Differentiation of Simulated and Genuine Suicide Notes

Abstract

Ss were asked to distinguish genuine from simulated suicide notes and the criteria they used in making these judgments were investigated. The 93 Ss were in 6 groups of varied levels of clinical training, ranging from undergraduates to practicing clinicians. Though there was no significant relationship between level of training and the ability to discriminate between the notes, 13 of the 93 Ss made the distinction with accuracy greater than that expected by chance ( p < .05). None of these 13 Ss came from the undergraduate sample, even though it was a substantially larger group than any other in the study. The specific criteria used by the 13 successful clinicians were compared with the criteria used by the remaining Ss. Differences were noted particularly in criteria involving affective expression, interpersonal relations, and practical issues concerning the future of survivors. Comparison between accurately judged and inaccurately judged notes indicated that accuracy of judgment is more a function of the clinical sensitivity and ability of the judges than any inherent characteristics of the notes.