Reducing MMPI-2 Defensiveness: The Effect of Specialized Instructions on Retest Validity in a Job Applicant Sample

The MMPI-2 is often used for screening job applicants when public safety or security are at risk. Inherent in such applications is concern for profile validity and test defensiveness. In this study, we examine the impact of revised instructions on profile validity for a group of job applicants who initially produced invalid profiles. Participants were 271 male applicants for airline pilot positions. Of these, 72 produced invalid defensive MMPI-2 profiles during preemployment screening. The MMPI-2 was readministered to these applicants with instructions informing them of validity scales and instructing them to respond in a more open, honest manner. Comparisons were made between valid and invalid profiles for initial administrations and between valid and invalid profiles at readministration. Some clinical scales were more elevated for valid, nondefensive profiles. Most content scales showed more elevation for valid profiles, and 12% of the applicants who were retested produced significant elevations on the content scales. Profiles were similar to those produced by employed pilots of a previous study.     

Reducing MMPI-2 defensiveness: the effect of specialized instructions on retest validity in a job applicant sample

The MMPI-2 is often used for screening job applicants when public safety or security are at risk. Inherent in such applications is concern for profile validity and test defensiveness. In this study, we examine the impact of revised instructions on profile validity for a group of job applicants who initially produced invalid profiles. Participants were 271 male applicants for airline pilot positions. Of these, 72 produced invalid defensive MMPI-2 profiles during preemployment screening. The MMPI-2 was readministered to these applicants with instructions informing them of validity scales and instructing them to respond in a more open, honest manner. Comparisons were made between valid and invalid profiles for initial administrations and between valid and invalid profiles at readministration. Some clinical scales were more elevated for valid, nondefensive profiles. Most content scales showed more elevation for valid profiles, and 12% of the applicants who were retested produced significant elevations (T>or=65) on the content scales. Profiles were similar to those produced by employed pilots of a previous study.     

Characteristics of juvenile offenders with invalid and valid MMPI--a profiles

The issue of what type of juvenile offender produces an invalid versus a valid Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, Adolescent Form (MMPI-A) profile requires study. Using technical manual profile invalidation requirements from a cohort sample of 1,054 juvenile offenders, 387 produced invalid profiles, whereas 667 yielded valid profiles. Utilizing scale scores from the Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory (MACI), univariate and multivariate analyses for girls, boys, and combined samples of invalid and valid MMPI-A profiles suggested similarities and differences which influenced the results for the combined samples. The groups were separated on the following MACI scales: Disclosure, Impulsivity, Substance Abuse Propensity, Unruly, and Oppositional by sex and for the combined group. Also noted were other MACI scales which distinguished boys and girls in comparisons made between as well as within the invalid and valid profiles.     

Research Validity Scales for the NEO-PI-R: Additional Evidence for Reliability and Validity

We examined the reliability and validity of the research validity scales (Schinka, Kinder, & Kremer, 1997) for the NEO-Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R) in a clinical sample. The Negative Presentation Management (NPM) and Positive Presentation Management (PPM) scales were found to have satisfactory internal consistency reliability. Support for the validity of these scales was provided by the pattern of convergent and discriminant correlations with respective Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) validity scales. Finally, PAI profiles of individuals with invalid NPM scores were found to differ significantly from those with valid NPM scores. Comparisons of the invalid profiles with profiles from other clinical samples provided additional support for the use of the NPM scale as a measure of negative impression management.     

Research Validity Scales for the NEO-PI-R: additional evidence for reliability and validity

We examined the reliability and validity of the research validity scales (Schinka, Kinder, & Kremer, 1997) for the NEO-Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R) in a clinical sample. The Negative Presentation Management (NPM) and Positive Presentation Management (PPM) scales were found to have satisfactory internal consistency reliability. Support for the validity of these scales was provided by the pattern of convergent and discriminant correlations with respective Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) validity scales. Finally, PAI profiles of individuals with invalid NPM scores were found to differ significantly from those with valid NPM scores. Comparisons of the invalid profiles with profiles from other clinical samples provided additional support for the use of the NPM scale as a measure of negative impression management.     

Validity rates of the MMPI-2 and PAI in a rural inpatient psychiatric facility

This study examines the validity rates of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) profiles in a rural inpatient population. The validity scales of 90 MMPI-2 and 90 PAI profiles were analyzed using published criteria for determining validity. Random responding, positive impression management, and negative impression management were also evaluated. The PAI had a higher number of valid profiles compared with the MMPI-2. Evidence suggests the primary source of the invalid profiles within the MMPI-2 is a higher level of endorsement of relatively rare statements. The substitution of the Infrequency-Psychopathology scale (Fp) for the Infrequency scale (F) on the MMPI-2 substantially reduced the number of invalid profiles. Contrary to expectations, the PAI did not demonstrate lower levels of invalid profiles due to random responding. Rates of invalid profiles for each scale are provided.     

A comparison of MMPI-2 high-point coding strategies

High-point coding refers to the popular practice of classifying Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (Hathaway & McKinley, 1983) profiles based on which clinical scales are the most elevated. A previous review of high-point code studies (McGrath & Ingersoll, 1999a) noted marked discrepancies across studies in the rules used to define high-point codes. This study was conducted to evaluate the costs and benefits of different strategies for high-point coding. The impact of 4 rules for high-point coding on effect sizes and group sizes was evaluated. The 4 rules included requiring a minimum elevation, excluding potentially invalid protocols, restricting coding to well-defined codes, and replacing the lower scale in infrequently occurring codes with the next most elevated scale. The evidence supported the clinical utility of requiring a minimum elevation for code scales. The results were more equivocal concerning the value of well-defined coding and for not replacing the lower scale in infrequent codes. Results were surprisingly negative concerning the utility of excluding potentially invalid protocols, suggesting that guidelines developed in situations in which there is a clear motivation to distort results may not generalize to other settings.     

Higher Order Factor Convergence and Divergence of Two Distinct Personality Systems: Cattell's HSPQ And Jackson's PRF

The 14 scales of the HSPQ and 20 scales of the PRF were administered to 1,862 adolescents. Scales were intercorrelated, factored, and the factors rotated to simple structure solutions, separately for each instrument. Cross-instrument relationships were subsequently examined by: (a) Dwyer extension analysis procedure, and (b) estimating correlations of "true" factor scores between the two sets of factors. Results indicated both cross-instrument commonalities and specificities. Higher stratum dimensions (HSPQ-PRF) of Exvia-Ascendance, Superego Strength-Impulse Control, Cortertia-Aesthetic Intellectual Orientation, and Dependence-Social Contact were found to be closely related in the two instruments. Dimensions such as Aggression (PRF), Achievement (PRF), and Anxiety (HSPQ) were found to be instrument-specific. It was concluded that neither instrument provides for a comprehensive mapping of the personality domain, broadly defined. Implications of the levels of factor convergence and divergence obtained in relation to theory building and prediction are discussed.     

Further evidence on 16 PF distortion scales

Norms were obtained on a nationally representative sample of 4830 adult men and women for two empirically developed faking indices for Cattell's 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF) by Winder, Karson, and O'Dell (1975). These data provided convincing evidence that the cutoff suggested in the original work for the faking good scale was far too liberal and would routinely classify more than half of all 16 PF protocols as invalid. The faking bad cutoff appeared to be approximately correct. The correlations of the faking scales with the 16 PF primary factors were highly congruent with those reported in the development study and provided additional validity evidence for the two indices. Both indices were found to be sufficiently reliable to permit adjustments to be made in the primary trait scales when distortion is above average.     

A validity scale sign calling for caution in the interpretation of MMPIs among psychiatric inpatients

Three expert MMPI judges classified 100 psychiatric inpatients as psychotic or non-psychotic on the basis of their MMPIs. Validity scale data, as well as clinical scale scores, were included for 50 of the profiles, while the validity scale scores were withheld from the judges for the remaining 50 profiles. Within each of the above two groups, half had a "positive" validity scale sign (a defensive validity scale configuration defined as L or K greater than or equal to 70, or both greater than or equal to 60) and half had a negative validity scale sign, indicating a lack of defensiveness. Using actual diagnosis as the external criterion, results indicated that the majority of defensive psychotic patients produced clinical scale configurations which appeared nonpsychotic to the judges. Conversely, the majority of nondefensive nonpsychotics produced psychotic-appearing clinical scale configurations. These two types of test misses suggest that K corrections on MMPI scales relating to psychosis are not optimal for psychiatric inpatients. Guidelines were developed for interpreting defensive profiles.     

An Investigation of the Mini-Mult Validity Scales

Examined the ability of the Mini-Mult validity scales to detect invalid MMPI profiles. When 34 invalid MMPI profiles were rescored with the Mini-Muir only 17 of the 34 profiles invalidated by the full MMPI were detected with the Mini-Mult. This included 14 of 27 profiles invalidated by an elevated F scale; 2 of 4 profiles invalidated by an elevated L scale and 1 of 3 profiles invalidated by an elevated K scale. Only 14 of 27 profiles invalidated by an F-K ratio of K11 were detected. When new conversion values for the Mini-Mult were utilized, the detection rate improved considerably for the F scale and the F-K ratio.     

An investigation of the Mini-Mult validity scales

Examined the ability of the Mini-Mult validity scales to detect invalid MMPI profiles. When 34 invalid MMPI profiles were rescored with the Mini-Muir only 17 of the 34 profiles invalidated by the full MMPI were detected with the Mini-Mult. This included 14 of 27 profiles invalidated by an elevated F scale; 2 of 4 profiles invalidated by an elevated L scale and 1 of 3 profiles invalidated by an elevated K scale. Only 14 of 27 profiles invalidated by an F-K ratio of K11 were detected. When new conversion values for the Mini-Mult were utilized, the detection rate improved considerably for the F scale and the F-K ratio.     

Research validity scales for the NEO-PI-R: development and initial validation

The purpose of this investigation was to develop a set of research validity scales for use with the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992b). In study 1 we used the existing NEO-PI-R item pool to select items for three validity scales: positive presentation management, negative presentation management, and inconsistency. Several iterative item and scale analyses were conducted, using multiple criteria for item selection. These analyses resulted in 10-item scales. In Study 2, the internal consistency, interscale relationships, and normative characteristics were examined in a separate sample of working adults. In Study 3, the validity of the scales was examined by contrasting five sets of NEO-PI-R protocols: from a separate sample of working adults, from a sample of 100 NEO-PI-R protocols with randomly produced responses, and from three samples of undergraduates completing the NEO-PI-R under different instructional sets. Analyses revealed that both the research validity scales and the NEO-PI-R domain scales were sensitive to group differences. issues relating to the appropriate use of the scales are discussed.     

The validity and utility of the positive presentation management and negative presentation management scales for the Revised NEO Personality Inventory

Schinka, Kinder, and Kremer developed "validity" scales for the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R; Costa & McCrae) to detect underreporting-the Positive Presentation Management (PPM) Scale and overreporting-the Negative Presentation Management (NPM) Scale. In this investigation, the clinical utility of these scales was examined using the established validity scales from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; Butcher et al.) as the referent. The sample was composed of 370 psychiatric patients who completed the NEO PI-R and the MMPI-2 as part of a routine evaluation. Results indicated that response distortion compromised the utility of the NEO PI-R domain scales. Moreover, the PPM and NPM scales and an NPM-PPM index significantly differentiated invalid under-and overreporting groups from a valid responding group. The PPM and NPM-PPM index were adequate in classifying under- and overreporters, respectively.     

Attentional Bias for Threat: Evidence for Delayed Disengagement from Emotional Faces

The present paper reports three new experiments suggesting that the valence of a face cue can influence attentional effects in a cueing paradigm. Moreover, heightened trait anxiety resulted in increased attentional dwell-time on emotional facial stimuli, relative to neutral faces. Experiment 1 presented a cueing task, in which the cue was either an "angry", "happy", or "neutral" facial expression. Targets could appear either in the same location as the face (valid trials) or in a different location to the face (invalid trials). Participants did not show significant variations across the different cue types (angry, happy, neutral) in responding to a target on valid trials. However, the valence of the face did affect response times on invalid trials. Specifically, participants took longer to respond to a target when the face cue was "angry" or "happy" relative to neutral. In Experiment 2, the cue-target stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was increased and an overall inhibition of return (IOR) effect was found (i.e., slower responses on valid trials). However, the "angry" face cue eliminated the IOR effect for both high and low trait anxious groups. In Experiment 3, threat-related and jumbled facial stimuli reduced the magnitude of IOR for high, but not for low, trait-anxious participants.These results suggest that: (i) attentional bias in anxiety may reflect a difficulty in disengaging from threat-related and emotional stimuli, and (ii) threat-related and ambiguous cues can influence the magnitude of the IOR effect.     

Use of the Personality Assessment Inventory in Assessment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder in Women

This study investigated the utility of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) for the assessment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Participants were 55 community-residing adult women who were administered a comprehensive battery that included the PAI and the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS). Participants were classified as either PTSD or non-PTSD based on the CAPS, and PAI profiles were compared between the two groups. Significant group differences were found for seven PAI clinical scales (Anxiety, Depression, Anxiety-Related Disorders, Somatic Complaints, Paranoia, Borderline Features, and Schizophrenia), one validity scale (Negative Impression), and two treatment scales (Nonsupport and Treatment Rejection). When all PAI scales and component subscales are considered, the largest group differences were found for the physiological subscale of the Depression scale (DEP-P) and the Traumatic Stress subscale of the Anxiety-Related Disorders scale (ARD-T). ARD-T and DEP-P also demonstrated excellent diagnostic utility. Finally, correlations between PAI scales and four CAPS symptom clusters provided additional validity evidence, in particular supporting a distinction between effortful avoidance and numbing. Taken together, these results support the use of the PAI in the assessment of PTSD.This study was the basis of a Masters thesis for Meghan McDevitt-Murphy. Portions of this study were presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Advancement of Behavior Therapy, November 2000.     

Family environment and its relation to adolescent personality factors

Investigated the relationship between family social climate characteristics and adolescent personality functioning. The High School Personality Questionnaire (HSPQ) was administered to 80 high school students. These students and their parents also completed the Family Environment Scale (FES). Results of a stepwise multiple regression analysis indicated that one or more HSPQ scales had significant associations with each FES scale. Significant variance in child behavior was attributed to family social system functioning; however, no single family variable accounted for a major portion of the variance to the exclusion of other factors. It was concluded that child behavior varies with total system functioning, more than with separate system factors.     

Detecting random, partially random, and nonrandom Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent protocols

The ability of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI-A; J. N. Butcher et al., 1992) validity scales to detect random, partially random, and nonrandom MMPI-A protocols was investigated. Investigations included the Variable Response Inconsistency scale (VRIN), F, several potentially useful new F and VRIN subscales, and formulas F-sub-2 - F-sub-1 and F + F-sub-2 + |F - F-sub-2|. Protocols completed by 150 adolescents at a juvenile court setting, screened for randomness with a matched-pair Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory (MACI) or Jesness Inventory, were compared with 100 computer-generated, all-random protocols, and with 5 levels of partially random protocols. VRIN was the most effective scale in detecting all-random protocols; however, the optimum cutoff of >or= 75 failed to identify 1/3 of them. Using the new scales, a decision algorithm was described that correctly classified 94%-95% of protocols as interpretable, partially interpretable, or uninterpretable.     

Effects of estimation methods on making trait-level inferences from ordered categorical items for assessing psychopathology

In assessments of attitudes, personality, and psychopathology, unidimensional scale scores are commonly obtained from Likert scale items to make inferences about individuals' trait levels. This study approached the issue of how best to combine Likert scale items to estimate test scores from the practitioner's perspective: Does it really matter which method is used to estimate a trait? Analyses of 3 data sets indicated that commonly used methods could be classified into 2 groups: methods that explicitly take account of the ordered categorical item distributions (i.e., partial credit and graded response models of item response theory, factor analysis using an asymptotically distribution-free estimator) and methods that do not distinguish Likert-type items from continuously distributed items (i.e., total score, principal component analysis, maximum-likelihood factor analysis). Differences in trait estimates were found to be trivial within each group. Yet the results suggested that inferences about individuals' trait levels differ considerably between the 2 groups. One should therefore choose a method that explicitly takes account of item distributions in estimating unidimensional traits from ordered categorical response formats. Consequences of violating distributional assumptions were discussed.     

Identification of random responding on the MMPI-A

Although substantial research literature on the effects of random responding on the MMPI-2 exists, there is very limited data available on this issue with the MMPI-A. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of selected MMPI-A validity scales in detecting differences in response patterns between protocols produced by 354 adolescents assessed in clinical settings and a group of 354 randomly produced MMPI-A protocols. Results indicate that MMPI-A validity and basic clinical scales differ significantly between random and clinical groups and that MMPI-A validity Scales F, F1, F2, and VRIN appear to be most useful in correctly identifying protocols from actual clinical participants versus randomly generated response patterns. Findings are discussed in terms of the dramatic effects of the sample base rate for random responding on overall classification accuracy results. Furthermore, it was noted that the optimal cutting scores for MMPI-A Scales F, F1, F2, and VRIN were largely consistent with interpretive recommendations found in the test manual (Butcher et al., 1992) when the relative frequency of random response protocols to clinical protocols was evaluated at a ratio of 1:10. Finally, future recommendations for evaluation of the F1-F2 difference score and the TRIN scale are offered in terms of the most relevant research designs to evaluate these measures.