Convergent validity of the MCMI-III personality disorder scales and the MMPI-2 scales

The MCMI-III personality disorder scales (Millon, 1994) were empirically validated in a sample of prisoners, psychiatric inpatients, and outpatients (N = 477). The scale intercorrelations were congruent with those obtained by Millon, Davis, and Millon (1997). We conclude that our Flemish/Dutch version shows no significant differences with the original version of the MCMI-III as far as intercorrelations are concerned. Convergent validity of the MCMI-III personality disorder scales was evaluated by the correlational data between the MCMI-III personality disorder scales and the MMPI-2 clinical (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) and personality disorder (Somwaru & Ben-Porath, 1995) scales. Improved convergence was obtained compared with previous versions of the MCMI-I. Only the compulsive MCMI-III personality disorder scale remains problematic. The scale even showed negative correlations with some of the related clinical scales and with the corresponding personality disorder scales of the MMPI-2.     

Depression, anxiety, and the MCMI-III: construct validity and diagnostic efficiency

This study aimed to enhance knowledge of the construct validity and diagnostic efficiency of the depression- and anxiety-related scales of the MCMI-III (Millon, 1994). The MCMI-III, various concurrent depression and anxiety measures, and an Axis I structured diagnostic interview were administered in a total sample of 696 outpatients with depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, or both. Sound construct validity was found for the Dysthymia and Major Depression clinical syndrome scales and the Avoidant and Depressive personality disorder scales. The validity of the Anxiety scale was poor, showing moderate convergence with panic and worry-related anxiety measures, but problems discriminating from depression. Operating characteristics for discriminating depressed patients from anxious patients were fair for the Major Depression scale, but poor for the Anxiety and Dysthymia scales.     

A comparison of the MCMI-III personality disorder and modifier indices with the MMPI-2 clinical and validity scales

In this study, we examined the relationship of the MCMI-III (Millon, Davis, & Millon, 1997; Millon, Millon, & Davis, 1994) modifier indices and personality disorder scales to the validity and basic clinical scales of the MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989). The MCMI-III modifier indices highly correlated with all of the MMPI-2 validity scales except for the F(p) scale. Similarly, the MCMI-III personality disorder scales strongly covaried with the MMPI-2 validity and clinical scales except for the F(p) and 5 (Mf) scales. A factor analysis with Promax rotation revealed substantial relationships between the MMPI-2 and MCMI-III. However, the MMPI-2 F(p) scale did not tend to correlate with MMPI-2 or MCMI-III scales, indicating that F(p) scale variance was largely independent of other scales. The results suggest that clinicians should consider the interrelationship between personality characteristics and dissimulation.     

Reliability of personality disorder symptoms and personality traits in substance-dependent inpatients

The authors compared the internal consistency, 1-year temporal stability, and self-informant agreement of ratings of personality trait (NEO Five-Factor Inventory; NEO-FFI; P. T. Costa & R. R. McCrae, 1992) and personality disorder symptom severity (Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R Personality Disorders Questionnaire; SCID-II-Q; R. L. Spitzer, J. B. W. Williams, M. Gibbon, & M. First, 1990) in 131 substance-dependent inpatients. Internal consistency coefficients were acceptable to very good for most NEO-FFI and SCID-II-Q scales, and temporal stability correlations were significant for all measures. Agreement between patient and informant ratings was more modest. Substance abuse and depression symptom severity moderated the temporal stability and self-informant agreement of several personality trait and disorder ratings. The authors did not find that the five factors were more reliable than the Axis II symptoms. Issues related to the reliability of personality assessment in multiply diagnosed patients are discussed.     

The MCMI-III personality disorders scores predicted by the NEO-FFI-R and the ZKPQ-50-CC: a comparative study

This study was designed to compare the NEO-FFI-R versus the ZKPQ-50-CC in their relationships with the fourteen MCMI-III personality disorder scales in a Spanish non-clinical sample (N = 674). Previous studies showed consistent relationships between the Five Factor Model and the DSM-IV personality disorders (PD), but there is no comparative study between both Five Factor and Zuckerman's personality models. The aim was to replicate previous results about relationships between the Big-Five and PDs using the revised short version of the NEO-PI-R, and to compare the NEO-FFI-R versus the ZKPQ-50-CC regarding the relationships with MCMI-III personality disorder scales. Results showed no sharp differences between the NEO-FFI-R and ZKPQ-50-CC scales. Each instrument explained around 30% of the PDs MCMI-III scales variance. Using conjointly the 10 personality scales from the NEO-FFI-R and ZKPQ-50-CC, the PDs accounted variance rose to 38%. Differences and similarities between both short personality questionnaires are discussed.     

Bias and Millon clinical multiaxial inventory (MCMI-II) diagnosis

In the current study, the degree of bias is calculated for each of the personality disorder and clinical syndrome scales of the MCMI-II. In general, most of the MCMI-II scales are prone to only mild or moderate biases. However, the paranoid personality disorder, somatoform, bipolar: manic, thought disorder, and delusional disorder scales are prone to severe biases. When the MCMI-II is utilized to make diagnostic decisions, bipolar and schizophrenic disorders are apt to be grossly underestimated. The implications of bias in diagnostic prevalence rates are discussed and an equation is offered which provides for adjustments to be made when the percentage of positive MCMI-II test results are used to determine prevalence rates for clinical or research populations. The observation is made that imperfect sensitivity and specificity for the MCMI-II scales will result in inaccurate estimates of personality disorders and clinical syndromes when the MCMI-II is used to survey various populations.     

A general factor of personality,social desirability,cognitive ability,and the survey of work styles in an employment selection setting

How a general factor of personality (GFP) correlated with employment screening measures in an applied setting was examined. Participants were 540 adult insurance sales job applicants who completed scales from two personality measures, the five scales from the Survey of Work Styles (SWS), an intelligence measure, and a social desirability scale. A joint factor analysis of the personality questionnaires produced four first order factors. A single GFP was also extracted. Strong correlations were found between some of the personality factors and the SWS scales. Strong significant correlations were found between the GFP and three of the four personality factors with social desirability. Neither the GFP nor the personality factors correlated significantly with cognitive abilities.     

Predicting dimensions of personality disorder from domains and facets of the Five-Factor Model

We compared the utility of several trait models for describing personality disorder in a heterogeneous clinical sample (N = 94). Participants completed the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP; Clark, 1993b), a self-report measure that assesses traits relevant to personality disorder, and two measures of the Five-Factor Model: the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa and McCrae, 1992) and the Big Five Inventory (BFI; John, Donahue, & Kentle, 1991). Regression analyses indicated substantial overlap between the SNAP scales and the NEO-PI-R facets. In addition, use of the NEO-PI-R facets afforded substantial improvement over the Five-Factor Model domains in predicting interview-based ratings of DSM-IV personality disorder (American Psychiatric Association, 1994), such that the NEO facets and the SNAP scales demonstrated roughly equivalent levels of predictive power. Results support assessment of the full range of NEO-PI-R facets over the Five-Factor Model domains for both research and clinical use.     

The effect of personality pathology on treatment outcome for Axis I disorders in dysfunctional clergy

The relationship between Narcissistic, Compulsive, Dependent, and Antisocial personality traits, as measured by the MCMI-III, and the clinical presentation and the treatment outcome for Axis I disorders, as measured by the MMPI-II was investigated. The subjects were 86 Roman Catholic priests and nuns who participated in 6 to 8 months of residential treatment. Pretreatment evaluation of the patients included the MCMI-III and the MMPI-2. Clinical presentation of Axis I disorders was measured by pretreatment scores on MMPI scales 2 (Depression), 7 (Psychasthenia), content scale DEP (Depression), and content scale ANX (Anxiety). Treatment outcome was measured by posttreatment MMPI-2 scores on these four variables. The results of this study suggest that the level of personality traits a patient possesses can significantly impact the clinical presentation of an Axis I disorder. Although the 48 patients with MCMI-III base rate scores above 74 had significantly higher pretreatment MMPI-2 scores than the patients with lower MCMI-III scores, both groups obtained posttreatment MMPI scores well within normal limits. The intensive individual and group therapy, extended length of stay, and emphasis on community living that the residential program provides may account for these results.     

Genetic and environmental influences on observed personality: evidence from the German Observational Study of Adult Twins

Previous behavior-genetic research on adult personality relied primarily on self-reports or peer reports that may be subject to contrast effects, resulting in biased estimates of genetic and environmental influences. In the German Observational Study of Adult Twins (GOSAT), personality traits of 168 monozygotic (MZ) and 132 dizygotic (DZ) twin pairs were rated on 35 adjective scales, largely markers of the Big 5. The ratings were provided by 120 judges who never met the twins but observed videotaped behaviors of 1 twin of each pair in 1 of 15 different settings. The aggregated video-based trait ratings were highly reliable, and substantial correlations were obtained between MZ as well as DZ twins. Model-fit analyses suggested about 40% genetic, 25% shared environmental, and 35% nonshared environmental influence. Extraversion was the only trait that seemed not to be influenced by shared environment.     

Assessing the basic traits associated with psychopathy: development and validation of the Elemental Psychopathy Assessment

A new self-report assessment of the basic traits of psychopathy was developed with a general trait model of personality (five-factor model [FFM]) as a framework. Scales were written to assess maladaptive variants of the 18 FFM traits that are robustly related to psychopathy across a variety of perspectives including empirical correlations, expert ratings, and translations of extant assessments. Across 3 independent undergraduate samples (N = 210-354), the Elemental Psychopathy Assessment (EPA) scales proved to be internally consistent and unidimensional, and were strongly related to the original FFM scales from which they were derived (mean convergent r = .66). The EPA scales also demonstrated substantial incremental validity in the prediction of existing psychopathy measures over their FFM counterparts. When summed to form a psychopathy total score, the EPA was substantially correlated with 3 commonly used psychopathy measures (mean r = .81). Finally, in a small male forensic sample (N = 70), the EPA was significantly correlated with scores on a widely used self-report psychopathy measure, disciplinary infractions, alcohol use, and antisocial behavior. The EPA provides an opportunity to examine psychopathy and its nomological network through smaller, more basic units of personality rather than by scales or factors that blend these elements.     

Assessing Old Order Amish outpatients with the MCMI-III

In this study, we examined Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (MCMI-III; Millon, 2009) characteristics in an Old Order Amish outpatient sample (n = 166), with a comparison group of Old Order Amish who were not receiving mental health treatment at the time of testing (n = 80). We also graphically compared the 2 Amish groups to a non-Amish psychiatric sample in the literature. Consistent with our hypotheses, the Old Order Amish outpatients scored significantly higher than the Old Order Amish comparison group on the majority of MCMI-III scales, with mostly medium effect sizes, suggesting that the MCMI-III is a useful personality instrument in discriminating between Old Order Amish clinical and nonclinical groups. In addition, the Amish outpatients scored similar to a non-Amish psychiatric sample in the literature on most personality scales. Future MCMI-III studies with the Amish are needed to replicate and generalize our findings.     

Exploring the psychometric properties and construct validity of the MCMI-III anxiety and avoidant personality scales

The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI; Millon, 1983) is a commonly used self-report instrument designed to aid in the assessment of Axis I and Axis II disorders. Concerns have been expressed regarding the procedures used in the normative research for the current version of the MCMI (MCMI-III; Millon, 1994) leading to a call for additional validity research on the MCMI-III (Retzlaff, 1996). In this study, we investigated the psychometric properties of the MCMI-III's Anxiety and Avoidant personality scales in a sample of patients diagnosed with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) anxiety disorders. Our results suggest that the MCMI-III Avoidant scale is reliable (r =.89) and it was found to demonstrate appropriate convergent and divergent validity with other self-report measures. The MCMI-III Anxiety scale also showed adequate reliability (r =.78); however, our findings raise some concerns about the discriminant validity of this scale. A scale composed of the MCMI-III core anxiety items was found to have better discriminant validity. These findings are consistent with those reported by other researchers regarding the relationship between self-report measures of anxiety, avoidance, and depression. We conclude that the MCMI-III measures of anxiety and avoidance are consistent with other measures of these constructs and may provide valuable clinical information in this regard.     

A Five-Factor Measure of Dependent Personality Traits

This study provides convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity data for a new measure of dependent personality traits from the perspective of the five-factor model (FFM). Dependent personality trait scales were constructed as maladaptive variants of FFM facets (e.g., Gullibility as a maladaptive variant of FFM trust). Based on responses from 383 undergraduates, the convergent validity of the Five-Factor Dependency Inventory (FFDI) scales was tested with respect to 2 measures of the FFM, 6 dependency trait scales, and 4 measures of dependent personality disorder. Discriminant validity was tested with respect to FFM facets from alternative domains. Incremental validity was tested with respect to the ability of the FFM dependent personality trait scales to account for variance in 2 established measures of dependency, after variance accounted for by respective FFM facet scales and other measures of DPD was first removed. The results of this study provided support for the validity of the FFDI assessment of dependency from the perspective of the FFM.     

A five-factor measure of dependent personality traits

This study provides convergent, discriminant, and incremental validity data for a new measure of dependent personality traits from the perspective of the five-factor model (FFM). Dependent personality trait scales were constructed as maladaptive variants of FFM facets (e.g., Gullibility as a maladaptive variant of FFM trust). Based on responses from 383 undergraduates, the convergent validity of the Five-Factor Dependency Inventory (FFDI) scales was tested with respect to 2 measures of the FFM, 6 dependency trait scales, and 4 measures of dependent personality disorder. Discriminant validity was tested with respect to FFM facets from alternative domains. Incremental validity was tested with respect to the ability of the FFM dependent personality trait scales to account for variance in 2 established measures of dependency, after variance accounted for by respective FFM facet scales and other measures of DPD was first removed. The results of this study provided support for the validity of the FFDI assessment of dependency from the perspective of the FFM.