An application of methods for clustered binary responses to a cardiovascular study with small sample size

Many clinicians have come to rely on the broad array of validity scales available on the MMPI and the MMPI-2. In this study, we evaluated the utility of 2 MMPI-2 validity scales, the K scale and VRIN scale, in a sample of 692 psychiatric inpatients. Specifically, the effects of the K-correction procedure and the exclusion of protocols based on VRIN scale elevations were examined on the relation between MMPI-2 basic clinical scales and external criteria including both self-report and clinician ratings of psychopathology. Results indicated that the K-correction procedure commonly used with the MMPI and MMPI-2 did not result in higher correlations with external criteria in comparison to non-K-corrected scores. In contrast, MMPI-2 protocols that produced VRIN T-score values > or = 80 generally produced lower correlations with patients self-reports and clinician ratings of psychopathology in comparison to protocols judged to be valid based on VRIN scale results.     

Ethnicity and psychopathology: A meta-analytic review of 31 years of comparative MMPI/MMPI-2 research.

Meta-analyses were performed on 25 comparative Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and MMPI-2 studies of 1,428 male African Americans versus 2,837 male European Americans, 12 studies of 1,053 female African Americans versus 1,470 female European Americans, and 13 studies of 500 male Latino Americans and 1,345 male European Americans. Aggregate effect sizes suggest higher scores for ethnic minority groups than for European Americans on some MMPI/MMPI-2 scales and lower scores on others. However, none of the aggregate effect sizes suggest substantive differences from either a statistical or clinical perspective. The MMPI and MMPI-2 apparently do not unfairly portray African Americans and Latinos as pathological. Effect sizes across studies generally did not vary as a function of sociodemographic variables, research setting, or use of the MMPI versus MMPI-2. It is recommended that additional between- and within-ethnic groups psychopathology research continue. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Comparing the empirical validity of the standard form with two abbreviated MMPIs.

The standard form MMPI and 2 abbreviated forms, the MMPI-168 and the Faschingbauer Abbreviated MMPI (FAM), were compared with direct measures of psychopathology obtained from the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) with 290 17–65 yr old psychiatric inpatients. Each S was interviewed using the Mental Status Schedule by one rater, while another rater observed this initial diagnostic interview behind a 1-way mirror to assess interrater reliability. Since MMPI scales contain more than 1 interpretative factor, these scales were correlated with the means of more than 1 BPRS symptom using multiple correlation coefficients. The multiple correlation coefficients between the BPRS ratings and the corresponding MMPI and abbreviated-form scales were significantly high and comparable. Only on Pd for females did a significant difference occur, with the FAM correlation being significantly higher. These findings suggest that these abbreviated forms are an accurate substitute for the standard-form MMPI in predicing objective measures of psychopathology. (55 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Methodological problems and issues in MMPI, MMPI-2, and MMPI-A research.

Personality questionnaires are among the most versatile and user-friendly approaches to personality assessment. This article focuses on methodological considerations in conducting research on the MMPI-2, the most widely used clinical personality instrument. The article addresses ways of identifying methodological problems in research and alerts researchers to potential pitfalls in conducting personality assessment research. The topics addressed include the following: methodological factors addressing the continuity of the MMPI-2 and the original MMPI; sample selection in MMPI-2 research; issues concerning test administration; the application of exclusionary criteria in developing research samples; methodological factors in processing, reporting, and analyzing data; developing and evaluating new MMPI-2 scales; and assessing test bias in personality research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The research base, psychometric properties, and clinical uses of the MMPI-2 and MMPI-A.

Describes the revision of the instrument and summarizes some of the main features of the revised Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2). Areas of discussion include goals of the MMPI restandardization, the MMPI-2 normative sample, interpretation of MMPI-2 scores, what the validity and clinical scales measure, new MMPI-2 content scales and new validity measures, and the revised adolescent form. Comments by P. Horvath and G. C. Fekken in support of the MMPI-2 are included. A list of references for more information on the MMPI-2 follows. (French abstract) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The identification of neurologically relevant items in the MMPI-2

The assessment of personality and (mal) adjustment after brain damage is regarded as an important aspect of rehabilitation. However, the administration of widely used self-report questionnaires, such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2), is restricted because of the danger of overscoring psychopathology and personality disorders. This is due to the inclusion of items reflecting manifestations of neurological dysfunction. Earlier investigations revealed variable neurologically relevant items (NRIs), within and between discrete cerebral aetiologies for the MMPI as well as the first part of the MMPI-2. In this study, 10 neuropsychologists, 10 neurologists, 10 psychiatrists, and 10 physiatrists identified NRIs in the complete MMPI-2. An item was considered to be an NRI based on professional expertise as well as type of brain damage. Based on a substantial inter-rater agreement index, four sets of clinical relevant NRIs were selected: one for brain damage in general and three partially overlapping sets for stroke, traumatic brain damage, and whiplash. Thus, the findings of this study unveil items which may indicate bona fide symptoms or manifestations related to neurological damage or dysfunction, rather than just reflecting psychopathology or personality disorders. It is advocated to develop an interpretative approach to correct for the impact of these NRIs on MMPI-2 scores.     

Using the Megargee MMPI-based classification system with the MMPI-2s of female prison inmates.

This study extends Megargee's Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI)-based classification system to female offenders. MMPI-2s of 400 women in state and federal prisons were rescored and reconfigured to estimate their original MMPI profiles. Their MMPIs and MMPI-2s were classified according to the rules devised for the original MMPI. Next, the MMPI-2s were reclassified using new rules for classifying the MMPI-2s of male offenders. Neither approach led to satisfactory agreement between MMPI and MMPI-2. A major problem was that Scale 5 was more prominent in the women's MMPI-2 profiles than on their MMPIs. Using revised rules for classifying the original MMPIs and the MMPI-2s of female offenders, 386 of the 400 women (97%) could be classified on both versions of the MMPI, of whom 336 (87%) were classified identically. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

An MMPI-2 infrequent response scale for use with psychopathological populations: The Infrequency-Psychopathology Scale, F(p).

This article describes the development and initial validation of a new Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2; J. N. Butcher, W. G. Dahlstrom, J. R. Graham, A. Tellegen, & B. Kaemmer, 1989) scale designed to detect infrequent responding in settings characterized by relatively high base rates of psychopathology and psychological distress. The Infrequency-Psychopathology Scale, F(p), was developed by identifying a set of 27 MMPI-2 items answered infrequently by both inpatients and the MMPI-2 normative sample. The new scale's construct validity was examined through tests of a series of hypotheses derived from an analysis of the reasons for elevated Infrequency (F) and Infrequency-Back (Fb) scores in inpatient settings. The F(p) scale's incremental validity was explored by comparing its performance to that of the F scale. The results of this study suggest that F(p) may be used as an adjunct to F in settings characterized by relatively high base rates of psychopathology and psychological distress. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Response to Drs. Horvath and Fekken.

Responds to comments by P. Horvath (see record 2007-09683-001) and G. C. Fekken (see record 2007-09684-001) on the current authors' original article entitled The Research Base, Psychometric Properties and Clinical Uses of the MMPI-2 (see record 1992-25725-001). Horvath and Fekken have made a substantial contribution to the evolution of MMPI-based assessment by providing thoughtful evaluations of key issues in the revision. We appreciate both their endorsement of the improved aspects as well as the questions and critiques they skillfully raise. In the limited space allotted to us, we will try to respond to the major issues. Both Horvath and Fekken, while noting the ways in which MMPI-2 improves the original instrument, point out apparent deficiencies in the original instrument that were not eliminated. The current authors contend that regardless of its psychometric ugliness and somewhat archaic aspects, the MMPI has worked extremely well as a screening instrument for psychopathology. Second, Fekken raises an important concern about the validity of the MMPI-2. Two published studies are cited to debate this critique. Third, Fekken cites the work of Duckworth which reports apparent "differences" between the profiles of some participants who took both the original and revised MMPI. Unfortunately, Duckworth's report fails to address a fundamental prerequisite of experimental design: the test-retest variable. Fourth, Horvath, in his critique of the original MMPI, questions validity generalization. However, the cited research did not study the original MMPI instrument but rather an abbreviated derivation or approximation of the test, the Minimult, which utilizes only 81 of the original MMPI items. Fifth, both Horvath and Fekken note that there are additional aspects about the revision process, the psychometric properties, and the applicability of the MMPI-2 that were not addressed in our original article. These are significant issues that deserve a much more detailed response than we can render in this brief response. However, these issues have been and continue to be addressed in the research literature. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Detection of overreported psychopathology with the MMPI-2 RF form validity scales.

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 23(1) of Psychological Assessment (see record 2011-01446-001). There was an error in the title. The title should have read “Detection of Overreported Psychopathology With the MMPI-2-RF Validity Scales.”] [Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Psychological Assessment (see record 2011-01446-001). There was an error in the title. The title should have read “Detection of Overreported Psychopathology With the MMPI-2-RF Validity Scales.”] We examined the utility of the validity scales on the recently released Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2 RF; Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008) to detect overreported psychopathology. This set of validity scales includes a newly developed scale and revised versions of the original MMPI-2 validity scales. We used an analogue, experimental simulation in which MMPI-2 RF responses (derived from archived MMPI-2 protocols) of undergraduate students instructed to overreport psychopathology (in either a coached or noncoached condition) were compared with those of psychiatric inpatients who completed the MMPI-2 under standardized instructions. The MMPI-2 RF validity scale Infrequent Psychopathology Responses best differentiated the simulation groups from the sample of patients, regardless of experimental condition. No other validity scale added consistent incremental predictive utility to Infrequent Psychopathology Responses in distinguishing the simulation groups from the sample of patients. Classification accuracy statistics confirmed the recommended cut scores in the MMPI-2 RF manual (Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

"Detection of overreported psychopathology with the MMPI-2 RF validity scales": Correction to Sellbom and Bagby (2010).

Reports an error in "Detection of overreported psychopathology with the MMPI-2 RF form validity scales" by Martin Sellbom and R. Michael Bagby (Psychological Assessment, 2010[Dec], Vol 22[4], 757-767). There was an error in the title. The title should have read “Detection of Overreported Psychopathology With the MMPI-2-RF Validity Scales.” (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2010-24850-001.) We examined the utility of the validity scales on the recently released Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2 RF; Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008) to detect overreported psychopathology. This set of validity scales includes a newly developed scale and revised versions of the original MMPI-2 validity scales. We used an analogue, experimental simulation in which MMPI-2 RF responses (derived from archived MMPI-2 protocols) of undergraduate students instructed to overreport psychopathology (in either a coached or noncoached condition) were compared with those of psychiatric inpatients who completed the MMPI-2 under standardized instructions. The MMPI-2 RF validity scale Infrequent Psychopathology Responses best differentiated the simulation groups from the sample of patients, regardless of experimental condition. No other validity scale added consistent incremental predictive utility to Infrequent Psychopathology Responses in distinguishing the simulation groups from the sample of patients. Classification accuracy statistics confirmed the recommended cut scores in the MMPI-2 RF manual (Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Review of MMPI-168 codebook.

Reviews the book, MMPI-168 codebook by Ken R. Vincent et al (1984). This book is an effort to present an actuarially devised system for use with the MMPI-168, a widely researched short form of the MMPI. It is an effort to move the MMPI-168 out of the category of screening instrument and into the area of a significant assessment instrument. The authors emphasize that the value in using the MMPI-168 and its complementary actuarial system will be its utility with patients having poor motivation, illiteracy, or physical disabilities. Psychologists using the MMPI-168 must be aware of several basic concerns, particularly those involved in research. For example, it is a different test from the MMPI, involving only the first 168 items, and it is normed on a nonrandomized sample of private psychiatric clinic patients. In examining the utility of brief assessment instruments, it would be of value to compare the utility of the MMPI-168 or other "short forms" to a validated structured interview procedure. There is no doubt that these types of assessment tools are needed in the field of rehabilitation psychology. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

New subscales for the MMPI-2 Social Introversion (Si) scale.

The development of three new content-homogeneous subscales for the revised Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2; J. N. Butcher et al, 1989) Social Introversion (Si) scale designed to replace the K. Serkownek (1975) subscales, which were not included in the revised MMPI, is described. The subscales, termed Shyness/Self-Consciousness, Social Avoidance, and Self/Other Alienation, were developed with data provided by college students (515 men and 797 women). Data analyses with this and the MMPI-2 normative sample demonstrated that the new subscales independently contribute to the assessment of nearly 90% of the variance in the full Si scale, that they display both convergent and divergent validity, and that these attributes generalize beyond the sample with which they were developed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Uniform versus linear T scores on the MMPI2/MMPI in an outpatient psychiatric sample: Differential contributions.

Hypothesized that the uniform T-score procedure was one possible source of observed differences between the MMPI-2 T scores and the MMPI T scores. MMPI-2 linear T scores were computed for a sample of 200 psychiatric outpatients (mean age 38.1 yrs) whose MMPI-2 and MMPI T scores had been determined at the same point in time. Differences created by the uniform technique were slight and did not exceed 1.2 T-score points. Contrary to hypothesis, the uniform T-score procedure reduced the differences between mean MMPI-2 T-scores and the MMPI T scores on 12 of the 16 scales. These data suggest that the differences between the MMPI and MMPI-2 T scores are mainly due to differences between the normative samples. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Comparison of the MMPI and the MMPI-2 for a sample of peace officers.

166 peace officers completed the MMPI and the MMPI-2 in one sitting. Results showed an overall concordance of 78% for the 2 tests when normal, high-point, and 2-point code types were grouped together and compared. A subset of well-defined profiles produced a concordance rate of 90%. Comparison of profile characteristics showed that half of the Ss produced the same high-point code type, one-third produced the same 2-point code type, 70% produced normal profiles on both tests, and all MMPI and MMPI-2 scales were highly correlated. These figures are highly similar to those found previously for 2 administrations of the MMPI. When the MMPI was compared to the MMPI-2 scored on original norms, 2 scales were found to differ significantly: Men and women both scored lower on Scale D (Depression) of the revised test; on Scale Mf (Masculinity-Femininity) of the MMPI-2, women scored higher and men scored lower. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Using the Megargee MMPI-based classification system with MMPI-2s of male prison inmates.

To determine the impact of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory—2 (MMPI-2; J. N. Butcher, W. G. Dahlstrom, J. R. Graham, A. Tellegen, & B. Kaemmer, 1989) on the Megargee offender classification system, 1,213 male offenders' responses on the original Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) were rescored and reprofiled as MMPI-2s, and the MMPI-2s of 422 male prisoners were used to estimate their original MMPIs. When classifications based on the original MMPIs were compared with those from MMPI-2s, less than two thirds were classified identically. Therefore, the original Megargee rules should not be used to classify MMPI-2s. A new set of classifactory rules was devised for the MMPI-2 which, on cross-validation, agreed with the original MMPI classifications in 82% of the cases. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of psychopathology and demographic characteristics on MMPI-2 scale scores

Using multiple linear regression analyses, we examined the effects of subject status for 6 demographic variables and the presence of psychopathology on variance in MMPI-2 scale scores. The analyses were designed to measure the incremental contribution of the demographic variables to scale variance beyond that explained by presence of psychopathology. Demographic variables were found to contribute little incremental variance for the validity and clinical scales, but did explain more than 10% of the score variance for 1 clinical scale, 2 content scales, and 5 supplemental scales. For these 8 scales, gender was most often the potent demographic variable and an expected influence. The results are discussed in light of the use of gender-based norms and in terms of other potential factors that might explain MMPI-2 scale score variance.     

Equivalence of the MMPI-2 with the MMPI in psychiatric patients.

Psychiatric patients were administered the MMPI, its revision (MMPI-2), or both, in a counterbalanced repeated-measures design. MMPI-2 T scores were found to be significantly lower than MMPI T scores on several of the clinical scales. S rank order on T scores and dispersion of the basic clinical scales did not differ between the tests, and measures of profile similarity indicated congruence between the 2 instruments. Among Ss who completed both the MMPI and the MMPI-2, code-type concordance was not significantly lower than stability rates of the tests. Results support the assignment of 65T as the lower boundary of clinical elevation on the MMPI-2 and the psychometric equivalence of the MMPI-2 and the MMPI with respect to mean T scores, score rankings, and measures of score distribution. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Adequacy of a translation of the MMPI into American Sign Language for use with deaf individuals: Linguistic equivalency issues.

Translated the MMPI into American Sign Language (ASL) via the back-translation procedure and recorded it on videotape to determine the linguistic equivalency of a sign language translation of a psychological test for use with deaf individuals. The bilingual retest technique was conducted whereby both forms of the instrument were administered to 28 ASL-English bilingual deaf Ss. Due to the advent of the MMPI-2 during the conduct of this study, a new set of T scores was calculated from the present MMPI data to compare the effect of shifting to the MMPI-2 norms. The results demonstrate adequate linguistic equivalencies of the ASL MMPI items and underscore the potential utility and practicality of future ASL translations of psychological tests for use with deaf individuals. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Clinicians' perceptions of the comparability of the MMPI and MMPI-2.

Determined whether experienced MMPI users perceive the MMPI and MMPI-2 as yielding clinically comparable results. Clinical psychologists (N?=?35) reviewed pairs of MMPI and MMPI-2 profiles derived from the same test responses and estimated that 92–96% of their diagnoses and 89–93% of their narrative interpretations would be essentially the same or only slightly different from one version of the instrument to the other, whereas only 0–3% of either their diagnoses or reports would be quite different. MMPI-2 profiles with poorly defined code types were likely to be viewed as somewhat different or quite different from the MMPI. Low-ranging MMPI-2 profiles were most apt to be poorly defined and, correspondingly, most likely to be viewed as different from the MMPI. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)