Search

The frequency, origin, and interpretative implications of elevation differences on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory- 2 (MMPI-2) clinical and restructured clinical (RC) scales were examined. Two large clinical samples consisting of 1,770 outpatients and 2,438 inpatients were used for this study. Three potential factors (Demoralization, subtle items, and K correction) were explored as to the extent to which they contributed to elevation differences between a clinical scale and its restructured counterpart. Results showed that differences in elevation between clinical and RC scales occurred between 10% and 35% of cases. Demoralization, subtle items, and K correction contributed substantially to elevation differences. Findings indicate that core descriptors of a clinical scale should be emphasized only when its corresponding RC scale is also elevated, whereas for Scales 4, 6, and 8, elevated scores on the RC scales are interpretable even when the corresponding clinical scales are not elevated.

The authors examined and compared the susceptibility of three Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) scale sets (Clinical, Restructured Clinical [RC], and Content) to over- and underreporting using five analog samples. Two samples of 85 and 191 undergraduate students, respectively, took the MMPI-2 under underreporting versus standard instructions. Three samples consisting of 42 undergraduates, 73 psychiatric inpatients, and 84 medical patients took the MMPI-2 under overreporting versus standard instructions. A comparison of the effect sizes across the three sets of scales indicated that Clinical Scale scores are not less susceptible to distortion than the Content or RC Scales. An apparent lesser susceptibility to underreporting for the Clinical Scales was an artifact of the subtle items’ effect on these scales.

The construct validity of the MMPI-2 (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2) College Maladjustment (Mt) Scale was examined using 376 student clients at a university psychological clinic. A principal components analysis and correlations of Mt scale scores with clients’ and therapists’ ratings of symptoms and functioning showed that the Mt scale identifies the presence of maladjustment as defined in terms of depressive and anxious symptoms. There is no evidence to show that the scale is specific to college students or that it is sensitive to severe psychological disturbance. The Mt scale does not inform the clinician as to why a person is distressed. In addition, there is no evidence from this study to suggest the superiority of the Mt scale over other MMPI-2 maladjustment measures. Therapists should use the entire MMPI-2 profile, not just the Mt scale, to gain the most comprehensive and specific understanding of clients.

The current study investigated the proportion of content-nonresponsive and content-responsive faking Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) protocols in a state corrections sample. Participants were 51,486 inmates who completed the MMPI-2 at the time they entered the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction system. Overall, approximately 79% of the study participants produced valid profiles. Of the entire study sample, 11.3% produced content-nonresponsive profiles, and 9.4% produced content-responsive faking profiles. African Americans produced a higher proportion of content-nonresponsive profiles than Caucasians, and women were slightly more likely than men to produce content-responsive faking profiles. Differences in level of education between African Americans and Caucasians did not account for the disparity in content-nonresponsive profiles. Implications for current practice and future research are discussed.

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) Personality Psychopathology-Five (PSY-5) scales were developed to measure abnormal personality symptomatology. The present study examines the incremental validity of the PSY-5 scales beyond the clinical and content scales in assessing criteria associated with personality disorders. The current sample includes 240 male and 407 female clients from private practice settings who completed the MMPI-2 and the Multiaxial Diagnostic Inventory (MDI), a self-report checklist of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (3rd ed., revised) symptoms. Six of the MDI personality disorder scales, conceptually related to the PSY-5 scales, are used as criteria. Hierarchical regression analyses determine the incremental validity of each PSY-5 scale. In most analyses, PSY-5 scales add a significant increment of variance to the clinical and content scales. Implications of the results are discussed.

The extent to which the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2 (MMPI-2) K scale serves as a suppressor variable that influences the validity of clinical scale scores was examined using 274 male and 425 female outpatients from a community mental health center and 105 male and 247 female clients from a university psychological clinic. Hierarchical regression analyses were performed with MMPI-2 K scale scores and clinical scale scores as predictors and therapist ratings as criteria. In most cases, the K scale did not act as a suppressor. Optimal K weights were different from the traditional K corrections. In most instances, there were no significant differences between correlations of therapist ratings with K-corrected and uncorrected clinical scale scores. The results do not support the Kscale as a suppressor variable in these settings, although additional research is needed in settings where higher levels of defensiveness are common.

This study examined the extent to which the validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory—Adolescent identified Mexican adolescents who were instructed to fake bad. Validity scales data were used to differentiate between nonclinical adolescents instructed to fake bad and both clinical and nonclinical adolescents who received standard instructions. Participants were 59 male and 87 female Mexican high school students and 59 male and 87 female Mexican adolescents from clinical settings. This is the first study on faking with adolescents in Mexico. The F, F1, and F2 Scales and the F-K index discriminated adequately between the three different groups. Results were similar to those previously reported for adults and adolescents in Mexico and the United States. High positive and negative predictive powers and overall hit rates were obtained in this study. Higher cut scores were needed to discriminate between the groups of girls than between the groups of boys.