In the field of substance use (SU) assessment, most measures are face-valid and thus warrant serious concerns over their vulnerability to positive impression management (PIM) in non-disclosing examinees. To address PIM, two specialized measures with validity indicators based on detection strategies were empirically evaluated: (a) the Adult Substance Use Subtle Screening Inventory-4 (SASSI-4) and (b) the Inventory of Drug Use Consequences-2R (InDUC-2R). The current study tested their effectiveness at distinguishing partial SU denial (i.e., acknowledging use but disavowing negative effects) from more general social desirability. The sample of 104 offenders were recruited from a court-mandated substance use treatment program. Relevant sections of Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Disorders, Clinical Version (SCID-5-CV) served as the external diagnostic criterion. Regarding the key results, both the SASSI-4 and InDUC-2R were particularly vulnerable to PIM. In terms of detection, the SASSI-4 DEF scale was generally encouraging for PIM but could not distinguish between the two types of PIM. As a distinct advantage, the Control scale on the InDUC-2R proved moderately effective at specifically identifying partial SU denial. To improve the SASSI-4 PIM classifications, a new strategy-based indicator, response style ratio, was initially validated. These findings are discussed within the context of clinical and forensic consultations.

在物质使用 (SU) 评估领域，大多数措施都是表面有效的，因此需要严重关注非公开考生对正面印象管理 (PIM) 的脆弱性。为了解决 PIM，对基于检测策略的有效性指标的两个专门措施进行了实证评估：（a）成人药物使用微妙筛选清单 - 4（SASSI-4）和（b）药物使用后果清单 - 2R（InDUC- 2R)。当前的研究测试了它们在区分部分 SU 否认（即承认使用但否认负面影响）和更普遍的社会愿望方面的有效性。104 名罪犯的样本是从法院授权的药物滥用治疗计划中招募的。DSM-5 障碍的结构化临床访谈的相关部分，临床版 (SCID-5-CV) 作为外部诊断标准。关于关键结果，SASSI-4 和 InDUC-2R 都特别容易受到 PIM 的影响。在检测方面，SASSI-4 DEF 量表对 PIM 普遍鼓励，但无法区分两种类型的 PIM。作为一个明显的优势，InDUC-2R 上的控制量表在专门识别部分 SU 拒绝方面证明是中等有效的。为了改进 SASSI-4 PIM 分类，一个新的基于策略的指标，InDUC-2R 上的控制量表在具体识别部分 SU 拒绝方面证明是中等有效的。为了改进 SASSI-4 PIM 分类，一个新的基于策略的指标，InDUC-2R 上的控制量表在具体识别部分 SU 拒绝方面证明是中等有效的。为了改进 SASSI-4 PIM 分类，一个新的基于策略的指标，response style ratio，最初得到验证。这些发现将在临床和法医咨询的背景下进行讨论。