What do the MMPI scales fundamentally measure? Some hypotheses

I consider the question of whether all psychopathological behaviors can, on an evolutionary foundation, be considered as positive adaptations. I proposed that higher functions can be differentiated from their associated emotional modulations at simultaneous subjective, behavioral, and neural levels and that organizing analyses in this way will enable us to fill in our understanding of both the effects and relief of traumatic experiences. I then present each of the 8 clinical scales of the MMPI (Hathaway & McKinley, 1943) as a dimension of positive adaptation with simultaneous cognitive-emotional, operant-classical, and neocortical-limbic elements. A variety of life-experience paradigms are then offered to explain the factors that operate to increase MMPI scale elevations as well as countermeasures that can operate to reduce such elevations. Understanding all such behaviors as adaptive leads to a notable enhancement of empathy.     

What do the TOSCA guilt and shame scales really measure: Affect or action?

Psychologists have long used the Test of Self-Conscious Affect (TOSCA) as an instrument for empirically distinguishing between trait emotions of guilt and shame. Recent assessments of the internal structure of the TOSCA guilt scale suggest that it may not measure the experience of guilt, but rather motivation to make amends for personal wrongdoing. In contrast, TOSCA shame may better assess the tendency to experience negative self-conscious affect. Previous research did not take into account that TOSCA guilt theoretically should only predict emotions in a situation of wrongdoing; we put this idea to the test in two studies. Experimental, but not control, participants received believable feedback that they had shown involuntary prejudice towards a member of a minority group. In both studies TOSCA guilt predicted reparative action after feedback was given, including expressing non-prejudiced views and recommending financial compensation to the minority group. However, TOSCA guilt had no relationship with feelings of guilt or shame after expressing prejudice. In contrast, TOSCA shame was a better predictor of feelings of guilt, shame and other self-critical emotions, but did not predict compensatory action. These findings suggest motivation rather than emotion as a mechanism behind past findings involving TOSCA guilt.     

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.     

Three scales of alexithymia: do they measure the same thing?

The psychometric properties of three scales of alexithymia were examined in a sample of 187 female undergraduates. The Shalling Sifneos Personality Scale (SSPS) and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) Alexithymia scale had little internal consistency. The scored archetypal test with nine elements (SAT9) had very low interrater reliability. As predicted, the tree measures were not significantly related to one another and the SSPS had a more clearly defined factor structure than the MMPI scale. The MMPI and SSPS scales were differentially related to measures of symptomatology but were similarly related to extraversion, absorption, and SAT scores. Of the three scales, the SSPS appeared to have the highest content validity. The results suggest that alexithymia is not a unitary construct and that its reification as such may be premature.     

What do Raven's Matrices measure? An analysis in terms of sex differences

Although it is sometimes claimed that Raven's Matrices provide an almost pure measure of g, there is evidence that the easier items in the Standard Progressive Matrices and in Set I of the Advanced Matrices measure a perceptual or Gestalt factor distinct from the more analytic items in the rest of the tests. There is also, however, both factor analytic and experimental evidence that these analytic items fall into two partially separate groups, distinguishable by the type of rule needed for their solution in the analysis proposed by Carpenter, Just, and Schell (1990) [Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A., Schell, P. (1990). What one intelligence test measures: A theoretical account of the processing in the Raven's Progressive Matrices Test. Psychological Review, 97, 404–431]. Re-analysis of published data suggests a new source of evidence for this further distinction: males do better than females on items requiring an addition/subtraction or distribution of two rule, but there is no sex difference on items requiring pairwise progression or distribution of three rules. A specially designed experiment confirmed this pattern of results.     

Assessing children's inference generation: What do tests of reading comprehension measure?

Background. Previous research suggests that children with specific comprehension difficulties have problems with the generation of inferences. This raises important questions as to whether poor comprehenders have poor comprehension skills generally, or whether their problems are confined to specific inference types. Aims. The main aims of the study were (a) using two commonly used tests of reading comprehension to classify the questions requiring the generation of inferences, and (b) to investigate the relative performance of skilled and less‐skilled comprehenders on questions tapping different inference types. Sample. The performance of 10 poor comprehenders (mean age 110.06 months) was compared with the performance of 10 normal readers (mean age 112.78 months) on two tests of reading comprehension. Method. A qualitative analysis of the NARA II (form 1) and the WORD comprehension subtest was carried out. Participants were then administered the NARA II, WORD comprehension subtest and a test of non‐word reading. Results. The NARA II was heavily reliant on the generation of knowledge‐based inferences, while the WORD comprehension subtest was biased towards the retention of literal information. Children identified by the NARA II as having comprehension difficulties performed in the normal range on the WORD comprehension subtests. Further, children with comprehension difficulties performed poorly on questions requiring the generation of knowledge‐based and elaborative inferences. However, they were able to answer questions requiring attention to literal information or use of cohesive devices at a level comparable to normal readers. Conclusions. Different reading tests tap different types of inferencing skills. Less‐skilled comprehenders have particular difficulty applying real‐world knowledge to a text during reading, and this has implications for the formulation of effective intervention strategies.     

What do philosophers believe?

What are the philosophical views of contemporary professional philosophers? We surveyed many professional philosophers in order to help determine their views on 30 central philosophical issues. This article documents the results. It also reveals correlations among philosophical views and between these views and factors such as age, gender, and nationality. A factor analysis suggests that an individual’s views on these issues factor into a few underlying components that predict much of the variation in those views. The results of a metasurvey also suggest that many of the results of the survey are surprising: philosophers as a whole have quite inaccurate beliefs about the distribution of philosophical views in the profession.     

What does doodling do?

Doodling is a way of passing the time when bored by a lecture or telephone call. Does it improve or hinder attention to the primary task? To answer this question, 40 participants monitored a monotonous mock telephone message for the names of people coming to a party. Half of the group was randomly assigned to a ‘doodling’ condition where they shaded printed shapes while listening to the telephone call. The doodling group performed better on the monitoring task and recalled 29% more information on a surprise memory test. Unlike many dual task situations, doodling while working can be beneficial. Future research could test whether doodling aids cognitive performance by reducing daydreaming. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

What to do? Upgrade!

The contents of what we transmit in colleges and universities as philosophic traditions need upgrading. But so do the methods of transmission.     

What do double dissociations prove?

Brain damage may doubly dissociate cognitive modules, but the practice of revealing dissociations is predicated on modularity being true (T. Shallice, 1988). This article questions the utility of assuming modularity, as it examines a paradigmatic double dissociation of reading modules. Reading modules illustrate two general problems. First, modularity fails to converge on a fixed set of exclusionary criteria that define pure cases. As a consequence, competing modular theories force perennial quests for purer cases, which simply perpetuates growth in the list of exclusionary criteria. The first problem leads, in part, to the second problem. Modularity fails to converge on a fixed set of pure cases. The second failure perpetuates unending fractionation into more modules.     

Meta‐analyses of love scales: Do various love scales measure the same psychological constructs?

Abstract: Two statistical meta-analyses synthesized 33 empirical studies which investigated the correlation between relationship satisfaction and two types of love: Erotic Love and Companionate Love, measured by various love scales based on four major theories by Rubin, Lee, Hatfield, and Sternberg. The results drawn by the Hunter-Schmidt method showed that satisfaction was highly correlated with Erotic Love, but that its correlation with Companionate Love was unclear due to heterogeneity in the total sample of the all Companionate Love studies. A moderator analysis indicated a potential moderator, that is, theoretical differences between Lee's Color Theory of Love and the other three theories. The result suggested that a Companionate Love named "Storge" in the Color Theory should not be mixed up with other friendship-style loves defined by other theories as the Storge subscale would measure a different psychological construct.     

What does the ultrasonic activity recording device measure?

Rats were observed while their behavior was being monitored by an ultrasonic activity recording device. It was found that the device yielded more counts when Ss were being more active. But very active behavior is relatively rare, so that most of the counts over a period of time are likely to result from the more frequent but less active kinds of behavior, such as grooming.     

What do monkeys' music choices mean?

McDermott and Hauser have recently shown that although monkeys show some types of preferences for sound, preferences for music are found only in humans. This suggests that music might be a relatively recent adaptation in human evolution. Here, I focus on the research methods used by McDermott and Hauser, and consider the findings in relation to infancy research and music psychology.