-party data to reduce misdiagnosis
(5) evidence supports cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), exposure and relaxation training, and, when necessary, pharmacotherapy (SSRIs/anxiolytics) as primary treatment approaches.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional tension, short-term fluctuations in sleep or attention
(2) symptoms may temporarily increase during periods of significant stress or life events.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate emotional reaction
(2) possesses some coping strategies
(3) may experience brief anxiety under stress but recovers.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most individuals can return to baseline through psychoeducation, lifestyle adjustments, and short-term supportive interventions
(2) if symptoms persist or worsen, retesting and expanded assessment are warranted.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if accompanied by D or HEA abnormalities, evaluate according to the corresponding pathway.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, relaxation training, sleep and stress management
(2) short-term supportive psychotherapy or group sessions as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)The subject’s ANX score falls within the normal range
(2) occasional situational anxiety and sleep fluctuations are present. Psych education and follow-up are recommended, with short-term relaxation training provided as needed.


▲Fear (FRS):T65     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The FRS assesses the intensity of reactions and avoidance behaviors toward various specific fear triggers, including fear of blood, wounds, injections, animals, heights, enclosed spaces, darkness, natural disasters, social situations, or specific objects
(2) high scores indicate that avoidance patterns have already impacted daily functioning or triggered panic-like physiological reactions
(3) low scores indicate low levels of fear or denial.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places the FRS within the framework of the fear spectrum and avoidance behaviors
(2) the FRS is associated with specific phobia diagnoses, panic disorder, generalized anxiety, and avoidant personality traits
(3) high scores are associated with reduced quality of life, occupational/academic limitations, and increased medical or social avoidance
(4)Longitudinal studies suggest that high FRS scores can predict long-term avoidance behaviors and functional impairment, but its diagnostic validity requires integration with clinical interviews and behavioral observations
(5) when interpreting results, attention should be paid to response style (exaggeration or defensiveness), cultural differences, and age effects
(6) the strongest evidence supports cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) centered on exposure as an intervention, combined with medication and functional rehabilitation when necessary.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Positive on several phobia items
(2) experiences anxiety, palpitations, or avoidance intentions upon approaching or anticipating exposure to the phobic stimulus
(3) symptoms worsen during periods of stress.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Prudent and markedly avoidant
(2) high need for control and a sense of security
(3) may manifest as thorough preparation or excessive precaution.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Patients often alter daily routines or reduce social interactions to avoid discomfort
(2) they demonstrate some motivation for treatment and respond well to CBT or exposure training
(3) intervention should be extended if depression or intense avoidance is present.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess the impact of avoidance on specific areas of life
(2) verify the presence of secondary gains (e.g., avoiding responsibility or gaining attention)
(3) administer the ANX and DEP concurrently to identify comorbidity.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Short-term exposure training and cognitive restructuring
(2) relaxation and mindfulness exercises
(3) functional goal setting and gradual return to activities
(4) collaborate with psychiatry to evaluate medication if necessary.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)The subject has a slightly elevated FRS score (T65–74)
(2) specific situational avoidance and anxiety are present. Exposure-oriented CBT and relaxation training are recommended, with efficacy to be assessed after 8–12 weeks.


▲Obsessive-Compulsive Syndrome (OBS):T50   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The OBS Content Scale assesses recurrent intrusive thoughts, compulsive rituals or behaviors such as checking, cleaning, or counting, decision-making difficulties, and a pursuit of perfection
(2) high scores indicate that these thoughts or behaviors have consumed a significant amount of time and are affecting work, academic performance, or interpersonal functioning
(3) low scores indicate few compulsive experiences or denial.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places OBS within the obsessive-compulsive spectrum and the framework of executive function/cognitive control
(2) OBS is associated with features of clinical obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), but single-item scales have limited sensitivity and specificity for diagnosis
(3) OBS frequently co-occurs with depression (DEP), anxiety (ANX), personality traits (perfectionism, high control), and neurocognitive deficits (inhibitory control, cognitive flexibility)
(4)The Y-BOCS is the gold standard for assessing severity
(5) ERP (Exposure and Response Prevention) is the first-line psychotherapy
(6) and SSRIs are commonly used medications
(7) interpretation should incorporate behavioral observations, longitudinal history, and third-party information to improve accuracy.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional intrusive thoughts or mild ritualistic behaviors
(2) symptoms may temporarily increase during periods of significant stress or life events

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Attention to detail and a moderate sense of responsibility
(2) may briefly exhibit perfectionism under stress but is able to self-correct

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most individuals can return to baseline through psychoeducation, behavioral exercises, and self-help strategies
(2) if persistent worsening or functional decline occurs, retest and expand the assessment

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if accompanied by abnormal DEP or ANX scores, evaluate according to the corresponding pathways
(3) note the presence of potential occupational or family stressors

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, cognitive strategies, time management, and relaxation training
(2) short-term supportive psychotherapy or group sessions as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject OBS falls within the normal range
(2) occasional situational obsessive thoughts or checking behaviors
(3) overall functional stability
(4) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Depression (DEP):T60   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The DEP content scale assesses persistent low mood, loss of interest or pleasure, fatigue and lack of energy, changes in sleep and appetite, self-blame or feelings of worthlessness, and difficulties with attention and decision-making
(2) high scores indicate that these symptoms have caused distress or impairment in daily functioning
(3) low scores indicate emotional stability or denial of depressive experiences.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research places DEP within the spectrum of mood disorders and assessments of functional impairment
(2) DEP is associated with major depressive disorder (MDD), persistent depressive disorder (chronic depression), and suicide risk
(3) High DEP scores are frequently comorbid with anxiety (ANX), obsessive-compulsive symptoms (OBS), hyperarousal (HEA/Hy), and DEP-related somatic complaints
(4) Longitudinal studies indicate that high DEP scores predict the risk of relapse and a tendency toward chronicity
(5)Interpretation should consider validity (L/F/K), functional assessment, past medical history, and history of medication/substance use
(6) evidence supports psychotherapy (CBT, behavioral activation, IPT) and antidepressants (SSRIs, SNRIs) as primary treatment pathways
(7) individuals with severe symptoms or at risk of self-harm require prompt psychiatric evaluation and safety management.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional low mood, fluctuations in sleep or attention
(2) symptoms are often related to recent stress or life events

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate emotional reactivity
(2) possesses some coping strategies
(3) may experience brief low mood under stress but is able to gradually recover

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most individuals can return to baseline through psychoeducation, supportive psychotherapy, and lifestyle adjustments
(2) if symptoms persist or worsen, retesting and expanded assessment are warranted

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) concurrently assess ANX, HEA/Hy to identify somatization or anxiety comorbidity
(3) monitor sleep and substance use

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, behavioral activation, sleep and exercise prescriptions, and short-term supportive therapy
(2) if symptoms persist or functioning declines, escalate to structured psychotherapy or a medication evaluation

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject’s DEP is within the normal range
(2) occasional low mood and sleep fluctuations, but overall stable functioning
(3) psych education and follow-up are recommended.


▲Health-Related Anxiety (HEA):T76     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The HEA content scale measures an individual’s sensitivity to bodily sensations, concern about illness, symptom magnification, and healthcare-seeking behavior, covering subjective somatic experiences such as pain, fatigue, digestive issues, sleep disturbances, and palpitations, as well as repeated requests for tests and diagnoses.A high score indicates that somatic symptoms have already affected daily functioning or led to frequent healthcare utilization
(2) a low score suggests little concern about physical symptoms or the possible presence of denial or emotional blunting.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Recent studies have placed HEA within the somatization spectrum and the framework of health anxiety, finding that HEA is highly correlated with somatization disorders, illness anxiety, chronic pain syndromes, and healthcare utilization
(2) HEA often co-occurs with DEP, ANX, and Hy (somatization), and is influenced by culture, gender, and access to healthcare
(3)A single-item scale has limited discriminative power for distinguishing organic causes
(4) optimal interpretation requires integration with medical test results, longitudinal follow-up, and behavioral observations
(5) cognitive-behavioral interventions (CBT targeting somatic symptoms), pain management, and interdisciplinary rehabilitation are the primary evidence-based intervention approaches.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Multiple physical symptom items are consistently positive
(2) patients report chronic pain, persistent fatigue, and recurrent digestive or cardiovascular-like discomfort
(3) they are often dissatisfied with test results and repeatedly seek further testing or second opinions.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)These individuals are physically sensitive, have low tolerance for uncertainty, tend toward catastrophic interpretations, and seek external validation to alleviate anxiety
(2) they may exhibit dependent or high-demand interaction styles.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Patients often alter work or social arrangements due to symptoms and exhibit high utilization of healthcare resources
(2) medical dependency, medicalization, or persistent skepticism toward medical explanations may occur
(3) often accompanied by depression, anxiety, or sleep disorders.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Prioritize medical evaluation to rule out treatable organic causes
(2) concurrently administer the DEP, ANX, and Hy scales along with validity measures
(3) review history of medication, endocrine disorders, immune disorders, or chronic diseases
(4) gather third-party information (from family members, primary care physicians) to assess patterns of healthcare utilization
(5) be vigilant for medicalization reinforcement and secondary gains.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Interdisciplinary management (internal medicine/pain medicine/psychiatry/psychotherapy)
(2) evidence-based CBT (somatic symptoms module, specialized in health anxiety)
(3) pain management, sleep interventions, progressive activity prescribing, and functional rehabilitation training
(4) short-term anti-anxiety or antidepressant medication as needed to alleviate comorbid symptoms
(5) implement healthcare utilization management and family education to reduce unnecessary tests.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject with extremely high HEA (T ≥ 75)
(2) multiple chronic physical complaints and frequent medical visits, already affecting work and daily functioning
(3) recommend prioritizing medical evaluation alongside DEP/ANX assessment, and initiating multidisciplinary management and CBT focused on somatic symptoms.


▲Bizarre Ideation (BIZ):T64     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The BIZ content scale measures self-reported tendencies toward bizarre beliefs (magical thinking, thoughts of being controlled or persecuted), perceptual abnormalities (auditory/visual experiences), difficulty with reality testing, and disorganized thinking. A high score suggests that the individual may experience persistent or recurrent unrealistic experiences that impair judgment and functioning
(2) a low score indicates few such experiences or denial of them.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Recent studies have placed BIZ within the framework of the psychotic spectrum and subclinical psychotic-like experiences, finding that BIZ is associated with Sc, Pa, thought disintegration, cognitive decline, and impaired social functioning
(2)BIZ has some value for screening early-stage psychosis risk
(3) however, the sensitivity and specificity of a single scale are limited. It must be combined with clinical interviews, behavioral observations, neuroimaging, or cognitive assessments, along with a history of medication and substance use, to improve diagnostic accuracy. Cultural and religious backgrounds may influence the expression of “bizarre” content and its pathological interpretation.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)A small number of BIZ items are positive
(2) the individual reports occasional “strange thoughts” or brief perceptual abnormalities, which can usually be corrected by evidence from reality.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Vivid imagination, tendency to fantasize, or ability to reflect on unusual experiences
(2) possesses some capacity for reality testing.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These are mostly short-term experiences resulting from stress, sleep deprivation, or medication side effects
(2) the individual is generally able to maintain occupational and social functioning.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering factors and longitudinal changes
(2) if frequent recurrences or functional decline occur, escalate the assessment
(3) concurrently screen for ANX/DEP and substance use history.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, sleep and stress management, and short-term supportive psychotherapy
(2) if symptoms persist or worsen, refer to psychiatry or conduct a cognitive assessment.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject BIZ’s scores fall within the normal range
(2) occasional brief bizarre thoughts or perceptual abnormalities are noted, with overall stable functioning
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Anger (ANG):T53   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The ANG content scale assesses subjective experiences of anger, angry outbursts, passive-aggressive or internalized anger, difficulties with impulse control, and the impact of anger on interpersonal and occupational functioning. High scores indicate frequent anger, with expressions that may be destructive or lead to avoidance
(2) low scores suggest infrequent experiences of anger or possible suppression and denial.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Recent research has placed anger within the spectrum of emotional regulation, impulse control, and aggression, finding that ANG is associated with impulsivity scales, substance use, depression, and a history of trauma
(2) high ANG is linked to domestic violence, workplace conflicts, legal issues, and unhealthy behaviors (such as alcohol abuse)
(3) interventions primarily focus on cognitive-behavioral anger management, impulse control training, and multimodal risk management.When interpreting results, behavioral history, third-party reports, and longitudinal data should be considered to enhance predictive validity.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Positive scores on the occasional anger subscale
(2) anger is typically self-regulated or alleviated through social support.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate emotional reactivity
(2) possesses some conflict resolution skills.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most individuals can return to baseline through psychoeducation, communication skills training, and stress management
(2) if persistent deterioration occurs, retesting and expanded assessment are warranted.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) administer the DEP/ANX concurrently to identify emotional comorbidity
(3) monitor sleep and substance use.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, communication and conflict resolution training, stress management, and relaxation techniques
(2) short-term supportive psychotherapy or group sessions as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)The subject’s ANG is within the normal range
(2) occasional episodes of anger or conflict occur, but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Cynicism (CYN):T53     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The CYN (Cynicism) Scale assesses an individual’s tendency to attribute suspicion, distrust, and hostility to others’ motives
(2) this scale can reflect both experience-based reasonable vigilance and chronic hostility, paranoid attributions, or interpersonal indifference
(3)When interpreting results, CYN scores should be considered in conjunction with validity scales (L/F/K/Fb/S), internalizing and externalizing dimensions (NEGE/RCd, PSYC/RC4, etc.), behavioral history, third-party reports, and social functioning indicators to distinguish between situational distrust, post-traumatic trust deficits, and personality-based cynicism
(4)In clinical practice and risk management, the CYN provides important insights into identifying risks of interpersonal conflict, difficulties in forming a therapeutic alliance, and impaired social functioning.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Recent research views cynicism as a cross-dimensional construct involving the interaction of cognitive attribution biases (hostile attributions), deficits in emotional regulation, and social experiences (being betrayed or exploited)
(2) neurobiological studies suggest functional differences in the limbic system and prefrontal regulatory networks related to threat processing
(3) longitudinal and developmental studies indicate that childhood experiences of neglect or deception, chronic social exclusion, and peer violence may increase cynicism in adulthood
(4)Methodologically, the combined use of multi-source assessments (self-reports, ratings by others, and behavioral recordings) with reconstruction scales (the RC series and PSY-5) enhances predictive validity regarding impairments in interpersonal functioning and conflict-related behaviors
(5)Intervention studies indicate that comprehensive programs centered on trust-building, cognitive attribution restructuring, emotional regulation, and trauma processing are better supported by evidence for reducing cynicism and improving social functioning
(6) ethical practice emphasizes avoiding simplistic labeling and calls for interpreting scale results in conjunction with concrete behavioral evidence and social context.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional suspicion or critical thinking, but able to revise attributions in light of evidence
(2) maintains a balance of vigilance and trust regarding others’ motives

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Cautious, realistic, with moderate critical thinking and average emotional stability
(2) able to maintain boundaries while establishing cooperative relationships in social interactions

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These are mostly experience-based, reasonable vigilance or personality-driven caution
(2) overall functioning is maintained
(3) symptoms may temporarily worsen upon experiencing betrayal or significant stress

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal trends
(2) conduct routine psychological screening concurrently to rule out comorbid depression or anxiety
(3) if a persistent upward trend emerges, further assess history of trauma and interpersonal functioning

♦ Recommendations
(1)Provide psychoeducation, emotional and conflict management skills, and short-term cognitive interventions as needed to address attribution biases
(2) encourage participation in supportive social activities to enhance experiences of trust

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)CYN Norms
(2) the patient exhibits wariness in specific situations but demonstrates good overall trust capacity. It is recommended to provide conflict management advice and conduct a re-evaluation if necessary.


▲Antisocial Behavior (ASP):T56     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The ASP Content Scale assesses an individual’s history of antisocial behavior, disregard for rules and the rights of others, impulsivity and aggression, tendencies toward deception and manipulation, and indifference to consequences
(2) high scores indicate that behavioral problems have already impacted legal, occupational, or interpersonal functioning, while low scores suggest that such behaviors are infrequent or denied.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Recent research places antisocial behavior within a three-dimensional model comprising impulsivity, comorbidity (substance use, mood disorders), and personality pathology
(2) high ASP scores are frequently associated with substance abuse, early-onset behavioral problems, childhood adversity (abuse/neglect), low empathy, and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD)
(3)When predicting the risk of violence or recidivism, it is necessary to consider behavioral history, criminal records, and dynamic risk factors (recent alcohol/drug use, stress triggers)
(4) interventions are primarily multimodal (behavioral correction, substance abuse treatment, judicial supervision, and restoration of social functioning), and a single scale cannot replace judicial or psychiatric diagnoses.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)A small number of antisocial items are positive
(2) the individual reports occasional arguments, conflicts with rules, or a history of minor delinquency during adolescence.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)A sense of responsibility and empathy is generally preserved
(2) brief impulsivity may occur under stress.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most individuals can return to baseline through psychoeducation, skills training, and social support
(2) if persistent deterioration occurs, retesting and expanded assessment are warranted.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) administer the SUB, ANG, and DEP concurrently to identify comorbidity
(3) pay attention to occupational and family stressors.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, conflict resolution and communication training, stress management, and short-term supportive psychotherapy
(2) if substance use or emotional issues are present, address them according to the appropriate treatment pathways.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)The subject’s ASP scores fall within the normal range
(2) occasional conflicts or short-term deviant behavior occur, but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Type A Personality (TPA):T50     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The TPA content scale assesses an individual’s competitive drive, sense of time urgency, hostility/aggression, overcommitment to work, and high sensitivity to failure. High scores indicate prolonged exposure to high stress, emotional irritability, and potential risks to interpersonal relationships and health (particularly cardiovascular health)
(2) low scores suggest low competitiveness, a relaxed state, or possible emotional suppression.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Recent studies have placed Type A personality within the frameworks of psychosomatic medicine and occupational health, finding that high TPA is associated with occupational burnout, chronic stress, physiological stress responses (sympathetic activation), sleep disturbances, elevated inflammatory markers, and risk of cardiovascular events
(2)TPA interacts with anger/hostility (ANG), depression (DEP), substance use (SUB), and sleep deprivation to influence health outcomes
(3) evidence supports interventions such as stress management, cognitive-behavioral techniques, mindfulness, and lifestyle changes (exercise, sleep, smoking cessation, and alcohol moderation) to reduce physiological and functional risks. Interpretation should incorporate longitudinal history, occupational background, cultural definitions of success, and third-party data to enhance accuracy.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive scores on items related to competitiveness or a sense of urgency
(2) participants are able to recover or self-regulate under stress.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Goal-oriented but capable of relaxation and recovery
(2) relatively good emotional regulation.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most individuals are able to maintain work and family functioning
(2) transient sleep disturbances or emotional fluctuations may occur during periods of high stress.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) escalate the assessment if persistent fatigue or cardiovascular symptoms occur.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, time management skills, short-term supportive interventions, and recommendations for a healthy lifestyle.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject’s TPA falls within the normal range
(2) exhibits moderate competitiveness and overall stable functioning
(3) psychological education and follow-up are recommended.


▲Low Self-Esteem (LSE):T70   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The LSE content scale measures an individual’s overall evaluation of self-worth, including self-acceptance, shame/self-blame, feelings of incompetence, social inferiority, and patterns of attributing failure. High scores (indicating low self-esteem) suggest that individuals frequently experience persistent self-denial, avoidance of challenges, and social withdrawal, which may affect their careers, academic performance, and intimate relationships
(2) low scores suggest higher self-esteem or denial/defensiveness regarding the issue.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Recent research has identified low self-esteem as a cross-diagnostic risk factor for various mental disorders (particularly depression, social anxiety, and personality disorders)
(2) low self-esteem can serve as both a predisposing factor and a maintenance factor. Longitudinal studies show that persistent low self-esteem predicts depression relapse, impaired social functioning, and the risk of self-harm
(3)Intervention studies support that self-esteem-targeted cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), self-compassion training, behavioral activation, and interpersonal therapy (IPT) can improve long-term outcomes. Interpretations should integrate L/F/K validity, DEP, ANX, HEA, social functioning indicators, and third-party data to enhance accuracy.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Multiple positive items related to self-deprecation, social inferiority, or feelings of incompetence
(2) strong reactions to failure or criticism.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Self-criticism, perfectionist tendencies, sensitivity to others’ evaluations, and poor emotional regulation.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)The individual often avoids challenges, reduces social participation, experiences decreased work efficiency, or exhibits excessive dependence or withdrawal in intimate relationships.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess for comorbid depression and anxiety, social support, and coping resources
(2) inquire about adverse childhood experiences and long-term interpersonal patterns
(3) conduct concurrent DEP/ANX and functional assessments

♦ Recommendations
(1)Short- or medium-term CBT (reframing self-beliefs), behavioral activation, social skills training, mindfulness, and self-compassion exercises
(2) if accompanied by depression or anxiety, consider combining medication with psychotherapy.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)The subject has a slightly elevated LSE score (T65–74)
(2) there is marked self-deprecation and social avoidance
(3) CBT and behavioral activation are recommended, along with an assessment for comorbid depression.


▲Social Maladjustment (SOD):T63   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The SOD content scale measures an individual’s discomfort in social situations, fear of negative evaluation, avoidance of social interactions, tension in public settings, and excessive self-consciousness. High scores indicate social avoidance or social anxiety-like symptoms that impact work, academic performance, and intimate relationships
(2) low scores suggest good social adaptation or denial of the problem.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Recent studies have placed SOD within the social anxiety spectrum and assessments of functional impairment, finding that SOD is associated with social anxiety disorder, avoidant personality traits, comorbid depression, and reduced quality of life
(2) individuals with high SOD scores seek medical and psychological help at higher rates and respond well to exposure therapy
(3)Cultural background, gender, and social roles have a significant impact on scale scores and symptom expression. A single scale cannot replace interviews and behavioral observations
(4) optimal interpretation requires integration with longitudinal history, behavioral samples, and third-party reports.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive scores on items related to social tension or avoidance
(2) these typically resolve with support or can be alleviated through preparation.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate self-consciousness, with some coping strategies and social resources.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most individuals can return to baseline through psychoeducation, skills training, and lifestyle adjustments
(2) if symptoms persist or worsen, retesting and expanded assessment are recommended.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) administer the DEP/ANX concurrently to identify comorbid mood disorders
(3) monitor sleep, substance use, and major life events.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, role-playing and preparation techniques, relaxation training, short-term supportive psychotherapy, or group sessions.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)The subject’s SOD is within the normal range
(2) occasional social anxiety is present, but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Family Problems (FAM):T62     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The FAM Content Scale measures the frequency and intensity of intra-family conflict, quality of communication, issues with roles and boundaries, level of emotional support, caregiving capacity, and indicators of domestic violence or neglect. High scores suggest that the family environment may be a trigger or maintaining factor for psychological symptoms, affecting the individual’s emotional stability, treatment adherence, and functional recovery
(2) low scores suggest better family support or that the participant is in denial of or downplaying family problems.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Research shows that family dysfunction is associated with depression, substance use, childhood behavioral problems, poor treatment adherence, and risk of relapse
(2) family interventions (systemic family therapy, structured family therapy, parent training) can improve outcomes at both the individual and family levels
(3) the assessment should incorporate family history, judicial/medical records, child protection data, and third-party statements to enhance interpretive validity
(4) cultural, economic, and living conditions have a significant impact on the manifestation of family functioning and the feasibility of interventions.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional family conflicts or role stress items are positive
(2) these are typically related to recent life events (such as moving, unemployment, or postpartum periods).

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Communication skills remain intact, and the individual is willing to seek help or accept advice.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most families can recover through psychoeducation, short-term counseling, or community support
(2) if problems persist or worsen, retesting and expanded assessment are warranted.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) concurrently administer the DEP/ANX and HEA scales to identify comorbidity or somatization
(3) pay attention to the social support network

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, short-term family counseling, referral to community resources, parent support groups, or individual psychotherapy.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)The subject’s FAM score falls within the normal range
(2) situational family stress is present but overall functioning is stable. Psychological education and short-term family counseling with follow-up are recommended.


▲Work Interference (WRK):T59   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The WRK content scale measures attention, motivation, attendance, performance, relationships with colleagues and supervisors, burnout, and reduced work capacity due to psychological issues in work or academic settings. High scores indicate impaired work functioning, frequent absenteeism, decreased performance, or occupational conflicts
(2) low scores indicate good work adaptation or minimization/denial of problems.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)The study placed work-related stress within the framework of workplace mental health and productivity and found that WRK is highly correlated with depression, anxiety, burnout, Type A personality, anger/impulsivity, substance use, and sleep deprivation
(2) high WRK levels predict long-term unemployment, an increased risk of workplace injuries, and increased use of medical services
(3) interventions primarily consist of workplace-oriented cognitive behavioral therapy, vocational rehabilitation, workplace accommodations, and interdisciplinary management.For accurate interpretation, results should be considered in conjunction with longitudinal performance records, employer/colleague feedback, and medical/psychological treatment records.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional declines in attention or motivation, short-term fatigue, or minor conflicts with colleagues
(2) these can usually be resolved through self-regulation or support.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses some coping strategies, a sense of responsibility, and resilience
(2) may exhibit brief episodes of anxiety or fatigue during periods of high stress.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most individuals can return to baseline through psychoeducation, lifestyle adjustments, and short-term support
(2) if symptoms persist or worsen, retesting and expanded assessment are warranted.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) administer sleep, substance use, and mood scales concurrently to identify potential comorbidities.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, stress management, time and task prioritization training, sleep hygiene, and exercise prescriptions
(2) short-term career counseling or group sessions as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject WRK falls within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational work-related stress is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Treatment Readiness Indicators (TRT):T64   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The TRT Content Scale assesses four core dimensions: treatment motivation (willingness to change), treatment adherence (attending appointments on time, taking medication/completing assignments), trust in the therapist and quality of empathy, and resistance to or passive-aggressive behavior toward treatment. High scores indicate a potential for treatment dropout, antagonistic behavior, frequent therapist changes, or overreliance on treatment resources
(2) low scores indicate high cooperation or downplaying of responses.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)TRT is associated with treatment discontinuation rates, treatment efficacy, resource utilization, and relapse risk. Early identification combined with motivational interviewing (MI), restoration of the therapeutic alliance, and adherence support (reminders, family intervention) can significantly reduce treatment dropout and improve outcomes. Interpretation should incorporate L/F/K validity, DEP/ANX/ANG/WRK/FAM scores, past treatment history, and third-party data.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional doubts about treatment or short-term discomfort may arise, but patients generally accept treatment recommendations and participate in the plan.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate cooperation, moderate sense of responsibility, and some capacity for self-reflection and reality testing.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Typically attends appointments on time and completes homework or takes medication
(2) may experience brief fluctuations during major life events or periods of stress.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Record triggers and longitudinal changes
(2) administer the DEP/ANX and WRK/FAM concurrently to identify potential influencing factors.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Establish clear treatment goals, routinely assess the therapeutic alliance, provide mild adherence support (appointment reminders, family involvement), and use brief MI when necessary.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)TRT is within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) the patient’s attitude toward treatment is generally cooperative
(3) it is recommended to establish clear goals and conduct regular follow-ups.

FRS1	FRS2
81	49

High
Low

▲Generalized Fear (FRS1):T81     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The RS1 measures an individual’s tendency to interpret neutral or low-threat events as dangerous (catastrophizing, threat bias, overgeneralization, intolerance of uncertainty), persistent worry, and resulting avoidance or safety behaviors
(2)High scores indicate threat bias at the cognitive level and avoidance/checking patterns at the behavioral level, while low scores suggest low threat perception or possible downplaying/defensiveness
(3) interpretation should be based primarily on functional impact (attendance, academic performance, social functioning, sleep) and longitudinal history, combined with third-party information to enhance accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Fear generalization is regarded as a cross-diagnostic mechanism within the anxiety spectrum
(2) neurobiological and physiological studies indicate that generalization is associated with an imbalance in the prefrontal cortex–amygdala circuit, sympathetic activation, and elevated levels of stress-related inflammatory markers
(3) behavioral and experimental paradigms suggest the existence of widespread and selective generalization phenotypes, with these phenotypic differences predicting disease type, severity, and treatment response
(4)Longitudinal studies have found that persistently high levels of generalization predict depression relapse, chronic stress responses, sleep disturbances, and somatization symptoms
(5) assessment methodologies are trending toward multimodal integration (self-report scales + fear generalization experiments + physiological indicators) to enhance predictive validity
(6) intervention studies show that CBT targeting threat interpretation (cognitive restructuring + systematic exposure) has the strongest evidence
(7)Mindfulness/ACT, exposure reinforcement, and behavioral activation serve as effective complementary approaches
(8) when combined with severe comorbidity, SSRIs/SNRIs can improve remission rates
(9) clinical implementation emphasizes early quantification of functional impairment, culturally contextualized assessment, and the integration of behavioral exposure into daily functional recovery plans.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)A large number of consistent positive entries regarding “things will go wrong,” “small matters will lead to major disasters,” “uncontrollable worry,” and “persistent anticipation of the worst-case scenario”
(2) L/F/K anomalies suggest a need to be vigilant for exaggerated or strategic responses.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High levels of catastrophizing, threat bias, low tolerance for uncertainty, excessive monitoring of bodily/environmental cues, perfectionism or a need for control, and high sensitivity to failure.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Long-term absenteeism, academic withdrawal, social isolation, frequent medical visits, or seeking reassurance
(2) severely impaired sleep, marked somatization symptoms (palpitations, gastrointestinal discomfort, headaches)
(3) treatment adherence may decline due to despair or avoidance.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Prioritize quantifying functional impairment (attendance, performance, academic achievement)
(2) assess thoughts of self-harm or despair
(3) concurrently evaluate DEP/ANX/HEA/WRK/FAM/SUB and verify with third parties
(4) rule out somatic causes (thyroid, cardiac) and medication effects.

♦ Recommendations
(1)CBT is the treatment of choice (cognitive restructuring + systematic exposure + response prevention)
(2) use in parallel with mindfulness/ACT, sleep interventions, and behavioral activation
(3) when combined with severe anxiety or depression, use SSRIs/SNRIs in collaboration with psychiatry
(4) if necessary, short-term intensive outpatient treatment or hospitalization to ensure safety and functional recovery.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)FRS1 extremely high (T ≥ 75)
(2) widespread catastrophic thinking and persistent worry lead to significant avoidance and functional impairment
(3) concurrent DEP/ANX/HEA assessment is recommended, along with initiation of CBT (cognitive restructuring and systematic exposure), sleep management, and safety management.


▲Multiple Phobias (FRS2):T49     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The FRS-2 measures the intensity of an individual’s fear, the breadth of fear (the number of stimulus types involved), and the frequency of avoidance in response to a variety of specific stimuli or situations (e.g., animals, heights, blood/injuries, enclosed spaces, social situations, natural disasters, etc.)
(2)High scores indicate avoidance across multiple domains, functional impairment, and somatization reactions, while low scores suggest reduced fear or possible desensitization/defense mechanisms
(3) interpretation should focus on functional impact (attendance, academic performance, social interactions, daily activities) and longitudinal history as core evidence, combined with third-party input (family members, employers, teachers) and behavioral observations to enhance accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Experimental and clinical studies indicate that multiple fears are often driven by conditioning and generalization mechanisms, and that the breadth of fear correlates with the intensity of conditioning
(2) physiological studies show that multiple fears are accompanied by sympathetic activation, elevated heart rate, and increased skin conductance, suggesting parallel physiological and cognitive mechanisms
(3) behavioral experiments and longitudinal studies have found that multiple fears predict greater functional impairment, increased healthcare utilization, and reduced quality of life
(4)Exposure therapy has the strongest evidence for reducing avoidance and fear responses, while cognitive restructuring, mindfulness/ACT, and exposure reinforcement can serve as effective adjuncts
(5) assessment methodologies are trending toward multimodal integration (self-report scales + behavioral exposure paradigms + physiological indicators) to improve the accuracy of predicting treatment response
(6) clinical implementation emphasizes early quantification of functional impairment, culturally contextualized assessment, and the integration of exposure into daily functional recovery plans.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive scores on specific phobia items
(2) functioning is generally maintained in most situations
(3) avoidance behaviors are limited and context-specific.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Good reality testing ability, possession of some coping strategies, and willingness to attempt exposure or practice.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Fear reactions occur under stress or specific triggers, but baseline functioning can be restored through self-regulation, support, or short-term intervention.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if fear persists or spreads, retest and expand the assessment (ANX/FRS1/HEA).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, graded exposure exercises, behavioral exercises, and short-term supportive psychotherapy
(2) community or group exposure courses may serve as a supplement.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)FRS2 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational fear is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation, gradual exposure, and follow-up are recommended.

DEP1	DEP2	DEP3	DEP4
60	53	54	77

High
Low

▲Lack of Motivation (DEP1):T60     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The DEP1 measures willpower, initiative, loss of interest, difficulty initiating behavior, and reduced goal-directed behavior
(2) high scores reflect persistent lack of motivation, reduced activity, diminished interest, and possible behavioral withdrawal, often accompanied by low mood, fatigue, and cognitive sluggishness
(3) low scores suggest normal motivation or that the participant is downplaying the problem.Interpretation should focus on functional impact (attendance, household chores, social interactions, personal hygiene, treatment adherence) and longitudinal changes, and should incorporate input from third parties (family members, employers, teachers) and behavioral observations to enhance accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Lack of motivation is considered one of the core phenotypes of the depression spectrum
(2) neurobiological and physiological studies show that loss of motivation is associated with impaired dopamine system function, reduced activity in the prefrontal-striatal circuit, and markers of chronic inflammation
(3) longitudinal studies indicate that persistent lack of motivation predicts functional decline, occupational/academic withdrawal, and depression relapse
(4)Behavioral experiments and ecological momentary assessments show that reduced daily activity and negative emotions mutually reinforce each other
(5) intervention evidence supports behavioral activation as the treatment of choice, combined with cognitive restructuring, exercise prescriptions, and medication (antidepressants) to improve remission rates in moderate-to-severe cases
(6) clinical implementation emphasizes early quantification of functional baselines, stepwise goal-setting, and family/occupational support to promote behavioral recovery.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional difficulty initiating tasks or fluctuations in interest
(2) still able to complete tasks in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses a certain degree of self-regulation, sense of responsibility, and resilience
(2) may exhibit a temporary decline in motivation during periods of high stress.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Fatigue or procrastination occurs in response to life events or short-term stress, but baseline functioning can be restored through self-regulation, support, or short-term counseling.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if a decline in motivation persists or spreads, retest and expand the assessment (DEP/ANX/WRK).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, time management and stress management, short-term supportive psychotherapy, or group activities
(2) encourage regular exercise and social participation.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)DEP1 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational fluctuations in motivation are present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and short-term follow-up are recommended.


▲Anxiety (DEP2):T53     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The DEP2 measures subjective anxiety intensity, persistent worry, somatized anxiety reactions (palpitations, sweating, tremors, gastrointestinal discomfort), impaired attention and sleep, and the interference of anxiety with work, academic performance, social interactions, and daily activities
(2)High scores indicate a high anxiety burden across emotional, physiological, and behavioral dimensions, while low scores suggest milder anxiety or downplaying/defensive responses
(3) interpretation should focus on functional impact and longitudinal history, and be combined with the GAD-7/PHQ-9, sleep scales, and third-party data to improve accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Anxiety is regarded as a core emotion-regulation disorder across diagnostic categories
(2) neurobiological and physiological studies indicate that anxiety is associated with an imbalance in amygdala–prefrontal cortex function, sympathetic activation, and subcortical stress responses
(3) longitudinal studies suggest that persistently high levels of anxiety predict sleep disturbances, cognitive decline, chronic somatization, and comorbid depression
(4) behavioral and experimental research emphasizes the role of attentional bias and threat interpretation in the maintenance of anxiety
(5)Evidence supports CBT (cognitive restructuring + exposure/behavioral experiments) as the first-line treatment, with mindfulness/relaxation training and behavioral activation serving as effective adjuncts
(6) when combined with moderate-to-severe or chronic anxiety, SSRIs/SNRIs and multidisciplinary management can improve remission rates
(7) assessment methodologies are trending toward multimodal integration (self-report scales + behavioral samples + physiological indicators) to enhance predictive validity and individualize treatment matching.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Positive scores on items related to occasional worry or sleep fluctuations
(2) reality testing and task completion are generally maintained in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses certain coping strategies, reality testing abilities, and resilience
(2) may exhibit brief episodes of anxiety during periods of high stress.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Transient anxiety or sleep problems occur during periods of stress, but baseline levels can be restored through self-regulation, support, or short-term counseling.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if anxiety persists or spreads, retest and expand the assessment (DEP/ANX/HEA).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, stress management, sleep and lifestyle adjustments, short-term supportive psychotherapy, or group sessions.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)DEP2 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational anxiety is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Low Self-Esteem (DEP3):T54   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The DEP-3 measures an individual’s stable tendencies regarding self-evaluation, feelings of shame, social self-consciousness, and self-deprecation
(2) high scores reflect persistent low self-esteem, internalized negative attributions, high sensitivity to criticism, and social avoidance, often accompanied by depression, anxiety, and functional withdrawal
(3) low scores suggest normal self-worth or possible downplaying or idealization in responses.Interpretation should focus on behavioral evidence (frequency of social participation, work/academic performance, help-seeking behavior), longitudinal history, and third-party observations, and should be combined with the DEP summary form, PHQ-9, GAD-7, and family/occupational data to improve accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Low self-esteem is considered an important cross-diagnostic dimension of depression and social anxiety
(2) research on neurobiological and psychological mechanisms shows that low self-esteem is associated with negative self-representation, differences in prefrontal-limbic system function, and heightened stress responses
(3) longitudinal studies indicate that persistently low self-esteem predicts depressive relapse, impaired interpersonal functioning, and occupational/academic withdrawal
(4) psychosocial research emphasizes the role of early attachment, experiences of humiliation, and social comparison in the development of low self-esteem
(5)Evidence for interventions supports a core approach centered on cognitive restructuring, evidence-based self-esteem enhancement training, social skills training, and behavioral activation
(6) integrated interventions (psychotherapy + family/occupational support + medication when necessary) are more effective in improving functional impairments associated with low self-esteem
(7) assessment methodologies are moving toward the integration of multiple data sources (self-reports + behavioral samples + third-party reports) to enhance interpretive validity.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional self-deprecation or fear of evaluation
(2) however, the individual is still able to maintain reality testing and complete tasks in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses a certain degree of self-reflection and resilience
(2) may briefly exhibit feelings of inferiority during periods of high stress.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Self-doubt or avoidance occurs in response to life events or short-term stress, but baseline functioning can be restored through self-regulation, support, or short-term counseling.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if low self-esteem persists or spreads, retest and expand the assessment (DEP/ANX/WRK/FAM).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, short-term cognitive skills training, social skills practice, and supportive psychotherapy
(2) encourage participation in rewarding activities to enhance self-efficacy.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)DEP3 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational inferiority is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and short-term follow-up are recommended.


▲Suicidal Ideation (DEP4):T77   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)EP4 measures the presence, frequency, and intensity of suicidal ideation, as well as specific plans and intent to act, along with suicide-related feelings of despair, helplessness, and history of self-harm
(2) high scores indicate a clear risk of self-harm or suicide or recent self-harm behavior, requiring immediate assessment of feasibility and risk and the initiation of safety measures
(3) low scores indicate no obvious suicidal ideation or possible downplaying or denial.Interpretation should focus on recent behavioral evidence (records of self-harm, emergency department visits, suicide notes, bequests), intent and feasibility of self-harm, social support, and available resources, and should incorporate longitudinal history and third-party information to improve the accuracy of the assessment.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Suicidal ideation is considered a key predictor of suicidal behavior
(2) epidemiological studies show that the presence of suicidal ideation is highly correlated with depression, substance use, chronic pain, social isolation, and economic stress
(3) neuroimaging and biomarker studies suggest that abnormalities in prefrontal-limbic system function, impaired impulse control, and elevated inflammatory markers are associated with suicide risk
(4)Longitudinal studies indicate that recent suicidal ideation, concrete plans, and a history of self-harm are the strongest short-term predictors
(5) assessment methodologies are trending toward a multi-source integrated approach (self-report scales + clinical interviews + behavioral records + physiological/biomarker data) to enhance predictive validity
(6)Evidence for interventions supports immediate safety planning, crisis intervention, short-term hospitalization or intensive outpatient care, evidence-based psychotherapy (such as cognitive-behavioral crisis intervention and DBT targeting impulse and emotion regulation), combined with medication and social support as needed
(7) clinical implementation emphasizes rapid triage, clear follow-up, and multidisciplinary collaboration.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)Multiple consistent positive responses to items such as “wanting to end one’s life,” “having a specific plan,” “having engaged in self-harm,” “preparing means or a suicide note,” etc.
(2) abnormal L/F/K ratios suggest a need to be vigilant for exaggerated or strategic responses, but behavioral evidence should take precedence in suicide risk assessment.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Intense feelings of despair, helplessness, negative attributions, impulsivity or emotional dysregulation, and hopelessness about the future
(2) may be accompanied by severe depression, psychotic symptoms, or substance abuse.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common indicators include a recent history of self-harm or suicide attempts, emergency department visits, preparation of bequests or a suicide note, social isolation, and feelings of hopelessness
(2) severe functional impairment is present, and treatment adherence may be inconsistent.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Immediately conduct a standardized suicide risk assessment (frequency, planning, intent, means availability, past behavior) and document it
(2) assess the feasibility and time window for self-harm
(3) concurrently administer the PHQ-9, DEP total score, SUB, FAM, and third-party verification
(4) if there is immediate danger, initiate emergency hospitalization or 24-hour supervision and notify relevant social/legal agencies.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize safety management (removal of means of self-harm
(2) signing a safety contract is only supplementary), intensive crisis intervention, short-term hospitalization or intensive outpatient care, DBT (emotion and impulse management), cognitive-behavioral crisis intervention, and medication to control severe depression or psychotic symptoms
(3) concurrently implement social work, family intervention, and a post-discharge follow-up plan.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)DEP4 Extremely High (T ≥ 75)
(2) presence of recent, explicit suicidal ideation accompanied by specific plans/methods or a history of self-harm
(3) high short-term risk of self-harm
(4) immediate initiation of safety measures, psychiatric inpatient evaluation, and concurrent referral to social services is recommended.

HEA1	HEA2	HEA3
64	72	87

High
Low

▲Gastrointestinal Symptoms (HEA1):T64     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The HEA1 measures the intensity and frequency of self-reported gastrointestinal symptoms (abdominal pain, bloating, nausea, vomiting, constipation, diarrhea, indigestion, changes in appetite, etc.), the association between symptoms and emotions (anxiety, depression, stress), and behaviors adopted to alleviate symptoms (frequency of medical visits, diagnostic tests, avoidance of certain foods, or social avoidance)
(2)High scores indicate the psychological dimension of somatization or functional gastrointestinal disorders and significant functional impairment, while low scores suggest few gastrointestinal symptoms or possible downplaying/denial of symptoms. Interpretation should be based on medical tests (complete blood count, thyroid function, liver and kidney function, inflammatory markers, endoscopy or imaging if available), medication history, substance use, and information from third parties (family members, attending physician).

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)The psychological components of functional gastrointestinal disorders and gastrointestinal symptoms have been extensively studied
(2)The biopsychosocial model emphasizes the role of the gut-brain axis, indicating that gastrointestinal symptoms are associated with gut microbiota, inflammatory markers, the vagus nerve, and central emotional regulation networks
(3) psychological factors (chronic stress, anxiety, depression, history of trauma) can amplify symptom perception and perpetuate avoidance and healthcare-seeking behaviors
(4) longitudinal studies show that persistently high gastrointestinal symptoms predict increased healthcare utilization, absenteeism from work or school, and reduced quality of life
(5)Evidence for interventions supports a multidisciplinary management approach: cognitive-behavioral therapy (targeting somatization and symptom catastrophizing), exposure and behavioral activation, dietary and gut microbiome interventions, medication (for symptoms or comorbid mood disorders), and follow-up with gastroenterology specialists
(6) assessment methodologies tend to integrate self-reports, clinical interviews, and biomarkers to improve the match between diagnosis and treatment.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Positive items for occasional abdominal pain, indigestion, or changes in bowel habits
(2) daily tasks can still be completed in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Some sensitivity to bodily signals, but with reality testing and coping strategies in place.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Symptoms occur due to poor diet, infection, or short-term stress but resolve through self-regulation, dietary adjustments, or short-term treatment.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Record triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if symptoms persist or worsen, retest and expand the medical evaluation (HEA full scale, endoscopy, etc.).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, dietary and lifestyle adjustments (regular eating, sleep, and exercise), short-term symptomatic medication, and follow-up
(2) provide short-term supportive psychotherapy or group sessions as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)HEA1 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational gastrointestinal discomfort is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) dietary and lifestyle adjustments and follow-up are recommended.


▲Neurological symptoms (HEA2):T72     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The HEA2 measures subjective symptoms and functional manifestations related to the central or peripheral nervous system, including headache/migraine, dizziness/imbalance, sensory abnormalities (numbness, tingling), motor coordination or weakness, epileptic or non-epileptic seizures, speech/swallowing difficulties, changes in vision or hearing, and autonomic symptoms (tachycardia, abnormal sweating, orthostatic hypotension)
(2)A high score indicates significant neurological symptoms, possibly accompanied by somatization or a neurological disorder, while a low score suggests few symptoms or possible downplaying/denial. Interpretation should focus on medical evidence (neurological physical examination, imaging, laboratory tests, and neurophysiological studies) and functional impact, combined with psychological factors (anxiety, depression, history of trauma) and medication/substance use history to determine the bio-psycho-social components of the symptoms.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Research on neurological symptoms emphasizes the biopsychosocial model
(2) neuroimaging and electrophysiological studies reveal that some subjective symptoms are associated with measurable physiological abnormalities (e.g., epilepsy, cerebrovascular lesions, peripheral neuropathy), but a large number of functional neurological symptoms (functional neurological symptom disorder/conversion disorder) are closely related to stress, trauma, attentional bias, and somatization mechanisms
(3)Long-term neurological symptoms are associated with sleep disorders, chronic pain, comorbid depression and anxiety, and impaired daily and occupational functioning
(4) assessment methodologies are trending toward multimodal integration (neurological examination + imaging/electrophysiology + psychological assessment + functional scales) to improve differential diagnosis and treatment matching
(5)Evidence supports interdisciplinary management: organic causes should be prioritized for medical or neurological treatment
(6) for functional or somatization components, the focus should be on cognitive-behavioral therapy, specialized treatment for functional neurological symptoms (educational explanations, movement/exposure training, psychosocial interventions), and rehabilitation
(7) rehabilitation plans oriented toward early identification and functional recovery can reduce the risk of chronicity and overutilization of medical services.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Several positive items regarding headaches, dizziness, intermittent weakness or sensory abnormalities, transient confusion, or seizure-like symptoms
(2) response consistency is generally good.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Patients are sensitive to symptoms, tend to seek reassurance, and experience symptom exacerbation during times of stress or fatigue
(2) they may engage in avoidance behaviors (e.g., avoiding driving, avoiding heights, etc.).

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Decreased work or academic efficiency, occasional falls or syncope, and increased frequency of medical visits or tests
(2) often accompanied by sleep disturbances, anxiety, or depression.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Identify the characteristics of the episodes (onset speed, triggers, duration, presence of aura or aftereffects), witness descriptions, and physical signs
(2) conduct necessary medical tests (imaging/EEG/laboratory) to rule out reversible causes
(3) assess the influence of medications or substances (alcohol, sedatives).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Conduct a medical evaluation and provide symptomatic treatment (migraine management, vestibular rehabilitation, treatment for neuropathy)
(2) if no clear abnormalities are found in organic causes, employ functional interventions (education, gradual return to activity, physical therapy) and psychological support (CBT, relaxation training)
(3) use medication as needed to control symptoms or comorbid mood disorders.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Elevated HEA2 (T65–74)
(2) recurrent neurological symptoms affect functioning
(3) a neurological evaluation (imaging/EEG/laboratory tests) is recommended, along with symptomatic treatment, rehabilitation, and psychological support.


▲General Health Problems (HEA3):T87     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The HEA3 measures an individual’s subjective experience of general health problems and their impact on functioning, including chronic fatigue, general malaise, pain sensitivity, sleep disturbances, decreased physical strength, difficulties managing chronic conditions, and frequent healthcare-seeking behavior
(2)High scores indicate widespread symptoms that constitute a persistent burden on daily functioning and may be accompanied by symptom catastrophizing or somatization tendencies
(3) low scores suggest few health problems or a tendency to downplay or deny them. Interpretation should be combined with medical examinations (laboratory tests, imaging, and specialist evaluations), medication and substance use history, lifestyle factors, and third-party information (from the attending physician and family members) to distinguish between organic causes and functional/psychological components.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Chronic nonspecific health problems are viewed as the product of bio-psycho-social interactions
(2) epidemiological studies show that chronic fatigue and general malaise are highly correlated with depression, anxiety, sleep disorders, chronic pain, and impaired social functioning
(3) physiological studies suggest that markers of chronic inflammation, alterations in hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis function, and abnormalities in energy metabolism can be detected in some individuals
(4)Behavioral and ecological momentary assessments indicate that symptom catastrophizing, avoidance behaviors, and healthcare-seeking behaviors can maintain or exacerbate symptoms
(5) evidence for interventions supports interdisciplinary management (medical screening + behavioral activation/CBT targeting symptom catastrophizing + exercise prescription + sleep and nutritional interventions) to improve functioning and reduce overutilization of healthcare services
(6) assessment methodologies are trending toward multi-source integration (self-report scales + medical examinations + functional records + third-party reports) to enhance the match between diagnosis and treatment.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)A large number of consistently positive items regarding “chronic fatigue,” “generalized pain,” “extremely poor sleep,” “frequent medical visits or tests,” and “inability to work or study due to health problems”
(2) abnormal L/F/K scores suggest a need to be vigilant for exaggerated or strategic responses.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Symptoms include symptom catastrophizing, health anxiety, low tolerance for uncertainty, excessive monitoring of bodily signals, avoidance of activities to prevent symptom exacerbation, and frequent reassurance-seeking behaviors.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common features include frequent outpatient or emergency department visits, numerous tests with limited organic findings, impaired weight or nutritional status, and a significant decline in social and occupational functioning
(2) the likelihood of comorbid depression, anxiety, sleep disorders, or substance use is high.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Prioritize a comprehensive medical workup (complete blood count, metabolic panel, endocrine panel, inflammatory markers, and imaging or specialty evaluations as needed) to rule out reversible organic causes
(2) concurrently administer the full HEA scale, DEP/ANX, sleep and nutritional assessments, and verify substance use history with third parties (attending physician, family members)
(3) assess functional impairment and activities of daily living.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Preferred interdisciplinary management: medical symptomatic treatment and screening + CBT targeting symptom catastrophizing and behavioral activation + structured exercise prescriptions and sleep/nutrition interventions
(2) concurrent pain management, physical therapy, and vocational rehabilitation
(3) if depression or anxiety is present, concomitant use of antidepressants or short-term anxiolytics (in collaboration with psychiatry and internal medicine)
(4) short-term intensive outpatient care or hospitalization as needed to stabilize symptoms and function.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)HEA3 Extremely High (T ≥ 75)
(2) widespread chronic health problems accompanied by significant functional impairment and frequent healthcare utilization. It is recommended to conduct a comprehensive medical evaluation, HEA/DEP/ANX assessment, and initiate multidisciplinary intervention (CBT + behavioral activation + exercise and nutritional interventions) concurrently.

BIZ1	BIZ2
65	54

High
Low

▲Psychotic Symptoms (BIZ1):T65     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The BIZ1 measures abnormalities in an individual’s perception, thinking, beliefs, and reality testing, including hallucinations (auditory, visual, tactile, etc.), delusions (persecution, control, grandeur, and reference delusions), thought disorder (incoherence, flight of ideas), abnormalities in volition and behavior (impulsivity, withdrawal, odd behavior), and impaired reality testing
(2)A high score suggests a possible psychotic disorder or drug- or somatic-induced causes, while a low score indicates few psychotic symptoms or possible downplaying or denial of symptoms. Interpretation should be based primarily on recent behavioral evidence (eyewitness reports, inpatient/emergency department records, medication history), neuropsychiatric examinations, and longitudinal history, combined with assessments of substance use, somatic causes, and social support to determine intervention priorities.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Psychotic symptoms are considered a cross-diagnostic clinical phenotype
(2) neuroimaging and neurobiological studies show that hallucinations and delusions are associated with functional abnormalities in the prefrontal-limbic system, temporal lobe, and dopamine/glutamate systems
(3) longitudinal studies indicate that early psychosis-like symptoms predict schizophrenia spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, and functional decline
(4)Substance use (particularly hallucinogens and synthetic stimulants) and neuroendocrine/metabolic abnormalities can induce or exacerbate psychotic manifestations
(5)Assessment methodologies are moving toward multimodal integration (clinical scales + behavioral observation + physiological/imaging markers) to improve differential diagnosis
(6) evidence on interventions supports the early initiation of antipsychotic medications and psychosocial interventions (CBT-p, family intervention, rehabilitation training), with an emphasis on crisis management, monitoring of medication side effects, and long-term functional recovery plans.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Several positive items for hallucinations or delusions
(2) intermittent disorganization of thought or speech
(3) generally good consistency in responses.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Impaired ability to test reality cues
(2) excessive speculation about others’ motives
(3) emotional reactivity
(4) may employ avoidance or confrontational strategies.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Decline in work or academic performance
(2) social withdrawal or conflict
(3) occasional emergency department visits or short-term hospitalizations
(4) often accompanied by sleep disturbances, anxiety, or depression.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Assess the time window and triggers of symptoms (discontinuation of medication, substance use, stress)
(2) obtain information from third-party witnesses
(3) conduct concurrent substance screening and basic medical examinations
(4) evaluate treatment adherence and support systems.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Short-term antipsychotic medication and psychosocial interventions (CBT-p, family education), intensive outpatient follow-up, or day hospital
(2) concurrent substance use treatment and sleep management
(3) if symptoms progress or plans/intentions emerge, escalate to inpatient evaluation.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)BIZ1 slightly elevated (T65–74)
(2) marked psychotic symptoms and impaired reality testing are present
(3) a psychiatric evaluation, medication, and psychosocial interventions are recommended as soon as possible, along with intensive follow-up.


▲Schizophrenia-like features (BIZ2):T54     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The BIZ2 assesses characteristic manifestations associated with the schizophrenia spectrum, including disorganized thinking, bizarre or deviant beliefs, social withdrawal, emotional flatness, cognitive slowness, abnormal perceptual experiences (mild hallucinatory-like experiences or perceptual distortions), and blurred self-boundaries
(2) a high score indicates that these features are significantly present and may affect occupational/academic and interpersonal functioning, while a low score suggests that related features are few or may be minimized or denied.Interpretation should be based on behavioral evidence (social withdrawal, work performance, witness reports), longitudinal history (early functional decline, social withdrawal during adolescence), and substance/medical factors to distinguish between spectrum features, transient psychotic-like presentations, or personality traits.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Schizophrenia-like features are considered a cross-diagnostic phenotypic continuum
(2) neurobiological and genetic studies indicate that these features are associated with differences in prefrontal-temporal lobe function, variations in dopamine and glutamate systems, and weakened cognitive control networks
(3)Longitudinal cohort studies indicate that social withdrawal, cognitive slowing, and bizarre beliefs during adolescence predict schizophrenia spectrum disorders and functional decline in adulthood
(4) clinical and epidemiological studies emphasize that substance use, sleep deprivation, and social adversity can trigger or exacerbate spectrum features
(5)Assessment methodologies are moving toward multi-source integration (self-reports + clinical interviews + cognitive tests + third-party/behavioral samples) to enhance predictive validity
(6) intervention studies support early identification and function-oriented interventions (cognitive training, social skills training, CBT-p, family intervention), combined with antipsychotic medications and rehabilitation services when necessary, to improve long-term functional outcomes.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional bizarre thoughts, mild social withdrawal, or emotional fluctuations
(2) reality testing and task completion are generally maintained in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses some capacity for reality testing and problem-solving
(2) tends to be skeptical of abnormal experiences or to seek help.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Transient psychotic-like experiences occur under stress, sleep deprivation, or the influence of substances, but recovery is possible with support or short-term treatment.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) conduct concurrent substance screening, sleep, and mood assessments
(3) if symptoms persist or worsen, repeat the assessment and expand the evaluation.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, short-term supportive psychotherapy, social skills training, and sleep/substance management
(2) short-term pharmacological intervention and follow-up as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)BIZ-2 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational schizophrenia-like features are present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation, sleep and substance management, and follow-up are recommended.

ANG1	ANG2
54	54

High
Low

▲Explosive Behavior (ANG1):T54     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The ANG1 measures intense anger outbursts, verbal or physical aggression, impulsive destructive behavior, and emotional dysregulation occurring within a short period of time
(2)High scores indicate recurrent outbursts, poor impulse control, and a risk of actual harm to others or oneself
(3) low scores suggest good anger control or possible downplaying/denial. Interpretation should be based primarily on recent behavioral records (witness reports, police/emergency room records, family/workplace complaints), triggering situations (frustration, humiliation, substance influence), and functional impact (work, family, legal consequences).

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Explosive behavior is considered a core phenotype of impulse control and emotional regulation disorders
(2) neurobiological research indicates it is associated with prefrontal-limbic system dysfunction, abnormalities in impulse-related neurotransmitters (dopamine, serotonin), and heightened stress responses
(3) epidemiological and longitudinal studies suggest that recurrent explosive behavior predicts interpersonal conflict, impaired occupational/academic functioning, legal problems, and comorbidity with substance abuse
(4)Experimental and ecological momentary assessment studies highlight the role of the trigger-response chain (humiliation/frustration → physiological arousal → impulsive behavior) in sustaining outbursts
(5) evidence on interventions supports approaches centered on emotion regulation training, impulse control skills (DBT techniques), cognitive restructuring, and exposure/behavioral exercises, supplemented as needed by short-term medication (mood stabilizers, anti-impulsivity medications) and legal/safety management
(6)Clinical practice emphasizes early risk stratification, collection of behavioral evidence, and multidisciplinary collaboration (psychiatry, social work, and the justice system).

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive scores on anger or impulsivity items
(2) self-control and problem-solving abilities are generally maintained in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses some emotional regulation strategies, reality testing abilities, and a sense of responsibility
(2) may experience brief loss of control during periods of stress.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Brief outbursts occur during periods of high stress or fatigue, but baseline functioning can be restored through self-regulation, support, or short-term counseling.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if the frequency or intensity of outbursts increases, retest and expand the assessment (DEP, SUB, BIZ).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, short-term anger management courses, relaxation training, and sleep/lifestyle adjustments
(2) group skills training may serve as a supplement.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)ANG1 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational anger is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation, anger management courses, and follow-up are recommended. ANG1 on the low side (T30–39)
(4) anger is well-controlled or the problem may be downplayed
(5) concurrent validity checks are recommended, with re-evaluation if functional clues emerge.


▲Irritability (ANG2):T54   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The NG2 measures an individual’s tendency toward irritability, lowered emotional thresholds, overreaction to minor events, persistent irritability, and slow emotional recovery in everyday situations
(2)High scores indicate difficulty with emotional regulation, increased impulsivity, and frequent interpersonal conflicts
(3) low scores suggest emotional stability or possible downplaying/denial. Interpretation should focus on behavioral evidence (reports from family members/colleagues, work records, conflict incidents), trigger patterns (fatigue, hunger, stress, substance influence), and functional impact, combined with assessments of sleep, substance use, and comorbid mood disorders.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Irritability is considered a key phenotype of the emotion regulation and impulse control dimension
(2) neurobiological and physiological studies show that irritability is associated with functional imbalances in the prefrontal-limbic circuit, sympathetic activation, and inflammatory markers
(3) ecological momentary assessments and longitudinal studies indicate that chronic irritability predicts interpersonal conflict, reduced occupational/academic functioning, sleep disturbances, and substance use risk
(4)Experimental studies highlight the role of sensitivity to humiliation/frustration and physiological arousal in the trigger chain
(5) intervention evidence supports a core approach centered on emotion regulation training (DBT skills), cognitive restructuring, behavioral activation, and sleep/substance management, supplemented by short-term medication (mood stabilizers or anti-anxiety/antidepressant medications) when necessary
(6) clinical implementation emphasizes early risk stratification, collection of behavioral evidence, and family/occupational interventions to reduce conflict and functional impairment.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Positive on items regarding occasional irritability or brief episodes of anger
(2) self-control and problem-solving abilities are generally maintained in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses some emotional regulation strategies, reality testing abilities, and a sense of responsibility.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Brief emotional fluctuations occur during times of stress or fatigue, but baseline levels are restored through self-regulation or support.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if the frequency or intensity of irritability increases, retest and expand the assessment (DEP, SUB, BIZ).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, short-term anger management courses, relaxation training, and sleep/lifestyle adjustments
(2) group skills training may serve as a supplement.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)ANG2 is within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational irritability is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation, anger management courses, and follow-up are recommended.

CYN1	CYN2
56	49

High
Low

▲Pessimistic Beliefs (CYN1):T56     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The CYN1 measures an individual’s general negative beliefs about humanity, social institutions, or the future (e.g., “People are selfish,” “There is no hope for the world,” “Effort is meaningless”), accompanying emotions (anger, weariness, despair), and behavioral consequences (social avoidance, withdrawal, radical or apathetic behavior)
(2)High scores indicate a negative worldview at the cognitive level and withdrawal or opposition at the behavioral level, while low scores suggest a relatively neutral or optimistic worldview
(3) interpretation should focus on core evidence of functional impact (work/academic attendance, social participation, daily activities) and longitudinal history, combined with input from third parties (family members, colleagues, teachers) and behavioral observations to enhance accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Cynical beliefs are regarded as a cross-diagnostic cognitive phenotype of depression, hopelessness, and hostility
(2) research in social psychology and neuroscience indicates that a long-term negative worldview is associated with early-life adversity, chronic stress, feelings of social deprivation, and cognitive biases (selective attention to negative information, attribution bias)
(3) longitudinal studies show that persistent cynical beliefs predict social isolation, occupational withdrawal, increased healthcare utilization, and elevated suicide risk
(4)Population and cultural studies highlight the amplifying effects of social inequality, political polarization, and media exposure in the process of cynicization
(5) intervention evidence supports approaches centered on cognitive restructuring, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT), social connection, and behavioral activation, supplemented when necessary by antidepressants and multidisciplinary social support
(6) assessment methodologies tend toward multi-source integration (self-report + interviews + third-party reports) to enhance interpretive validity.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive scores on negative worldview items
(2) reality testing and social participation are generally maintained in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses some capacity for reality testing and resilience
(2) may briefly exhibit doubt about life’s value during periods of high stress.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Short-term feelings of misanthropy may arise during unemployment, loss, or social conflict, but baseline functioning can be restored through support or short-term counseling.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if feelings of world-weariness persist or spread, retest and expand the assessment (DEP/ANX/WRK).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, stress management, value clarification exercises, short-term supportive psychotherapy, or group sessions
(2) encourage participation in meaningful activities to enhance a sense of belonging.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)CYN1 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational feelings of world-weariness are present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Interpersonal Suspicion (CYN2):T49     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The CYN2 measures an individual’s tendency to doubt others’ motives in everyday interpersonal interactions, to interpret neutral or ambiguous behaviors as hostile or manipulative, and to exhibit distrust and monitoring behaviors toward others
(2)High scores indicate persistent victimization attributions, relational defensiveness, and confrontational interactions, often accompanied by social avoidance or conflict
(3) low scores suggest normal levels of trust or possible downplaying/idealization. Interpretation should focus on behavioral evidence (complaints from family members or colleagues, records of conflicts, frequency of social participation), longitudinal history, and third-party observations, combined with assessments of substance use and psychotic symptoms to rule out precipitating factors.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Interpersonal suspicion is viewed as a dimension at the intersection of personality traits and the psychotic spectrum
(2) neuropsychological research indicates that suspicion is associated with functional differences in the prefrontal-limbic circuit, a bias toward threat detection, and deficits in social cognition
(3) longitudinal studies show that persistent suspicion predicts interpersonal conflict, decline in occupational/academic functioning, and social isolation
(4) social environments (trauma, experiences of deception, social distrust) and substance use can amplify tendencies toward suspicion
(5)Evidence for interventions supports a core approach centered on cognitive restructuring, evidence-based trust-building training, social skills training, and family interventions, supplemented when necessary with anti-anxiety, antidepressant, or antipsychotic medications to address comorbidity or severe persecutory delusions
(6) assessment methodologies tend toward multi-source integration (self-reports + interviews + third-party reports + behavioral samples) to improve the fit between assessment and intervention.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Below Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Underreporting of suspicion or victimization items
(2) response style should be cross-checked with validity scales.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Tendency toward trust, strong social connections, or emotional suppression to maintain relationships.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Typically maintains good interpersonal relationships
(2) may harbor hidden emotional wounds without expressing them under prolonged stress or after experiences of deception.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Cross-reference L/F/K with third-party data to rule out denial or the influence of social expectations
(2) pay attention to the risk of trust breakdown caused by long-term stress.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Recommend routine follow-up and relationship maintenance
(2) if accompanied by depression or emotional issues, assess and treat according to the appropriate protocol.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)CYN2 is low (T30–39)
(2) interpersonal suspicion is minimal or may be downplayed
(3) concurrent validity checks are recommended, with re-evaluation when functional clues emerge.

ASP1	ASP2
58	51

High
Low

▲Antisocial Attitudes (ASP1):T58     BACK

※ General Description
(1)ASP1 measures an individual’s tendency to deny or rationalize social norms, the rights of others, and the law in terms of values and behavioral inclinations, including indifference, exploitative attitudes, numbness to others’ suffering, and rationalization of illegal behavior. Interpretation is based primarily on objective behavioral records, third-party evidence, and longitudinal history, avoiding the determination of risk based solely on self-reports.High scores are often accompanied by low empathy, impulsivity, substance abuse, and occupational or legal consequences
(2) low scores suggest normal levels of social responsibility and empathy or may indicate idealized responses.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Neurobehavioral research points to impaired prefrontal function and abnormalities in emotional processing circuits, accompanied by differences in dopamine and serotonin pathways
(2) long-term longitudinal cohorts show that childhood behavioral problems, attachment disorders, and early adversity strongly predict antisocial tendencies in adulthood
(3) social environments (poverty, peer influence, institutional injustice) amplify the risk of antisocial attitudes and behaviors
(4) substance use can both trigger and exacerbate violent and exploitative behaviors
(5)Evidence on interventions supports multimodal, function-restoration-oriented programs (cognitive-behavioral interventions, empathy training, family and community interventions, multisystemic therapy)
(6) assessment methodologies trend toward integrating evidence from multiple sources (self-reports, third-party records, judicial records, biomarkers) to improve risk assessment and intervention matching
(7) ethical and public policy research emphasizes early prevention and social support to reduce long-term costs.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive scores on items reflecting dissatisfaction with rules or others
(2) social norms are generally adhered to and responsibilities are fulfilled in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Situational self-interest
(2) a sense of responsibility remains
(3) empathy can be mobilized
(4) relatively good ability to comply with norms
(5) responsive to structured interventions.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Short-term self-serving or indifferent behaviors are primarily caused by situational factors (stress, unemployment, relationship conflicts)
(2) reports from third parties (colleagues, spouses) often indicate fluctuations in functioning
(3) responds well to short-term psychoeducation and vocational counseling
(4) risk of relapse is lower than in the high-scoring group.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if antisocial tendencies persist or spread, retest and expand the assessment (ANG, BIZ, SUB).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation
(2) short-term training in a sense of responsibility and empathy
(3) conflict resolution skills and vocational counseling
(4) encourage participation in altruistic or team activities to strengthen social connections.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)ASP1 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational self-interest or indifference is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended


▲Antisocial Behavior (ASP2):T51     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The ASP2 measures antisocial behavior manifested at the behavioral level, including specific acts of violent aggression, theft, fraud, harassment, property destruction, and violations of others’ rights or the law, as well as the impact of these behaviors on victims, family, work/academic performance, and legal status.Assessments rely primarily on objective behavioral records (police/judicial records, employer/school disciplinary actions, emergency medical records) combined with third-party statements (victims, family members, colleagues) and longitudinal history
(2) self-reports serve only as supplementary evidence. High scores are often comorbid with substance abuse, impulse control deficits, personality pathology (antisocial/borderline), or environmental risks (peer influence, poverty).

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Long-term longitudinal studies show that childhood aggression, family dysfunction, and early adversity are strong predictors of antisocial behavior in adulthood
(2) neurobiological research points to impaired prefrontal function, abnormalities in emotional processing circuits, and reduced sensitivity to punishment and impulse control
(3)substance use (alcohol, stimulants) can both trigger and exacerbate violence and criminal behavior
(4) multisystemic interventions (involving the judicial, family, educational, and mental health systems) are most effective in reducing recidivism and improving social functioning
(5) assessment methodologies emphasize the integration of evidence from multiple sources (self-reports, third-party records, judicial records, and biological/toxicological screening) to improve the accuracy of risk assessment and the appropriateness of interventions.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Positive on items related to occasional aggression or illegal behavior
(2) able to adhere to norms and assume responsibility in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Situational impulsivity
(2) sense of responsibility remains intact
(3) able to modify behavior when faced with clear consequences
(4) responsive to structured interventions.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Primarily situational issues (arguments, short-term impulsive behaviors, one-time legal violations)
(2) third-party reports often indicate that the behavior is related to stress or substance use
(3) responds well to short-term psychoeducation and vocational counseling.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if the frequency or severity of behavior increases, retest and expand the assessment (ANG, SUB, BIZ).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, anger management, impulse control training, short-term substance use intervention, and vocational/family support
(2) encourage participation in alternative activities to reduce exposure to high-risk situations.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)ASP2 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational antisocial behavior is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation, anger management, and follow-up are recommended.

TPA1	TPA2
52	52

High
Low

▲Impatience (TPA1):T52     BACK

※ General Description
(1)TPA1 measures an individual’s tendency toward impatience in everyday situations: immediate irritability in response to waiting, interruptions, others’ slowness, or minor friction
(2) slow emotional recovery
(3) and impatient behaviors accompanied by verbal or nonverbal cues.High scores indicate a persistent or situationally-induced lowered emotional threshold, increased impulsivity, and frequent interpersonal conflicts
(4) low scores suggest good tolerance or possible downplaying/idealization. Interpretation should be based primarily on behavioral records (complaints from family members/colleagues, work performance, conflict incidents), triggering situations (fatigue, hunger, stress, substance influence), and functional impact (work efficiency, interpersonal relationships, driving/operational safety).

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Impatience is considered part of the emotion regulation and impulse control dimension
(2) neurobiological and physiological studies show it is associated with differences in prefrontal-limbic circuit function, sympathetic nervous system activation, and stress responses
(3) longitudinal studies indicate that chronic impatience predicts interpersonal conflict, decreased occupational performance, and substance use risk
(4)Ecological momentary assessment emphasizes the role of the trigger-response chain (frustration/delay → physiological arousal → irritable behavior) in sustaining impatience
(5) intervention evidence supports emotion regulation training (DBT skills), cognitive restructuring, behavioral experiments, and sleep/substance management
(6) assessment methodology tends toward multi-source integration (self-report + third-party records + behavioral samples) to improve the fit between assessment and intervention.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive entries regarding “brief irritability” and “tendency to lose patience under high pressure”
(2) self-control and task completion are generally maintained in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses some emotional regulation strategies
(2) good reality testing ability
(3) can adjust behavior when faced with clear consequences.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Brief episodes of impatience occur under high pressure, fatigue, or sleep deprivation, but baseline levels can be restored through self-regulation or support.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if the frequency or intensity of impatience increases, retest and expand the assessment (ANG, DEP, SUB).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, short-term relaxation training, time management, and sleep/lifestyle adjustments
(2) group skills training or workplace support as supplements.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)TPA1 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational impatience is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation, relaxation training, and follow-up are recommended.


▲Competitive Motivation (TPA2):T52     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The TPA2 measures an individual’s motivational intensity, sensitivity to winning and losing, goal-oriented behavior, and the strategies they may employ to achieve goals (positive effort, manipulation, rule-evasion) in competitive and achievement-oriented contexts. High scores are commonly found among highly performance-driven individuals, those in highly competitive professions, or those who tend to use inappropriate means to achieve goals under pressure
(2) low scores indicate weaker achievement motivation or a greater preference for cooperation and intrinsic satisfaction.Interpretation should focus on behavioral evidence (performance records, feedback from colleagues/supervisors, disciplinary or legal records), longitudinal history (long-term career trajectory, academic performance), and situational triggers, avoiding the misclassification of high competitiveness as a pathology based solely on self-assessment.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Research on competitive drive and achievement motivation shows that individual differences are influenced by personality (high conscientiousness, low agreeableness), early educational experiences, and socialization
(2) neurobiological and physiological studies suggest that the reward system (dopamine pathways) and prefrontal control networks are more sensitive in individuals with high competitive motivation but require greater regulatory control
(3)Organizational and social psychology research indicates that highly competitive environments can amplify performance but simultaneously increase conflict, ethical risks, and burnout
(4) longitudinal studies suggest that sustained, extreme competitiveness is associated with strained interpersonal relationships, occupational burnout, and substance abuse or emotional problems
(5) interventions primarily focus on goal-setting training, value clarification, ethical decision-making training, and emotional and conflict management
(6) at the organizational level, incentives and support must be balanced to reduce negative spillover effects.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive items regarding “desire for success” and “striving in competition while respecting the rules”
(2) cooperation and ethical boundaries are generally maintained in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Moderate achievement motivation
(2) a sense of responsibility coexists with cooperativeness
(3) capable of self-regulation when faced with clear consequences.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These are mostly normal reactions to occupational/academic stress
(2) short-term counseling or time management can restore baseline functioning
(3) third-party feedback generally supports stable functioning.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if the frequency of competitive behavior or strategic deviations increases, retest and expand the assessment (ANG, ASP, DEP).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, goal management, team communication training, and career counseling
(2) encourage participation in collaborative projects to balance competitive pressures.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)TPA2 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) moderate competitive drive and stable functioning
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.

LSE1	LSE2
75	63

High
Low

▲Self-Doubt (LSE1):T75   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)LSE1 measures an individual’s negative self-evaluation beliefs (e.g., “I’m not good enough,” “I can’t do it”), persistent doubts about their abilities and decision-making, and the resulting avoidance, procrastination, or low-effort behaviors
(2) high scores indicate chronic low self-esteem, avoidant coping, and functional withdrawal, while low scores suggest self-confidence or possible idealization in responses.Interpretation should focus on behavioral evidence (work/academic performance, observations by family members/colleagues, records of behavioral withdrawal), longitudinal history, and comorbid mood symptoms
(3) avoid determining pathological status based solely on self-reports.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Self-doubt and low self-esteem are considered key cognitive phenotypes of depression, anxiety, and lack of motivation
(2) cognitive neuroscience indicates they are associated with the negative self-representation network and differences in self-referential processing in the prefrontal-limbic system
(3) longitudinal studies show that persistent self-doubt predicts career/academic withdrawal, chronic stress responses, and depressive relapse
(4)Social psychology emphasizes the role of early attachment, critical parenting, and social comparison in the development of self-doubt
(5) intervention evidence supports approaches centered on cognitive restructuring, behavioral activation, value clarification, and self-compassion training, combined with antidepressant medication and functional rehabilitation as needed
(6) assessment methodologies tend toward multi-source integration (self-report + interviews + third-party records + functional indicators) to enhance interpretive validity.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)A large number of consistently positive items regarding “I am worthless,” “I will fail at anything I do,” and “I do not deserve good things”
(2) abnormalities in L/F/K scores suggest a need to be vigilant for exaggerated or strategic responses, but behavioral and third-party evidence take precedence.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Negative self-attribution (attributing failure to unchangeable internal defects)
(2) co-occurrence of perfectionism and catastrophic thinking
(3) avoidance and procrastination
(4) low self-compassion
(5) high sensitivity to feedback and a tendency toward self-blame.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common manifestations include prolonged absenteeism, declining performance, social withdrawal, abandonment of important goals, or academic stagnation
(2) patients often report feelings of hopelessness, lack of motivation, and may experience thoughts of self-harm
(3) they may be passive or distrustful at the beginning of treatment.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Prioritize concurrent screening for depression and self-harm risk, functional indicators (attendance, task completion rates), and third-party verification (employers, teachers, family members)
(2) assess the impact of sleep, substance use, and chronic illnesses on motivation.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Preferred treatment: Behavioral activation + CBT (cognitive restructuring targeting negative self-beliefs) + self-compassion training
(2) concurrently implement functional goal-setting, small-step exposure, and reinforcement of positive feedback
(3) if severe depression is present, consider antidepressants and collaborate with psychiatry
(4) arrange intensive follow-up and vocational/academic support.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)LSE1 Extremely High (T ≥ 75)
(2) widespread and intense self-doubt accompanied by significant functional impairment and depressive symptoms. It is recommended to immediately conduct concurrent depression and self-harm risk assessments, initiate behavioral activation and cognitive restructuring, and coordinate vocational/social support.


▲Compliance (LSE2):T63   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The LSE2 measures an individual’s degree of compliance with others’ demands, authoritative directives, or social norms in everyday interpersonal and organizational contexts, including active compliance, passive compliance, accommodating behavior, and the tendency to sacrifice one’s own needs to maintain relationships
(2) high scores are often accompanied by conflict avoidance, a lack of assertiveness, dependent decision-making, and a potential risk of being taken advantage of
(3) low scores are characterized by autonomy, questioning authority, or a tendency toward conflict.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Compliance is influenced by personality (high agreeableness, low autonomy), attachment style, and socialization experiences
(2) neurocognitive and social cognitive research suggests that compliance is associated with sensitivity to social rewards/punishments and the prefrontal decision-making control network
(3)Long-term excessive compliance is associated with depression, anxiety, occupational burnout, and the risk of exploitation
(4) interventions focus primarily on assertiveness training, boundary-setting, value clarification, and attachment repair
(5) assessment emphasizes the integration of multi-source evidence to distinguish adaptive compliance from pathological passive dependence.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive responses to items regarding “choosing to compromise in certain situations” and “tending to cooperate while still expressing bottom lines.”

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Combines agreeableness with a sense of responsibility
(2) demonstrates self-regulation when faced with clear consequences
(3) possesses a certain degree of assertiveness.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)These are mostly normal interpersonal adaptive behaviors
(2) short-term counseling or communication training can help optimize boundaries
(3) feedback from third parties typically indicates stable functioning.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if compliance suddenly increases or is accompanied by a decline in functioning, retest and expand the assessment (DEP, ANX, LSE1).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, communication and conflict resolution training, values clarification, and career counseling
(2) encourage participation in decision-making training to boost self-confidence.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)LSE2 is within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) compliance is moderate and functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.

SOD1	SOD2
64	55

High
Low

▲Introversion (SOD1):T64     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The SOD1 measures an individual’s tendency toward introversion in social settings, preference for solitude, social energy depletion, and avoidance behaviors, including reluctance to speak up in groups, avoidance of social activities, and a preference for solitude to recharge.High scores may reflect a personality trait (steady-state introversion) or pathological social withdrawal (resulting from anxiety, depression, or trauma)
(2) low scores indicate high extraversion or social proactivity. Interpretation should focus on behavioral evidence (attendance, frequency of social interactions, third-party observations), functional impact, and longitudinal history to distinguish between adaptive solitude and functional avoidance.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Introversion is considered one of the personality dimensions and is related to energy recovery mechanisms, depth of information processing, and social preferences
(2) neuropsychological research indicates that introverts differ from extroverts in stimulus processing and reward sensitivity, but this does not necessarily imply a pathological condition
(3) prolonged social withdrawal and isolation may increase the risk of depression, anxiety, and health issues
(4)Environmental factors (work culture, family expectations, social support) and life events can transform introversion into a functional problem
(5) interventions primarily focus on social skills training, behavioral activation, cognitive restructuring, and gradual exposure, with treatment for depression or anxiety administered concurrently when necessary
(6) assessments emphasize the integration of evidence from multiple sources to distinguish between personality differences and clinical problems.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive responses to items regarding “preference for solitude” or “not speaking up in large groups”
(2) still able to fulfill responsibilities and maintain relationships in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Introversion is a stable personality trait
(2) energy management is good
(3) participation in social activities is possible with clear support or preparation.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)May experience short-term withdrawal during periods of high stress or major life changes, but can return to baseline with support or short-term counseling
(2) third-party feedback typically indicates stable functioning.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if introversion suddenly intensifies or is accompanied by a decline in functioning, retest and expand the assessment (DEP, ANX).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, time and energy management, and social skills training
(2) encourage participation in meaningful, low-intensity social activities to maintain connections.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)SOD1 is within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) introverted tendencies are present but functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.


▲Shyness (SOD2):T55   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The SOD2 measures an individual’s feelings of shyness, facial/verbal discomfort, physiological arousal, and avoidance behaviors in situations involving social interaction, being watched, or being evaluated, including withdrawing in the presence of strangers or authority figures, avoiding public speaking, and fear of negative evaluation.High scores may indicate issues within the social anxiety spectrum, attachment disorders, or self-esteem problems
(2) low scores suggest social ease or extroversion. Interpretation focuses on behavioral evidence (attendance, frequency of speaking, social participation), longitudinal history, and third-party observations to distinguish between personality-based shyness and pathological social avoidance.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Shyness is viewed as a dimension at the intersection of social anxiety and personality traits
(2) neurobiological and physiological studies indicate hypersensitivity to social threats, sympathetic activation, and differences in prefrontal-limbic regulation
(3) developmental research suggests that early temperament (behavioral inhibition), attachment patterns, and parenting styles predict persistent shyness
(4)Environmental factors (peer rejection, experiences of humiliation) can transform shyness into a functional impairment
(5) intervention evidence supports gradual exposure, social skills training, cognitive restructuring, and value-based behavioral activation
(6) assessment should integrate multiple sources (self-report + interview + third-party input + behavioral samples) to improve diagnostic accuracy and ensure appropriate intervention matching.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive responses to items such as “not speaking up in large groups” or “feeling slightly uncomfortable in unfamiliar situations”
(2) still able to fulfill responsibilities and maintain relationships in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Shyness is a stable personality trait
(2) energy management is good
(3) social participation is possible with preparation or support.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)May experience short-term withdrawal during high-pressure situations or major life changes, but can return to baseline with support or short-term counseling
(2) feedback from third parties typically indicates stable functioning.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if the frequency or intensity of shyness increases, retest and expand the assessment (DEP, ANX).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, social skills training, and time and energy management
(2) encourage participation in low-intensity social activities to maintain connections.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)SOD2 within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) a tendency toward shyness is present but functioning is stable
(3) psychoeducation and follow-up are recommended.

FAM1	FAM2
62	68

High
Low

▲Family Dysfunction (FAM1):T62     BACK

※ General Description
(1)General Notes: FAM1 measures the quality of family relationships and the impact of the family environment on an individual’s psychological, behavioral, and functional well-being. It covers the frequency and intensity of conflict, communication quality, emotional support, clarity of boundaries and roles, signs of abuse or neglect, and the impact on the care of children, older adults, or individuals with chronic illnesses
(2)When interpreting results, prioritize the integration of third-party information and objective records, and concurrently conduct L/F/K validity checks alongside complementary scales such as DEP, ANX, SUB, WRK, and HEA to distinguish between short-term situational friction and systemic family dysfunction
(3) the assessment should quantify the frequency, breadth (single relationship vs. entire family), persistence, and vulnerability of those affected by conflict
(4)Immediately initiate crisis intervention and referral to social services when there are signs of functional decline, gaps in care, self-harm, despair, or violence
(5) in the short term, prioritize safety and resource linkage (protecting children and vulnerable family members, removing sources of harm, and arranging temporary placement)
(6) in the medium to long term, focus primarily on family systems therapy, parenting skills training, communication and conflict resolution training, individual emotional and trauma therapy, and community-based recovery support.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Research shows that family conflict increases the risk of depression, anxiety, and externalizing behaviors in children and adolescents by undermining emotional security and parent-child attachment, and by increasing parenting dysregulation and difficulties with emotional regulation
(2) early parenting styles (high criticism, low warmth) and insecure attachment predict the intergenerational transmission of these problems
(3)financial stress, work–family conflict, and lack of social support amplify the frequency and intensity of conflict
(4) parental substance use, psychotic symptoms, or personality pathology often co-occur with family discord and increase the risk of violence and neglect
(5) multi-system interventions (structured family therapy, parent skills training, and collaboration between schools and social workers) have the strongest evidence
(6) assessments and research are moving toward multi-source evidence and longitudinal designs to improve risk identification and intervention matching
(7)Biopsychological research suggests that chronic conflict is associated with physiological markers of stress and differences in brain function
(8) policy and community support can indirectly reduce conflict and adverse outcomes by alleviating stress.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive entries regarding “communication breakdowns, role-related stress, or short-term disputes”
(2) basic family functioning is generally maintained in most situations, and feedback from third parties typically indicates that the situation is reversible.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Conflicts are mostly situationally triggered (financial, work, child-rearing)
(2) members still possess the willingness and resources to repair the relationship
(3) a sense of responsibility coexists with a spirit of cooperation.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common short-term relationship tensions, temporary declines in functioning, or stress-related issues
(2) responds well to short-term counseling, communication training, or referrals to resources.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering events and longitudinal changes
(2) if the frequency or intensity of conflicts increases, retest and expand the assessment (substance use, mental health disorders).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Short-term family/couples counseling, communication and problem-solving training, resource referrals (financial and parenting support), stress management, and individual psychological support
(2) set functional goals and conduct follow-ups.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)FAM1 is within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational family friction exists but overall functioning is stable
(3) short-term family counseling and resource linkage are recommended.


▲Family Alienation (FAM2):T68     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The FAM2 Family Alienation Scale assesses weakened emotional bonds, reduced interaction, and disrupted support networks among family members
(2)Interpretation should be based on multi-source behavioral evidence (statements from spouses/cohabitants/children, social work/medical/school records, and data on attendance and social interaction frequency), using concurrent validity scales (L/F/K) and co-morbidity scales (DEP/ANX/SUB/WRK/HEA) to distinguish between personality-driven social withdrawal and pathological estrangement
(3)A T-score ≥65 warrants clinical attention
(4) a T-score ≥75 requires immediate third-party verification, assessment of care and safety risks, and initiation of interagency intervention. Short-term interventions focus primarily on establishing basic support and safety, while medium- to long-term interventions center on behavioral activation, social reintegration, and family/group interventions.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Research indicates that family estrangement can be either a normal variant of solitary behavior due to personality traits or a reflection of family dysfunction or withdrawal following conflict
(2) long-term estrangement is associated with depression, anxiety, substance use, chronic stress, and physical health problems
(3) early attachment patterns and parental emotional availability predict the quality of intimate relationships and tendencies toward estrangement in adulthood
(4)Socioeconomic pressures, work–family conflict, and major life events amplify family estrangement by reducing shared activities and depleting resources
(5) intervention studies support multisystemic strategies (family/group therapy, behavioral activation, social skills training, and community resource linkage) and emphasize multi-source longitudinal assessment to improve intervention fit
(6) digital communication can buffer geographic isolation but may maintain only superficial connections
(7) assessments must distinguish between online interactions and actual support.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Multiple positive items regarding “reduced family interaction,” “feeling a lack of emotional support,” and “avoiding family discussions or gatherings”
(2) self-reports and third-party reports are often consistent.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Tendency to avoid conflict, leading to social withdrawal
(2) diminished self-worth
(3) increased tendency to withdraw under stress
(4) may be accompanied by mild to moderate depression or anxiety.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common manifestations include low mood, reduced social activity, and decreased engagement in work or school
(2) withdrawal following family conflicts or long-term estrangement is common
(3) patients are generally receptive to short-term interventions.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Verify family history and third-party statements
(2) assess triggering events (arguments, loss, relocation) and resource gaps
(3) conduct concurrent DEP/ANX and substance use screenings.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Behavioral activation and social reintegration (gradually increasing family contact tasks), family communication training, group support, or family therapy
(2) link to community resources and vocational/academic support.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)FAM2 slightly elevated (T65–74)
(2) family estrangement significantly impacts mood and functioning
(3) behavioral activation, family communication interventions, and linkage to community support are recommended.

TRT1	TRT2
56	53

High
Low

▲Low Motivation (TRT1):T56     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The TRT1 measures an individual’s ability to initiate, sustain, and exert effort in goal-directed behaviors, covering the impact of loss of interest, reduced willpower, procrastination, fatigue, decreased reward sensitivity, and reduced activity on daily functioning
(2)When interpreting results, prioritize integrating objective behavioral indicators (attendance, task completion rates, activity diaries, third-party observations) with parallel scales (DEP/ANX/SUB/WRK/HEA) to distinguish between depression-related loss of willpower, chronic fatigue, or situational lack of motivation (e.g., unemployment, prolonged stress) and personality-based low motivation (low extraversion, low achievement motivation)
(3)The assessment should quantify the affected domains (work/academics, family, social life), duration, and triggering factors (sleep, medications, chronic illnesses, life events)
(4)Immediately initiate a crisis assessment and coordinate with medical and social services when there is a significant decline in functioning, self-harm/despair, or risks to personal safety
(5) Interventions should center on behavioral activation, motivational interviewing, value clarification, and structured goal-setting, combined with medication (if depression is present) and vocational/academic rehabilitation.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Research shows that low motivation can arise through multiple pathways: a combination of depression-related declines in reward system function and reduced activity in the prefrontal-striatal circuit
(2) energy depletion caused by chronic stress and fatigue
(3) substance use or side effects of certain medications
(4) and personality traits (low extraversion, low conscientiousness) or environmental factors (unemployment, lack of social support)
(5)There is consistent evidence from randomized controlled trials that behavioral activation, motivational interviewing, and value clarification are effective in increasing activity levels and improving functioning
(6) neurobiological research suggests that dopamine-related reward sensitivity and the assessment of effort costs are impaired in individuals with low motivation, and cognitive-behavioral and neuromodulatory approaches (such as transcranial stimulation) represent emerging intervention strategies
(7)Assessment and research are moving toward the integration of multi-source behavioral measures, longitudinal tracking, and biomarkers to enhance the targeting of interventions.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive items regarding “short-term procrastination,” “fluctuations in interest,” or “reduced activity during high-stress periods”
(2) basic responsibilities can still be fulfilled in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Motivation is influenced by context (stress, fatigue)
(2) possesses some capacity for self-regulation and recovery
(3) sense of self-worth remains intact.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Short-term low motivation occurs during periods of high work/academic workload or life events
(2) baseline levels can be restored through time management, resource coordination, or short-term counseling.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal changes
(2) distinguish between temporary fatigue and persistent lack of motivation
(3) if symptoms worsen, expand the assessment (DEP, SUB).

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, time and energy management, mild behavioral activation, goal setting, and progress feedback
(2) encourage the use of external structures (schedules, reminders, peer monitoring).

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)TRT1 is within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational low motivation is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) time management and short-term behavioral activation are recommended.


▲Cannot be disclosed (TRT2):T53     BACK

※ General Description
(1)General Description: The TRT2 measures an individual’s tendencies and behaviors regarding information disclosure, including avoidance, minimization, or denial of personal history, emotional experiences, traumatic experiences, or sensitive behaviors
(2)When interpreting results, prioritize integrating objective behaviors with third-party evidence (consistency in interviews, missing records, observations by others, administrative/judicial files), while concurrently conducting L/F/K validity checks and collaborative assessments of DEP/ANX/SUB/WRK/HEA to distinguish between reasonable privacy (professional confidentiality, cultural norms) and pathological concealment (trauma avoidance, shame-driven behavior, deception, or risk concealment)
(3)The assessment should quantify the scope of avoidance (specific topics vs. broad avoidance), its persistence, motivational cues (fear, shame, strategy), and impact on functioning (treatment adherence, legal/safety risks, access to social support)
(4) immediately initiate third-party verification and interagency coordination when avoidance leads to significant functional decline, gaps in care, or safety/legal risks.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Research indicates that information avoidance may be driven by multiple mechanisms: emotional suppression resulting from post-traumatic avoidance and feelings of shame
(2) personality traits (high introversion, high need for privacy, avoidant attachment)
(3) situational motivations (professional or legal confidentiality)
(4) and strategic concealment (to avoid blame or legal consequences). Information avoidance is associated with depression, anxiety, substance use, poor treatment adherence, and reduced social support
(5)Assessment and intervention studies emphasize the use of multi-source evidence (self-reports, structured interviews, third-party reports, and record reviews) and motivation-oriented interventions (motivational interviewing, trauma-informed therapy, and trust-building) to enhance disclosure and treatment engagement
(6) ethical and legal contexts (mandatory reporting, protective orders, and judicial proceedings) require assessors to balance confidentiality and safety obligations.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive responses to items regarding “reluctance to discuss certain private topics” or “remaining silent in specific situations”
(2) necessary information is still provided in most situations to maintain functioning.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Respect privacy and boundaries
(2) individuals tend to withhold information until a trusting relationship is established
(3) disclosure is influenced by the context and the quality of the relationship.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Information is limited during the initial assessment, but more complete data can be obtained through relationship-building and over time
(2) there are typically no obvious safety or legal risks.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document the scope of avoided topics and the situations that trigger avoidance
(2) distinguish between reasonable privacy and functional avoidance
(3) if functional decline or conflicting information arises, retest and expand verification efforts.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Establish a therapeutic alliance, provide a safe framework for information disclosure, and use open-ended and nonjudgmental questioning
(2) if necessary, arrange for gradual disclosure tasks and follow-up.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)TRT2 is within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational information withholding is present but overall functioning is stable. It is recommended to obtain more information by building trust and using gradual questioning.

A	R	ES	MAR_R	AAS	APS	MDS	HO	O_H	DO	RE	MT	GM	GF	PK	PS
54	54	39	78	72	36	68	61	52	30	32	61	38	0	58	64

High
Low

▲Anxiety (A):T54   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)Scales measure subjective concerns (cognitive anxiety), physiological arousal (palpitations, sweating, muscle tension, sleep disturbances), vigilance/avoidance behaviors, and functional impairment (work, academics, interpersonal relationships)
(2)Interpretation prioritizes the integration of objective behavioral indicators (absenteeism, decreased performance, frequency of medical visits) and third-party reports
(3) the assessment quantifies symptoms in terms of frequency × intensity × duration × functional impact, and identifies triggering factors (life events, chronic illnesses, medications, substance use)
(4) conduct parallel L/F/K validity checks to identify denial or exaggeration
(5) short-term goals focus on alleviating physiological arousal and restoring functioning (sleep, daily activities, crisis safety), while medium- to long-term goals primarily involve cognitive-behavioral intervention, exposure and coping skills training, and, when necessary, medication and functional rehabilitation.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)The neurological and physiological mechanisms of generalized anxiety involve dysregulation of the prefrontal-limbic circuit, sustained activation of the sympathetic nervous system, and alterations in HPA axis function
(2) the cognitive dimension is characterized by threat bias, catastrophic thinking, and low tolerance for uncertainty as core maintaining factors
(3)Long-term anxiety is associated with depression, somatization, sleep disorders, chronic pain, and cardiovascular risk
(4) assessments should be multimodal (self-reports, behavioral indicators, physiological measurements, third-party data) and include longitudinal tracking to improve the fit between diagnosis and intervention
(5)Evidence-based interventions are grounded in CBT (cognitive restructuring, exposure, behavioral experiments), supplemented by relaxation training, mindfulness, behavioral activation, and SSRI/SNRI medication for moderate-to-severe cases or those with comorbid depression, with an emphasis on functional recovery (work, academics, social life) and interdisciplinary collaboration.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive responses to items regarding “short-term worries,” “decreased sleep or attention during periods of stress,” or “feeling tense in specific situations”
(2) most responsibilities can still be fulfilled.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Sensitive to stress but capable of self-regulation
(2) anxiety is often related to specific situations or short-term stress
(3) emotional management and coping skills are adequate.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Short-term anxiety occurs during periods of high work/academic workload or life events
(2) baseline functioning can be restored through time management, relaxation training, or short-term counseling
(3) if persistent functional decline occurs, the assessment should be expanded.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal changes
(2) distinguish between transient stress reactions and persistent anxiety disorders
(3) administer the DEP, ANX, and SOM concurrently to identify comorbidity.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, relaxation training, sleep hygiene, time management, and short-term CBT skills training
(2) encourage the use of social support and schedule follow-up appointments.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)A Norm (T40–64)
(2) situational anxiety is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) if the patient’s score has not increased, anxiety is mostly a conscious source of distress
(4) relaxation training, short-term psychological support, and follow-up are recommended.


▲Repression (R):T54     BACK

※ General Description
(1)Scales measure an individual’s strategies of inhibition, denial, and emotional suppression when faced with unpleasant emotions, conflicts, or internal conflicts
(2)When interpreting results, prioritize integrating behavioral evidence (avoidance during therapy, reports from family members/colleagues, emotional expressiveness) with third-party data
(3) assessments should quantify the scope of suppression (specific topics vs. generalized suppression) × intensity × persistence × functional impact (interpersonal, occupational, treatment adherence), and verify the influence of cultural/occupational background on emotional expression
(4) concurrently conduct L/F/K validity checks to identify denial, downplaying, or strategic presentation
(5)Short-term goals are to establish a sense of safety and obtain reliable information
(6) medium- to long-term goals are to gradually develop emotional awareness, provide expression training, and restore interpersonal functioning.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Emotional suppression may reduce immediate distress in the short term, but in the long term, it is associated with depression, anxiety, somatization symptoms, difficulties with emotional regulation, and interpersonal alienation
(2) suppression often interacts with a high-control personality, avoidant attachment, and early-life trauma
(3) physiological research suggests that suppression is associated with chronic stress markers (disrupted cortisol rhythms, inflammatory markers) and autonomic nervous system dysfunction
(4)Assessment methodologies tend to integrate evidence from multiple sources (self-reports, behavioral observations, third-party reports, and physiological measurements) and utilize longitudinal tracking to improve identification accuracy
(5) evidence-based interventions primarily consist of trauma-informed, step-by-step training in emotional awareness and expression, cognitive restructuring, and interpersonal skills training, combined with medication and interdisciplinary rehabilitation when necessary.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional positive responses to items regarding “avoidance of specific topics” and “tendency to rationalize under stress”
(2) maintains adaptive emotional expression in most situations.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Emotional expression is context-dependent
(2) the individual possesses some capacity for self-regulation and emotional awareness
(3) may gradually open up within a trusting relationship.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Emotional inhibition may occur during short-term stress or conflict, but baseline functioning can be restored through the establishment of support and short-term interventions
(2) sufficient information is typically provided during therapy to facilitate intervention.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal changes
(2) distinguish between culturally-based restraint and functional suppression
(3) if suppression patterns suddenly intensify, retest and expand the assessment.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, emotion recognition exercises, short-term expression training, and family/interpersonal communication skills
(2) encourage the use of support networks and schedule follow-up appointments.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)R Within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) situational emotional reserve is present but overall functioning is stable
(3) emotional recognition training and follow-up are recommended.


▲Self-Intensity (Es):T39     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The scale measures psychological resilience, sense of reality, speed of emotional recovery, and effectiveness of stress coping
(2) interpretation should prioritize the integration of objective behavioral indicators (attendance, performance, academic progress, medical/treatment records) and third-party reports
(3) the assessment should quantify the breadth × depth × persistence × impact on functioning of self-intensity, and verify L/F/K validity indicators to rule out response bias
(4)The short-term goal is to assess the potential for functional recovery and safety
(5) the medium- to long-term goal is to develop individualized recovery and prevention plans (behavioral activation, cognitive restructuring, vocational/academic support).

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)High ego strength is associated with better emotional recovery, lower chronic stress burden, and faster functional recovery
(2) low ego strength is associated with long-term stress, depression, chronic somatic symptoms, and functional impairment
(3)Biopsychological research suggests that ego strength is related to HPA axis response, heart rate variability, and the regulatory capacity of the prefrontal-limbic circuit
(4) scale studies indicate that high-scoring groups are common in the general population (e.g., college students), and high T-scores (≥65) often co-occur with supplementary or clinical scales such as Ma, Do, and St
(5)When high scores are accompanied by elevated clinical scale scores, one should be vigilant for denial or defensive presentation
(6) evidence-based interventions include cognitive-behavioral strategies, resilience training, psychoeducation, and vocational/academic rehabilitation
(7) assessments increasingly integrate multi-source evidence and longitudinal follow-up to improve the match between diagnosis and intervention.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Below Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)The entry indicates low resilience, slow emotional recovery, and a weak sense of reality.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Low self-confidence, poor self-perception, and a tendency toward helplessness or indecisiveness
(2) thinking may occasionally be disorganized or slowed
(3) may present as polite, gentle, devout, or rigid.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common symptoms include chronic fatigue, low mood, functional decline, and somatization complaints
(2) treatment engagement may be limited, and rebuilding self-efficacy should be a priority.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Concurrent DEP/ANX/HEA and L/F/K
(2) assess for chronic illness, medication effects, and lack of social support
(3) be careful to distinguish between a genuine lack of resources and a negative presentation in responses.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Rebuild self-efficacy (small-step goals, behavioral activation), cognitive restructuring, and resource linkage (social/vocational/medical), while concurrently investigating physical causes.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Low Es (T30–39)
(2) low self-intensity, manifested as low self-confidence and prolonged stress
(3) it is recommended to focus primarily on behavioral activation and rebuilding self-efficacy, while concurrently conducting physical and emotional assessments.


▲Modified Alcoholism Scale (MAC-R):T78     BACK

※ General Description
(1)Assessments measure a broad range of traits associated with alcohol use, including sensation-seeking, impulsivity, antisocial or norm-violating behavior, difficulty regulating emotions, and disregard for rules
(2) interpretations prioritize the integration of objective behavioral evidence (drinking frequency/amount, behavior while intoxicated, work/legal consequences, history of abstinence attempts) with third-party reports
(3)The assessment quantifies risk based on the frequency × intensity × functional impact of alcohol use and identifies the presence of comorbid psychiatric conditions (depression, anxiety, personality disorders) or physical complications
(4) short-term goals focus on assessing safety and motivation to abstain, while medium- to long-term approaches primarily involve harm reduction, motivational enhancement therapy (MET), cognitive-behavioral interventions, and, when necessary, medication-assisted treatment.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)The MAC-R has consistent correlations with alcohol use disorders, impulsive personality traits, and antisocial behavior
(2) studies show that high scores are associated with early-onset drinking, higher risk of alcohol dependence, more legal/occupational problems, and poorer treatment adherence
(3)Assessments tend to integrate evidence from multiple sources (self-reports, clinical interviews, biomarkers, third-party records) to improve identification accuracy
(4) evidence-based interventions include motivational enhancement therapy (MET), cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) with exposure and coping training targeting drinking triggers, medication-assisted treatment (with medications for abstinence or relapse prevention), and social functioning/vocational rehabilitation, with an emphasis on concurrent management of comorbid mental disorders and long-term follow-up.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely High

♦ Test Performance
(1)A large number of items point to thrill-seeking, impulsive decision-making, disregard for rules, and alcohol use as a coping strategy
(2) abnormal validity indicators suggest denial or strategic responses.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)High impulsivity, thrill-seeking, disregard for consequences, and a tendency toward alcohol-induced aggression or illegal behavior
(2) poor emotional regulation and a tendency to use alcohol to alleviate negative emotions.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common recurring alcohol-related incidents (drunk driving, loss of employment or academic standing, legal problems), multiple failed attempts at abstinence, comorbid depression or anxiety, and weak social support
(2) poor treatment adherence and high relapse rates.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Concurrent substance use assessment (AUDIT, clinical interview), biological markers (liver function, blood alcohol records), legal/employment records, and family verification
(2) assess risk of self-harm or harm to others and document triggering situations.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Prioritize safety and harm reduction (crisis management, short-term hospitalization, or intensive outpatient care), motivational enhancement therapy (MET), CBT-based coping training for trigger situations, medication-assisted treatment (e.g., alcohol withdrawal medications), and social/vocational rehabilitation
(2) consult with psychiatric and addiction specialists as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)MAC-R score is extremely high (T ≥ 75)
(2) indicates high alcohol-related risk and impulsive/anti-social behavior. Substance use and safety assessments have already been conducted
(3) initiation of intensive addiction intervention and interdisciplinary management is recommended.


▲Addiction Acceptance Scale (AAS):T72     BACK

※ General Description
(1)Scales measure the degree to which participants acknowledge substance use problems and their self-reported candor
(2) interpretation prioritizes the integration of recent and past substance use history (frequency, quantity, withdrawal, and episodes of loss of control), AAS/DAST scores, biochemical indicators such as toxicology tests and liver function tests, records of legal or occupational consequences, and reports from family members and colleagues
(3)The AAS is self-report-based and is susceptible to social expectations, denial, or motivation to seek help
(4) the assessment quantifies risk by evaluating frequency × intensity × functional impact and clarifies the presence of comorbid psychiatric conditions (depression, anxiety, personality disorders) or physical complications
(5) short-term goals focus on assessing safety and withdrawal risks to determine whether immediate intervention is warranted, while medium- to long-term goals center on motivation enhancement, specialized addiction treatment, and functional rehabilitation.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Studies indicate that the AAS has incremental validity for identifying substance use in outpatient and forensic samples
(2) in particular, when used in combination with the MAC-R, APS, and standardized substance screening tools (AUDIT, DAST), identification accuracy is significantly improved
(3)The main limitation of the AAS is its sensitivity to denial (false negatives) and help-seeking admissions (false positives)
(4) therefore, the integration of multi-source evidence (self-reports, clinical interviews, biomarkers, third-party records) and longitudinal follow-up are considered best practices
(5)Evidence-based interventions include motivational enhancement therapy (MET), cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) with coping training for trigger situations, medication-assisted treatment (with medications for abstinence or relapse prevention), and social/vocational rehabilitation, with an emphasis on concurrent treatment of comorbid mental disorders to reduce the risk of relapse.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Multiple items reflect frequent use, using substances to cope with emotions, or signs of withdrawal/loss of control
(2) self-reports and third-party reports are often consistent.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Risk-taking tendencies, frequent drinking or substance use in social settings, poor awareness of consequences, and reliance on substances for emotional regulation.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common sleep/mood problems, decreased work/academic performance, and occasional legal or interpersonal conflicts
(2) if accompanied by elevated scores on other clinical scales, this indicates a risk of comorbidity (depression, anxiety, personality traits).

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Obtain a detailed substance use history (age of onset, frequency, amount, withdrawal symptoms)
(2) administer the AUDIT/DAST concurrently and verify with third-party reports
(3) assess motivation and social support
(4) screen for poly-substance use.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Motivational enhancement therapy, short-term CBT, harm reduction strategies (limiting use, alternative behaviors), family intervention, and follow-up
(2) consider medication-assisted treatment and referral to addiction services as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Elevated AAS score (T65–74)
(2) significant admission of substance use and associated risks are present
(3) a detailed substance use history assessment, motivational enhancement intervention, and follow-up are recommended.


▲Addiction Potential Score (APS):T36   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)Scales measure personality and behavioral traits associated with addiction risk, such as sensation-seeking, impulse control, antisocial behavior, emotional regulation, and self-efficacy
(2) assessment prioritizes the integration of recent and past substance use history (age of onset, frequency, quantity, withdrawal, and episodes of loss of control), AUDIT/DAST scores, toxicology and liver function test results, legal and employment records, and family reports
(3)The assessment quantifies risk based on the frequency × intensity × functional impact of substance use and identifies the presence of comorbid psychiatric conditions (depression, anxiety, personality disorders) or physical complications
(4) short-term goals include assessing safety and withdrawal risks to determine whether immediate intervention is warranted, while medium- to long-term goals focus on motivational enhancement, specialized addiction treatment, and functional rehabilitation
(5) concurrent L/F/K validity checks are conducted to identify denial, minimization, or exaggeration.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)The APS is an empirically developed scale
(2) research indicates it has stable validity in distinguishing substance use disorders from control groups and complements the identification capabilities of the MAC-R and AAS
(3) the scale exhibits a multidimensional structure, with common components including sensation-seeking/impulsivity, antisocial externalizing behavior, and low self-efficacy
(4)Best practice involves combining the APS with standardized substance screening tools (AUDIT, DAST), clinical interviews, biomarkers, and third-party records to improve identification accuracy
(5)Methodological studies emphasize the integration of multi-source evidence and longitudinal follow-up to reduce false-positive and false-negative rates
(6) evidence-based interventions include motivational enhancement therapy (MET), cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) with coping training for trigger situations, medication-assisted treatment, and social/vocational rehabilitation, with an emphasis on concurrent treatment of comorbid mental disorders to reduce the risk of relapse.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Below Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Underreporting of items related to sensation-seeking or loss of control
(2) a low-risk assessment is supported when self-reports align closely with third-party observations

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Strong self-control, adherence to rules, and good emotional regulation
(2) may also exhibit a tendency to deny issues or a response style driven by social expectations

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Usually no significant substance-related problems
(2) occasional short-term use under high-stress situations but with self-restraint

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Cross-reference L/F/K data with third-party information to rule out downplaying or denial
(2) if functional impairment or physical symptoms are present, further evaluation is warranted

♦ Recommendations
(1)Routine follow-up and recommendations for a healthy lifestyle
(2) if new substance use issues arise, follow the appropriate protocol

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Low APS score (T30–39)
(2) self-reported low addiction potential
(3) if external clues are present, third-party verification is recommended.


▲Marital Distress Scale (MDS):T68   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The MDS scale is designed to quantify core dimensions of the couple’s relationship, including the frequency and intensity of conflict, emotional support and alienation, communication quality, intimacy and sexual issues, as well as parenting and financial conflicts
(2)When interpreting results, priority should be given to integrating interviews with both partners, behavioral observations, marital history, and third-party records (such as social work or legal documents), while concurrently conducting L/F/K validity checks and using clinical scales such as the DEP, ANX, Pd, and Si to identify comorbidity or response bias
(3)The assessment should quantify the frequency, intensity, and persistence of conflict, and clarify the specific impacts on parenting, work, and social functioning
(4) short-term goals focus on evaluating safety and functional stability, while long-term goals involve developing an intervention plan to restore communication, rebuild trust, and reestablish functional role distribution
(5) cultural, religious, and family structural factors can influence response styles and relationship patterns, and these contextual factors must be taken into account during interpretation.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Recent studies indicate that MDS scores are highly correlated with marital satisfaction, communication deficits, attachment styles, and certain personality traits
(2) high scores often co-occur with depression, anxiety, substance use, or personality pathology and lead to higher utilization of medical and mental health services
(3)Methodologically, evidence supports combining self-report scales with interviews of both partners, behavioral observations during interactive tasks, third-party records, and longitudinal follow-up to improve the sensitivity and specificity of identification
(4) intervention studies show that structured couples therapy—such as Emotion-Focused Therapy (EFT), CBT-Couples Therapy, and family systems interventions—has evidence-based support for improving relationship satisfaction and communication patterns
(5)Key practice points include prioritizing the integration of multi-source evidence, conducting concurrent comorbidity screening, immediately initiating safety and legal/social work collaboration in high-risk situations, and monitoring intervention effectiveness and relationship dynamics through longitudinal assessment.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Above Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Multiple items indicate frequent arguments, communication barriers, emotional detachment, or pessimism about the relationship’s future.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Communication patterns are impaired, with frequent blame, defensiveness, or avoidance
(2) emotional irritability or indifference
(3) and a mismatch between expectations and reality.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Common sleep or mood problems, conflicts over child-rearing, decreased work productivity, or short-term separations can lead to a more rapid deterioration of the relationship if accompanied by depression or substance use issues.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Investigate triggering events such as infidelity, unemployment, or postpartum changes, and conduct parallel interviews with both partners along with behavioral observations to assess whether domestic violence or addiction issues are present.

♦ Recommendations
(1)Short-term structured couples therapy, focusing on communication training and conflict resolution, with individual emotion regulation training and family systems intervention as needed.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Elevated MDS scores (T65–74) indicate significant partner conflict and communication barriers
(2) a couple’s assessment and initiation of short-term structured intervention are recommended.


▲Hostility (Ho):T61   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Ho is designed to capture multidimensional manifestations of hostility: experiences of anger, cynicism/distrust, aggressive intent, and tendencies toward conflictual behavior
(2)When interpreting results, one must first examine validity indicators such as L/F/K to rule out exaggeration or underreporting
(3) scale scores should be interpreted in conjunction with third-party records (family/employer/legal/medical records), clinical interviews, and behavioral observations
(4) high scores indicate a need to prioritize safety and conflict management needs, while low scores warrant vigilance regarding the long-term effects of internalized anger or emotional suppression on physical and mental health.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Research indicates that Ho is associated with conflictual interpersonal relationships, a history of aggressive behavior, and certain cardiovascular and stress-related physiological indicators
(2) Ho often covaries with paranoia, antisocial traits, and comorbid depression/anxiety, thus limiting the discriminant validity of a single scale in clinically controlled samples
(3)Methodological studies emphasize concurrent validity testing, the use of local norms, and the integration of self-report results with behavioral/recorded data to enhance predictive validity
(4) clinical practice recommends using Ho as part of screening and functional assessment, with structured interviews and behavioral history verification serving as the basis for diagnosis and intervention.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Occasional anger or distrust
(2) moderate item responses that are context-dependent

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Relatively intact emotional regulation abilities
(2) tendency to use problem-solving or support-seeking strategies

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Conflicts may arise in specific stressful situations, but overall functioning is maintained

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal trends
(2) if functional decline or persistent symptoms occur, further evaluation is warranted

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, communication training, short-term emotion regulation and stress management
(2) provide family or occupational interventions as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Ho Norms (T40–64)
(2) hostility is situational in nature
(3) observation is recommended, with communication and emotion regulation support provided as needed.


▲Overcontrolled Hostility (O-H):T52     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The O-H assesses an “overcontrolled/repressed” hostile personality pattern: superficial compliance or denial of anger, with internally accumulated hostility that manifests as intense emotional or behavioral reactions upon specific triggers
(2) interpretation should prioritize concurrent validity checks such as L/F/K to rule out minimization or idealization
(3)Scores should be interpreted in conjunction with clinical interviews, third-party behavioral records (family members, employers, judicial/medical records), and functional indicators (work/academic performance, family relationships, legal records)
(4) high scores indicate a need to prioritize assessment of the risk of sudden externalizing behavior, the likelihood of self-harm or harm to others, and triggering situations, while low scores require vigilance regarding whether the individual exhibits genuinely low hostility, culturally influenced compliance, or deliberate downplaying.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Research indicates that O-H can distinguish between two risk phenotypes: “repressed hostility” and “uncontrolled aggression”
(2) O-H is associated with internalized anger, passive-aggressive behavior, chronic stress responses, and certain somatization symptoms
(3) its predictive validity for externalizing behavior is higher in samples with a history of behavioral problems or in judicial populations, but its sensitivity decreases in the general population
(4)Comorbidity (depression, paranoia, personality disorders) and response styles (downplaying, social expectations) can influence the interpretation of scores
(5) methodological recommendations include using local norms, parallel validity scales, and multi-source behavioral evidence to enhance discriminant validity
(6) in clinical practice, O-H is best suited as an indicative screening tool to identify individuals requiring further structured interviews and risk management.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Moderate responses to denial/repression and hostility items, showing situational dependence

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Relatively intact emotional regulation abilities
(2) tendency to use problem-solving or support-seeking strategies

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Transient passive-aggressive or angry behavior may occur in specific stressful situations, but overall functioning remains intact

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal changes
(2) if functional decline or persistent symptoms occur, further assess the potential impact of repressed hostility

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, emotional regulation training, communication skills, and stress management
(2) provide short-term supportive or interpersonal therapy as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)O–H Norms (T40–64)
(2) repressed hostility is within a manageable range
(3) observation is recommended, with emotional regulation and communication support provided as needed.


▲Depressive Symptoms (D-o):T30   (Please interpret this score with caution)  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:Below Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Fewer items related to sadness, loss of interest, or helplessness were selected
(2) the individual reported maintaining high levels of energy and interest.

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Extraverted, decisive, or high self-efficacy
(2) may also be accompanied by high defensiveness or emotional masking. Tends to seek stability and resist feelings of passivity or helplessness.

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)This may represent a healthy, high-energy state, or it may mask depression (denial) or indicate hypomanic-like features
(2) a delayed emotional breakdown may occur under high stress.

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Conduct a parallel Ma assessment and review the longitudinal history to rule out bipolar spectrum disorders or hypomania
(2) inquire about a history of reduced sleep, impulsive behavior, substance use, and fluctuations in functioning
(3) be mindful of the influence of culture or gender on emotional expression.

♦ Recommendations
(1)If bipolar disorder or hypomania is suspected, prioritize a psychiatric evaluation and screening for mood spectrum disorders
(2) if the individual is healthy and high-energy, provide advice on stress management and self-monitoring and schedule a follow-up.

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Subject D-o has a low score, reports feeling energetic, and denies depression
(2) it is recommended to conduct a concurrent Ma review and longitudinal history assessment to rule out hypomania or emotional masking.


▲Social Responsibility (Re):T32     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The Re is designed to measure stable traits in the dimension of social responsibility: adherence to rules, fulfillment of obligations, accountability to others, and social conscience
(2) prioritize the interpretation of parallel L/F/K validity checks to rule out minimization or idealization
(3)Scores should be interpreted in conjunction with third-party behavioral records (reports from employers, schools, judicial authorities, or family members), work/academic performance, and clinical interviews
(4) high scores indicate reliable and predictable law-abiding and responsible behavior in organizational and social contexts, while low scores suggest a need to address functional impairment, occupational/legal risks, or potential antisocial tendencies
(5) the Re is more suitable for assessing occupational suitability, risk management, and rehabilitation planning than for a standalone psychiatric diagnosis.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Modern research indicates that Re is associated with conscientiousness, a sense of responsibility, law-abiding behavior, and occupational performance
(2) the scale demonstrates some validity in predicting work attendance, adherence to professional standards, and recidivism risk, but its discriminant validity is influenced by sample type (general population, judicial samples, clinical samples) and cultural norms
(3)Comorbidity (impulsivity, personality disorders, substance use) and response styles (minimization, idealization) can alter the interpretation of scores
(4) methodological recommendations include using local norms, parallel multi-source data (self-reports, third-party reports, behavioral records), and structured interviews to enhance predictive validity
(5) in clinical practice, Re is best suited as a screening and functional assessment tool to identify individuals requiring further behavioral verification or risk management.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Below Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Fewer selections of items related to compliance, fulfilling responsibilities, or reliability

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Tendency toward carelessness, impulsivity, or self-centeredness
(2) may exhibit poor planning, low organization, and weak orientation toward long-term goals
(3) low scores typically indicate high dependency, reflecting characteristics such as a lack of self-confidence, modesty, and reticence
(4) your low score suggests a reluctance to take responsibility for the consequences of your actions, a lack of reliability, and reduced trustworthiness and sense of collective responsibility
(5)Your values may be easily influenced and altered by others
(6) if you are a young person, you may reject the values of your parents or older generations
(7) it is worth noting that individuals under 25 may score low on the Responsibility Scale (Re) (T ≈ 45–55), which often reflects a divergence between personal values and parental values
(8) furthermore, individuals seeking help at mental health centers due to life setbacks often score within this range

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)May exhibit procrastination, absenteeism, or inconsistent task quality in work or academic settings
(2) may be perceived as unreliable or evasive of responsibility in interpersonal relationships
(3) low scores are common among those seeking therapeutic intervention and indicate a tendency toward dependence on others

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Cross-reference with third-party records to verify behavior
(2) investigate the contribution of comorbid conditions (impulsivity disorders, substance use, depression) to the score
(3) assess whether functional decline is due to lack of motivation or insufficient environmental resources
(4) note the relationship with the Pd (Psychopathy) scale
(5) if Pd > 75 and Re < 55, be alert to rebellious or antisocial tendencies

♦ Recommendations
(1)Employ behavioral activation, goal setting, and executive function training
(2) if substance use or mood disorders are present, address comorbidities concurrently to enhance the effectiveness of the intervention
(3) vocational rehabilitation and skills training can improve a sense of responsibility and performance

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)A low Re score (T 30–39) suggests a low sense of responsibility or inconsistent task completion
(2) it is recommended to implement third-party performance verification alongside interventions targeting executive function and motivation enhancement.


▲University Adjustment Difficulties (MT):T61   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The MT is designed to capture adjustment issues upon entering or while in a college or higher education setting: academic motivation and executive functioning, interpersonal relationships in the classroom and dormitories, time management, coping with academic stress, and the transition to campus life roles
(2) interpretation must prioritize concurrent validity checks (e.g., L/F/K) to rule out underreporting or idealization
(3)Scores should be interpreted in conjunction with academic performance, attendance records, history of visits to counseling centers, feedback from residence halls and student organizations, and self-reported life history
(4) high scores indicate a need to prioritize assessment of risk for academic withdrawal, psychological distress, and lack of social support, while low scores suggest good adaptation but still warrant attention to comorbid conditions or situational stressors.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research indicates that MT is associated with academic performance, dropout rates, psychological distress (depression, anxiety), social isolation, and sleep problems
(2) the scale has practical value in predicting short-term academic maladjustment and counseling needs, but its predictive power is influenced by differences in sample type (freshmen vs. current students), cultural background, and educational systems
(3)comorbidity (depression, anxiety, substance use) and personality traits (low conscientiousness, avoidant style) may reduce discriminant validity
(4) methodological recommendations include using local or institutional norms, concurrent academic and behavioral records, and structured interviews (academic functioning assessment) to improve interpretive accuracy
(5) in clinical and student affairs practice, the MT is best suited as a screening and triage tool to identify student groups requiring prompt intervention.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Academic and social performance is moderate, with occasional stress-related fluctuations
(2) time management and task completion skills are generally adequate

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possess basic self-management skills and social skills
(2) able to seek help when needed

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)Most students can recover through routine support (peers, mentors)
(2) brief distress may occur during exam periods or major life events

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal changes
(2) if a sustained decline or impairment in functioning occurs, further evaluation for potential mental health disorders or learning disabilities should be conducted

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducational training, stress management, learning strategies, and time management training
(2) provide short-term counseling or group support as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)MT norms (T40–64)
(2) overall good university adjustment
(3) it is recommended to provide routine academic and stress management resources and to reassess as needed.


▲Gender Role—Masculinity (GM):T38   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The GM is designed to measure the extent to which respondents identify with traditional masculine role characteristics (preference for technical/physical activities, competitiveness, independence, problem-solving orientation, and dominant/assertive interpersonal style)
(2) interpretation should be accompanied by parallel L/F/K validity checks and integrate life history interviews, occupational/educational records, and third-party behavioral observations to distinguish between internal identification, professional performance, or situational role demands
(3)When conducting cross-cultural or intergenerational comparisons, local norms and cultural contexts should be taken into account

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Factor analysis and related studies indicate that GM correlates with the “Dominance/Efficacy” dimension of personality and the “Realistic/Technical” sub-factors in the RIASEC model
(2) embedded and standalone scales are generally comparable in terms of reliability and convergent validity, but discriminant validity is significantly influenced by sample type (clinical vs. non-clinical), cultural norms, and changes in gender roles over time
(3)Comorbidity (depression, anxiety) or response styles (idealization, downplaying) may alter the interpretation of scores
(4) research suggests using local norms, parallel multi-source data, and structured interviews to enhance the validity and reliability of clinical and vocational interpretations.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Below Average

♦ Test Performance
(1)Rarely selects traditionally masculine items
(2) prefers relationship-oriented, expressive, or artistic/service-oriented activities

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Tendency toward collaboration, emotional expression, or service/art-oriented activities

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)May experience a sense of role mismatch or encounter stereotypical expectations in highly masculine or competitive environments

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Verify cultural, educational, and occupational backgrounds in parallel to rule out response bias or the influence of social expectations
(2) avoid misinterpreting low scores as “lack of ability” or “antisocial behavior”

♦ Recommendations
(1)Support for career interest exploration and environmental adaptation
(2) if identity-related distress is present, provide supportive counseling and social support resources

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)Low GM score (T30–39)
(2) interests and activities lean toward non-traditional masculinity
(3) a comprehensive assessment incorporating career and cultural data is recommended.


▲Gender Role—Feminine (GF):T0     BACK

※ General Description
(1)The GF is designed to assess the extent to which participants identify with traditional feminine role characteristics (emphasis on interpersonal relationships, emotional expression, caregiving tendencies, aesthetic/artistic interests, and a cooperative orientation)
(2) interpretation must include concurrent L/F/K validity checks to identify minimization or exaggeration
(3)interpretation must integrate life history interviews, vocational/educational records, and behavioral observations to distinguish between intrinsic identification, socially acquired patterns, or response patterns driven by vocational demands
(4) when conducting cross-cultural or intergenerational comparisons, local norms and cultural contexts should be taken into account
(5) the GF reflects interests and role-behavior patterns rather than sexual orientation or gender identity and should be used in conjunction with the GM, vocational interest scales, and functional evidence to improve interpretive accuracy.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Factor analysis and related studies indicate that GF correlates with the “relationship-oriented/emotional expression” personality dimension and the artistic/social interest categories in the RIASEC model
(2) embedded and standalone scales are generally comparable in terms of reliability and convergent validity, but discriminant validity is significantly influenced by sample type (clinical vs. non-clinical), cultural norms, and changes in gender roles over time
(3)Comorbidity (depression, anxiety) or response style (social expectations, downplaying) can alter the interpretation of scores
(4) research recommends using local norms, parallel multi-source data (self-reports, third-party reports, behavioral records), and structured interviews to enhance the validity and reliability of clinical and vocational interpretations.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Extremely Low

♦ Test Performance
(1)Virtually no selection of items associated with traditional femininity

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Tends to be more independent, competitive, or technically oriented, with potentially less emotional expression or a more rational approach

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)May face adjustment pressures or risk of discrimination in emotionally oriented or caregiving roles
(2) if accompanied by functional impairment, further assessment of social support and identity conflict is needed

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Strictly cross-validate the scale with third-party data to rule out downplaying or deliberate misrepresentation
(2) be mindful of how cultural and generational differences influence the definition of “feminine”
(3) avoid using this score alone to determine gender identity or sexual orientation

♦ Recommendations
(1)Support career and identity exploration
(2) provide coping strategies and workplace adaptation training when facing discrimination or adjustment difficulties

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)GF extremely low (T ≤ 29)
(2) exhibits marked non-traditional feminine interests and behaviors
(3) a comprehensive assessment combining behavioral and environmental data is recommended, along with career and identity support.


▲Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder—Keane (PK):T58   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The PK is designed to capture symptom patterns associated with PTSD: intrusive re-experiencing, avoidance/emotional numbing, and arousal/hypervigilance
(2) interpretation must be accompanied by checks of L, F, and K validity
(3)High scores indicate symptom burden but may be influenced by comorbid conditions such as depression, generalized anxiety, or somatization
(4) therefore, they must be combined with trauma history, evidence of functional impairment, and structured diagnostic interviews (e.g., CAPS or PCL) to determine diagnosis and intervention priorities.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)The embedded and stand-alone versions are comparable in terms of mean scores, reliability, and convergent validity
(2)Original and cross-validation studies indicate good discriminative power between PTSD and healthy controls, but reduced discriminative power in psychopathology control groups
(3) research recommends using local norms across different samples and cultures, with structured interviews as the gold standard
(4) comorbidity (depression, substance use) increases the false-positive rate, so the PK should be used as a screening tool rather than a diagnostic tool.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Most trauma-related items are sporadic or of moderate intensity
(2) no persistently high-scoring positive responses on re-experiencing, arousal, or avoidance items

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal changes
(2) if functioning declines or symptoms persist, further assess trauma history and comorbid conditions
(3) be careful to distinguish between normal stress reactions and pathological PTSD

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)If a history of trauma is present, it is commonly characterized by spontaneous recovery or subclinical symptoms
(2) functioning is typically maintained but may be temporarily affected in high-stress situations

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Possesses basic coping strategies and emotional regulation abilities
(2) tends to seek support or use problem-solving strategies

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, coping skills training (relaxation, mindfulness, sleep interventions), and short-term supportive psychotherapy
(2) refer to trauma-focused therapy as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)PK norm (T40–64)
(2) no clear indications of PTSD
(3) observation and provision of coping skills training are recommended
(4) retest or refer for further evaluation as needed.


▲Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder—Davidson (PS):T64   (Please interpret this score with caution)  BACK

※ General Description
(1)The PS is designed to capture symptom patterns associated with PTSD: intrusive re-experiencing (flashbacks, nightmares, intrusive memories), avoidance/emotional numbing (avoidance of trauma cues, emotional detachment, social withdrawal), and arousal/hypervigilance (startle response, sleep disturbances, changes in attention and alertness)
(2)Interpretation must be accompanied by L/F/K validity checks and combined with the type and severity of trauma exposure, evidence of functional impairment (sleep, work/academic performance, interpersonal relationships), and structured diagnostic interviews (e.g., CAPS, PCL-5) to determine the diagnosis and prioritize intervention.

※ Review of Contemporary Research
(1)Contemporary research indicates that the PS demonstrates good sensitivity in screening for trauma-related symptoms and shows moderate to high correlation with PTSD self-report scales
(2) however, its discriminant validity may be compromised by comorbid depression, generalized anxiety, substance use, or somatization. The embedded and standalone versions are generally comparable in terms of reliability and convergent validity.Research recommends using culturally adapted norms across different cultures and clinical samples, with structured interviews serving as the gold standard
(3) therefore, the PS is best suited as a preliminary screening tool to identify individuals requiring further evaluation, rather than as the sole basis for diagnosis.

※ Your Assessment Results

♦ T-Scores:Normal

♦ Test Performance
(1)Most trauma-related items are sporadic or of moderate intensity
(2) no persistently high-scoring positive responses on re-experiencing, arousal, or avoidance items

♦ Behavioral Characteristics
(1)Possesses basic coping strategies and emotional regulation abilities
(2) tends to seek support or use problem-solving strategies

♦ Empirical Analysis
(1)If a history of trauma is present, it is commonly characterized by spontaneous recovery or subclinical symptoms
(2) functioning is typically maintained but may be temporarily affected in high-stress situations

♦ Assessment Results
(1)Document triggering situations and longitudinal changes
(2) if functioning declines or symptoms persist, further assess trauma history and comorbid conditions
(3) be careful to distinguish between normal stress reactions and pathological PTSD

♦ Recommendations
(1)Psychoeducation, coping skills training (relaxation, mindfulness, sleep interventions), and short-term supportive psychotherapy
(2) refer to trauma-focused therapy as needed

♦ Reference Conclusions
(1)PS within the normal range (T40–64)
(2) no clear signs of PTSD are observed
(3) observation and coping skills training are recommended, with retesting or referral for further evaluation as needed.