Assessment of the semantic sphere in clinical practice: adaptation and differential-diagnostic potential of J. Nuttin's motivational induction method

Abstract

Context and relevance. Modern forensic psychological and psychiatric examination requires a systemic analysis of the individual's semantic sphere, which serves as the highest level of behavioral regulation. Hypothesis. The modified version of J. Nuttin's Motivational Induction Method (MIM) is a reliable and valid tool capable of identifying nosology-specific features of the motivational-semantic sphere in individuals who have committed unlawful acts. Objective. To analyze the psychometric properties of the adapted method and to explore the features of the semantic sphere in personality disorders (PD) and schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD). Methods and materials. The study involved 148 male participants, including individuals with personality disorders (PD), schizophrenia spectrum disorders (SSD), and mentally healthy individuals. To assess the motivational-semantic structure and time perspective, J. Nuttin’s Motivational Induction Method (MIM) and V.E. Milman’s motivational structure assessment technique were used. Method modification. To solve the set tasks, J. Nuttin’s MIM was modified and translated into a quantitative assessment system: the temporal code was used to encode responses regarding the moment of the illegal act; the list of "persons" was divided into three groups in the assessment of the content of motivation; the assessment of the content of motivational objects was modified to reflect the goals and objectives of the expert assessment of the semantic perception of a legally significant situation. Results. Psychometric analysis confirmed the reliability and validity of MIM. Factor analysis revealed qualitative differences in the structure of the groups' meaning sphere, enabling the empirical substantiation of the method's differential-diagnostic potential: individuals with PD demonstrate temporal ambivalence, a dominance of hedonistic motives, and a passive-dependent social stance. Meanwhile, examinees with SSD were characterized by a narrowed future perspective, contradictory self-reflection, and semantic fragmentation. Conclusions. MIM is a reliable tool for clinical psychodiagnostics. The method allows for the objectification of the characteristics of the meaning sphere and possesses high differential-diagnostic potential in distinguishing between pathocharacterological and endogenous types of response. Limitations and future prospects. A necessary step toward integrating MIM into forensic psychiatric expert practice is the addition of variables related to legally relevant circumstances, as well as expanding the sample and the nosological spectrum of the participants.