Principal components analyses of the MMPI-2 PSY-5 scales: identification of facet subscales

The Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) is a five-factor personality trait model designed for assessing personality pathology using quantitative dimensions. Harkness, McNulty, and Ben-Porath developed Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) scales based on the PSY-5 model, and these scales were recently added to the standard MMPI-2 profile. Although the PSY-5 constructs are multidimensional in definition, explicit subscales for the broader PSY-5 scales have not been developed. The primary goals of this study were to empirically derive subscales for the MMPI-2 PSY-5 scales using principal components analysis (PCA) and to replicate these subscales with an independent sample. Individual PSY-5 scales were analyzed using PCA with an initial sample of 4,325 MMPI-2 protocols, and the component structure was replicated with a second sample of 4,277 MMPI-2 protocols. A third sample of 4,327 protocols was used to further evaluate the internal consistency reliabilities of the resulting facet subscales. Overall, replicable facet subscales were identified with content areas that are largely congruent with Harkness and McNulty's model.     

Internal Consistencies and Structural Analysis of the MMPI-2 PSY-5 Facet Subscales in Chinese Population

Using the normative data set of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 of the People’s Republic of China, this study examined the psychometric properties of the Personality Psychopathology Five facet subscales recently developed by Arnau et al. (2005). The internal consistency reliability, convergent and discriminant validity of the Psy-5 were found to be unsatisfactory. Results of confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicated that both item-to-facet factor structure (except the PSYC domain facets subscales) and facet-to-domain factor structure fit the data poorly. These findings suggested that the PSY-5 facet subscales may not be reliable and valid in population independent of those used to derive them. Thus, the utility of these facet subscales in clinical and research settings is premature at least for Chinese people at the present time.     

Incremental validity of the MMPI-2 PSY-5 scales in assessing self-reported personality disorder criteria

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.     

Validation of the dimensional factor structure of the personality psychopathology five in clinical and nonclinical samples

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to determine whether the latent structure underlying the items composing the MMPI-2 Personality Psychopathology Five scales (PSY-5; Harkness, McNulty, & Ben-Porath, 1995) is representative of the theoretical model that informed their construction. Results from the CFA revealed a good fit between the hypothesized five-factor model and the obtained latent factor structure in both clinical (n = 284) and nonclinical (n = 351) samples. Moreover, the PSY-5 model proved to be a better fit than a random five-factor model and a one-factor model. Correlations between the PSY-5 scales and a set of MMPI-2 (DSM-IV) personality disorder scales provided additional evidence of convergent and discriminant validity.     

A replication of the MMPI-A PSY-5 scales and development of facet subscales

McNulty, Harkness, Ben-Porath and Williams recently developed Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) scales for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-A (MMPI-A). This study examined these new scales in a sample of 545 adolescents receiving inpatient psychiatric treatment. Item-level principal components analyses were employed to determine the internal structure of each PSY-5 scale and to aid in the creation of facet subscales for each PSY-5 scale. Results suggest that the MMPI-A PSY-5 scales display adequate internal consistency and our findings generally replicate the original work of McNulty et al. but also extend this work by showing that several of the PSY-5 scales may also be subdivided into meaningful lower level dimensions. These facet subscales for each of the MMPI-A PSY-5 scales are offered for further study.     

The Personality Psychopathology-Five (PSY-5): recent constructive replication and assessment literature review

The Personality Psychopathology-Five (PSY-5; Harkness & McNulty, 1994) is a model of individual differences relevant to adaptive functioning in both clinical and non-clinical populations. In this article, we review the development of the PSY-5 model (Harkness, 1992; Harkness & McNulty, 1994) and discuss the ways in which the PSY-5 model is related to and distinct from other 5-factor models. Using different methods and measures, the dimensions of the PSY-5 model have been constructively replicated (Lykken, 1968) by Tackett, Silberschmidt, Krueger, and Sponheim (2008) and by Watson, Clark, and Chmielewski (2008), and dimensions congruent with the PSY-5 have even been suggested for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.; Krueger et al., 2011). PSY-5 Scales can be scored from the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; Butcher et al., 2001), the MMPI-Adolescent version (MMPI-A; Butcher et al., 1992), and the Restructured Form of the MMPI-2 (MMPI-2-RF; Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008). Because the largest body of research exists for the MMPI-2-based scales, we focus our review of the literature on the MMPI-2-based PSY-5 scales (Harkness, McNulty, & Ben-Porath, 1995), but we briefly cover the small, but growing, body of MMPI-A and MMPI-2-RF PSY-5 scales research. We show that the PSY-5 research literature includes a wide variety of psychometric methodologies as well as diverse samples and clinical problems. An integrative summary reprises the theory behind each PSY-5 construct and links it to the reviewed literature. Advantages and limitations of MMPI-2-based PSY-5 scales are discussed.     

Correlates of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) scales in a forensic assessment setting

Empirical correlates of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) scales in a forensic assessment setting were identified. Archival extratest data, including demographics, psychosocial history, criminal behavior history, and current mental status and psychodiagnosis, were extracted from the case files of 593 men and women referred to a forensic assessment clinic for criminal court-ordered evaluations. Zero-order and multiple correlations were calculated between the MMPI-2 PSY-5 scales and relevant criterion variables. Findings indicated that the PSY-5 scales' empirical correlates in a forensic setting are similar to and consistent with those found in general mental health settings. Linear combinations of MMPI-2 PSY-5 Scale scores accounted for moderate proportions of variance in the collateral indicators.     

What do the MMPI-2 restructured clinical scales reliably measure? Answers from multiple research settings

The Restructured Clinical (RC; Tellegen et al., 2003) scales were developed to improve measurement of the core constructs of the MMPI-2 (Butcher et al., 2001) Clinical scales by removing "demoralization," hypothesized to affect these scales adversely. Using 25 samples with MMPI-2 responses from 78,159 subjects across diverse clinical settings, we found that each RC scale was highly correlated with a Supplementary, Content, or Personality Psychopathology 5 (PSY-5; Harkness, McNulty, & Ben-Porath, 1995) scale: higher, in fact, than the correlation between the RC scale and its parent scale. Furthermore, for over half the RC scales (i.e., RC1, RC3, RC7, RC8, and RCd), the correlations were strong enough to conclude that the RC scales replicate MMPI-2 scales with rich empirical foundations; the remaining RC scales were not redundant. Next, we examined reliability estimates using alpha coefficients and interitem correlations and did not reveal superior reliability for most of the RC scales over existing MMPI-2 scales.     

A Structural Analysis of the Impact of MMPI-2 on MMPI-1

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-1 (MMPI-1) items modified for Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) are presented in pairs to illustrate modifications. MMPI-1 items deleted from MMPI-2 are presented, grouped by categories. Frequencies of items remaining in MMPI-2 for the following special scales are presented: Harris and Lingoes subscales of the clinical scales (Harris & Lingoes, 1955/1968); Wiggins Content scales (Wiggins, 1966); Tryon, Stein, and Chu (TSC) cluster scales (Stein, 1968; Tryon, 1966); Indiana Rational scales (Levitt, 1989); and selected other special scales. Frequencies of MMPI-1 items in the MMPI-2 validity and content scales are also presented, k is concluded that most of the special scales developed for MMPI-1 remain relatively intact in MMPI-2.     

Cross-cultural replication of the five-factor model and comparison of the NEO-PI-R and MMPI-2 PSY-5 scales in a Dutch psychiatric sample

The authors investigated cross-cultural replicability of the five-factor model (FFM) of personality as represented by the revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; P. T. Costa & R. R. McCrae, 1992) in a sample of 423 Dutch psychiatric patients. Also, NEO-PI-R domain scales were compared with the Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5; A. R. Harkness & J. L. McNulty, 1994) scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (J. N. Butcher, W. G. Dahlstrom, J. R. Graham, A. Tellegen, & B. Kaemmer, 2002). Principal-components analysis with procrustean rotation confirmed the hypothesized structural similarity of the present sample with the U.S. normative factor scores. All of the hypothesized relations between NEO-PI-R and PSY-5 scales were confirmed. The results provide evidence for cross-cultural replicability of the FFM and for validity of the NEO-PI-R and PSY-5 constructs in the psychological assessment of psychiatric patients.     

Detection of feigned mental disorders: a meta-analysis of the MMPI-2 and malingering

The validity of test data from multiscale inventories is dependent on self-reports that may be easily distorted by malingering. In examining the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2's (MMPI-2) role in the assessment of feigning, this review provides a conceptual analysis of the detection strategies underlying the MMPI-2 validity scales. The conceptual analysis is augmented by comprehensive meta-analysis of 65 MMPI-2 feigning studies plus 11 MMPI-2 diagnostic studies. For the rare-symptoms strategy, Fp (Cohen's d = 2.02) appears especially effective across diagnostic groups; its cut scores evidence greater consistency than most validity indicators. The data supported the F as an effective scale but questioned the routine use of Fb. Among the specialized scales, Ds appeared especially useful because of its sophisticated strategy, consistent cut score, and minimalfalse-positives. General guidelines are offeredfor specific MMPI-2 validity scales in the assessment of malingering with specific diagnoses.     

MMPI-2 characteristics of the Old Order Amish: a comparison of clinical, nonclinical, and United States normative samples

[Correction Notice: An erratum for this article was reported in Vol 23(4) of Psychological Assessment (see record 2011-12640-001). The article contains an error under the Participants and Procedure heading. This is addressed in the correction.] In the current study, we investigated Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) characteristics in an Old Order Amish nonclinical sample (N = 84), comparing these data with both the United States normative sample (N = 2,600) and a sample of Old Order Amish outpatients (N = 136). Consistent with our hypothesis, the Old Order Amish nonclinical group scored similarly to the United States normative sample and lower than the Old Order Amish outpatients on most scales. Thus, overall, the MMPI-2 appears to be sensitive to psychopathology, especially depression and psychosis, among Old Order Amish test takers. Still, several Validity, Clinical, Supplementary, Content, and Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) scale score differences materialized between the Old Order Amish nonclinical group and the United States group, suggesting that certain MMPI-2 scales may need to be interpreted differently for Old Order Amish test takers. Further MMPI-2 research is needed with the Old Order Amish to replicate and generalize our findings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved).     

Assessing psychopathic personality traits with the MMPI-2

In this study, we examined the utility of the MMPI-2 (Butcher et al., 2001) in assessing psychopathic personality traits. We explored whether MMPI-2 scales that measure affective and interpersonal traits add to the instrument's social deviance measures in assessing global psychopathy and its two facets. Our study of 281 male and female college students indicates that the MMPI-2 Social Deviance scales (e.g., Clinical Scales 4 and 9, ASP) predict substantial variance in the social deviance factor and affiliated subscales of the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI; Lilienfeld & Andrews, 1996), whereas MMPI-2 measures of affective and interpersonal functioning predict substantial variance in the affective-interpersonal PPI factor. In addition, the results of two regression models indicate that the Restructured Clinical scales provide the most parsimonious assessment of psychopathic personality traits.     

Detection of Feigned Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: A Comparison of the MMPI-2 and PAI

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) were compared for detecting feigned posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in a simulation research design. Participants were 85 undergraduates in one of three groups: PTSDs (n = 23), Fakers (n = 31), and Controls (n = 31). As expected, both the MMPI-2 and PAI discriminated PTSDs and Controls, with PTSDs scoring significantly higher on fake-bad validity scales and PTSD-relevant clinical scales. However, only the MMPI-2 discriminated Fakers and PTSDs, with Fakers scoring significantly higher on all MMPI-2 scales considered, but on only one PAI scale. Further, in logistic regression analyses the MMPI-2 demonstrated higher overall correct classification of PTSDs and Fakers than did the PAI. Although the MMPI-2 outperformed the PAI in detecting feigned PTSD, a substantial proportion of Fakers avoided detection by MMPI-2 fake-bad validity scales, suggesting that both tests are vulnerable to feigning of PTSD by motivated respondents with relatively limited coaching.     

The Consistency Between Scores of the Harris-Lingoes Subscales of the MMPI and MMPI-2

This study investigates the consistency between scores of the Harris-Lingoes subscales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and the MMPI-2. College students (200 men and 200 women) were randomly assigned to either the original to original condition, where they took the MMPI twice, or the original to revised condition, where they took the MMPI and MMPI-2. Results indicate relative consistency in the item and normative changes between the Harris-Lingoes subscales of the MMPI and MMPI-2. These results suggest that the recommendation of a clinical significance score of T > 65 for the MMPI-2 scales should not be applied to the Harris-Lingoes subscales.     

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.     

Further validation of the MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-RF Response Bias Scale: findings from disability and criminal forensic settings

The present study extends the validation of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) Response Bias Scale (RBS; R. O. Gervais, Y. S. Ben-Porath, D. B. Wygant, & P. Green, 2007) in separate forensic samples composed of disability claimants and criminal defendants. Using cognitive symptom validity tests as response bias indicators, the RBS exhibited large effect sizes (Cohen's ds = 1.24 and 1.48) in detecting cognitive response bias in the disability and criminal forensic samples, respectively. The scale also added incremental prediction to the traditional MMPI-2 and the MMPI-2-RF overreporting validity scales in the disability sample and exhibited excellent specificity with acceptable sensitivity at cutoffs ranging from 90T to 120T. The results of this study indicate that the RBS can add uniquely to the existing MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-RF validity scales in detecting symptom exaggeration associated with cognitive response bias.     

Detection of overreported psychopathology with the MMPI-2-RF [corrected] 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).     

The detection of feigned uncoached and coached posttraumatic stress disorder with the MMPI-2 in a sample of workplace accident victims

In this study research participants completed the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) under standard instructions and then were asked to fake posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) when completing the MMPI-2 for a 2nd time in 1 of 4 conditions with different instructions on how to fake PTSD: (a) uncoached, (b) coached about PTSD symptom information, (c) coached about MMPI-2 validity scales, or (d) coached about both symptoms and validity scales. These MMPI-2 protocols were then compared with protocols of claimants with workplace accident-related PTSD. Participants given information about the validity scales were the most successful in avoiding detection as faking. The family of F scales (i.e., F, FB, FP), particularly FP, produced consistently high rates of positive and negative predictive power.