Comparability of two-point high-point code patterns from original MMPI norms to MMPI-2 norms for the restandardization sample

Using records from the 1,138 males and 1,462 females in the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) restandardization sample (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989), two-point high-point code patterns generated from the original norms were compared to the patterns that these subjects obtained from the new norms. Although some code patterns proved to be quite stable across both norms, code comparability was generally lower in this community-based sample than was true for the records from samples of psychiatric patients also reported in Butcher et al. (1989). The sources of differences between the original and the new norms were reviewed, and the implications for profile interpretation based on code patterns were pointed out. The differences arising from the use of the MMPI-2 norms are appreciable; they highlight the need for new empirical data on the correlates of coding patterns based on these norms.     

Comparability of MMPI and MMPI-2 profile patterns: Ben-Porath and Tellegen's inappropriate invocation of Mahalanobis's D2 function

Ben-Porath and Tellegen (1995) claimed that the data in the article by Humphrey and Dahlstrom (1995) were improperly analyzed by means of Q correlations between raw scores earned by the individuals in the forensic sample to establish pattern comparability between the original Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI; Hathaway & McKinley, 1943) and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989), which were then contrasted with Q correlations between the corresponding T-score patterns. Ben-Porath and Tellegen (1995) contended that the Q correlation is affected by random factors and that a generalized distance function, D2, is the only legitimate index of profile comparability. Data are presented here to show that the Q correlation serves as a reliable index of pattern comparability, relatively unaffected by differences in profile elevation. The Mahalanobis (1936) D2 index is too heavily weighted with differences in profile elevation serve as the proper index of equivalence in profile patterning. The findings in the Humphrey and Dahlstrom (1995) article were based on appropriate data-analytic procedures because the primary concern is their investigation was the extent to which the patterns of T-score profiles from the original MMPI and the MMPI-2 are comparable when the raw-score patterns are virtually identical.     

Comparability of MMPI and MMPI-2 Profile Patterns: Ben-Porath and Tellegen's Inappropriate Invocation of Mahalanobis's D² Function

Ben-Porath and Tellegen (1995) claimed that the data in the article by Humphrey and Dahlstrom (1995) were improperly analyzed by means of Q correlations between raw scores earned by the individuals in the forensic sample to establish pattern comparability between the original Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI; Hathaway & McKinley, 1943) and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989), which were then contrasted with Q correlations between the corresponding T-score patterns. Ben-Porath and Tellegen (1995) contended that the Q correlation is affected by random factors and that a generalized distance function, D², is the only legitimate index of profile comparability. Data are presented here to show that the Q correlation serves as a reliable index of pattern comparability, relatively unaffected by differences in profile elevation. The Mahalanobis (1936) D² index is too heavily weighted with differences in profile elevation serve as the proper index of equivalence in profile patterning. The findings in the Humphrey and Dahlstrom (1995) article were based on appropriate data-analytic procedures because the primary concern is their investigation was the extent to which the patterns of T-score profiles from the original MMPI and the MMPI-2 are comparable when the raw-score patterns are virtually identical.     

The consistency of scores and configural patterns between the MMPI and MMPI-2

This article is an extension of the Ben-Porath and Butcher (1989a) study, investigating the claim that the scores and configural patterns of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) are consistent with those of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). College students (200 men and 200 women) were randomly assigned to either the original to original condition (O-O), in which they took the MMPI twice, or the original to revised condition (O-R), in which they took the MMPI and the MMPI-2. Correlations and configural patterns of the O-O condition were compared to those of the O-R condition. Results suggest some score changes between the MMPI and MMPI-2, particularly on Scales L, 5, and 8 for men and Scales L and 5 for women.     

MMPI-2 profile code types and measurement error

We studied simulated MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) code type stability and change expected with measurement error for 12 MMPI-2 well-defined mean code type profiles. Profile scores for the 2 scales defining the code type were systematically varied to represent target code type profiles at 9 different levels of T-score profile definition. We randomly generated samples of 50 simulated, estimated true score profiles at each level of profile definition for each code type around the estimated true scores for each scale at each level of profile definition. Two sets of simulated profiles were developed. The first simulation was based on the reported means, test-retest reliabilities, and the standard errors of measurement for the MMPI-2 normative group. The second simulation was based on the means, standard deviations, and estimated retest stability for a clinical group of psychiatric patients. We calculated frequencies and percentages of simulated profiles with the highest estimated true scores on the same 2 scales as the original code type profile. Percentages of simulated profiles with the same 2 highest scales as the original code type profiles increased from 27% to 37% for the 3-point level of definition, 37% to 49% for the 5-point definition, 46% to 61% for 7-point definition, 63% to 78% for 10-point definition, 78% to 89% for 13-point definition, 83% to 93% for 15-point definition, and greater than 90% for profile definition greater than 15 points.     

The MMPI-2 Clinical Scales and Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales: comparative psychometric properties and relative diagnostic efficiency in young adults

We examined the psychometric properties of the Restructured Clinical (RC) scales (Tellegen et al., 2003) of the MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) in a large sample (N = 744) of 18-year-old college freshman. We found that the RC scales demonstrated good convergence with their Clinical scale counterparts and were more distinctive than the Clinical scales. The patterns of discriminant correlations for the RC scales were slightly clearer than those of the Clinical scales and a set of other existing MMPI-2 scales. Diagnostic efficiency statistics based on Clinical and RC scale elevation status did not differ appreciably. However, the diagnostic efficiency statistics of cutoff scores derived from mean RC and Clinical scale T scores improved on the traditional scale elevation measures. We consider the clinical implications of these findings.     

Four-Month Test-Retest Reliability of the MMPI-2 With Normal Male Clergy

This investigation examined the test-retest coefficients and absolute score changes with the Basic, Supplementary, and Content scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2). Participants were 111 active male clergy who were not receiving mental health services at the time of their participation and who completed the MMPI-2 on two occasions separated by 4 months. A repeated measures multivariate analysis of variance for the three groups of scales revealed nonsignificant changes in mean T scores. In general, the test-retest coefficients obtained were similar to those reported in the MMPI-2 manual by Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, and Kaemmer (1989) and by Spiro, Butcher, Levenson, Aldwin, and Bosse (1993). Increases or decreases of 3 to 6 T-score points were observed for the majority of the scales, and instances in which T-score changes exceeded 10 points were observed on every scale. In sum, the test-retest reliability of the majority of MMPI-2 scales, as represented in this nonclinical sample, appears acceptable and compares favorably with the original MMPI.     

The MMPI-2 in Perú: a normative study

In this study, we compared a Peruvian normative group to the standard Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989b) U.S. normative sample. The MMPI-2 Hispanic Version was administered under standardized conditions to participants with a wide range of age, educational, occupational, and socioeconomic levels. Between the 2 samples, there was a high degree of similarity across most basic and supplementary scales. Elevations (Ts = 60-65) were found on Scale F for men and women and Scales Mf and MDS for women only. For both men and women, small elevations (Ts = 55-60) were found on several other scales. The differences were consistent with those found in other Latin American populations. The results of this study suggest that the adaptation of the MMPI-2 with the U.S. norms is appropriate for use in Perú.     

Type A Personality,Self-Control,and Vulnerability to Stress

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI-A; Butcher et al., 1992) was released in 1992 and has rapidly become the most widely used objective personality assessment instrument with adolescents. Although the MMPI-A reduced or eliminated several problems associated with the use of the original MMPI (Hathaway &; McKinley, 1943) with adolescents, the MMPI-A does produce a high frequency of within normal limits basic scale profiles for individuals with substantial psychopathology including adolescents in inpatient psychiatric settings. To better understand the reasons for this phenomenon, we compared the item endorsement frequencies for the MMPI-A normative sample with results from two adolescent clinical samples, and these results were contrasted to the item endorsement frequencies for the MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, &; Kaemmer, 1989) normative sample and a clinical sample of adult psychiatric inpatients. Results showed that the MMPI-A contains a substantial number of items that do not show a significant difference in item endorsement frequency between normative and clinical samples. Furthermore, MMPI-A basic and content scales generally show a much lower percentage of effective items than do the corresponding scales for the MMPI-2. We discuss the findings in relation to the frequent occurrence of low range MMPI-A profiles in clinical samples and the potential usefulness of these results in future efforts to develop viable short forms for the MMPI-A.     

The effectiveness of MMPI-A items in discriminating between normative and clinical samples.

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI-A; Butcher et al., 1992) was released in 1992 and has rapidly become the most widely used objective personality assessment instrument with adolescents. Although the MMPI-A reduced or eliminated several problems associated with the use of the original MMPI (Hathaway & McKinley, 1943) with adolescents, the MMPI-A does produce a high frequency of within normal limits basic scale profiles for individuals with substantial psychopathology including adolescents in inpatient psychiatric settings. To better understand the reasons for this phenomenon, we compared the item endorsement frequencies for the MMPI-A normative sample with results from two adolescent clinical samples, and these results were contrasted to the item endorsement frequencies for the MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) normative sample and a clinical sample of adult psychiatric inpatients. Results showed that the MMPI-A contains a substantial number of items that do not show a significant difference in item endorsement frequency between normative and clinical samples. Furthermore, MMPI-A basic and content scales generally show a much lower percentage of effective items than do the corresponding scales for the MMPI-2. We discuss the findings in relation to the frequent occurrence of low range MMPI-A profiles in clinical samples and the potential usefulness of these results in future efforts to develop viable short forms for the MMPI-A.     

MMPI-2 in the inpatient assessment of women with eating disorders

The MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) reveals similar patterns across all Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) eating-disorder diagnoses. In this study, 550 women with eating disorders completed the MMPI-2. The 3 highest mean elevations for all eating-disorder diagnostic groups occurred on the same scales in the same order: 2, 7, and 3. The modal code for all groups was 2-7/7-2. However, multivariate analyses using the 16 validity and clinical scales, as well as the 27 content and supplementary scales, indicated that the MMPI-2 also distinguishes among eating disorders, especially in that patients with restricting anorexia report less psychopathology than other groups. These results are compared with the results of past eating-disorder research that used the older MMPI (Hathaway & McKinley, 1983).     

How (not) to evaluate the comparability of MMPI and MMPI-2 profile configurations: a reply to Humphrey and Dahlstrom

Humphrey and Dahlstrom (1995) presented a study on the comparability of MMPI/MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) profiles in which they concluded that "the bases for clinical interpretation derived from the MMPI and MMPI-2 profiles were sufficiently at variance to require different conclusions" [sic] (p. 2). In this brief critique, we identify procedural and data-analytical deficiencies that invalidate Humphrey and Dahlstrom's argument. Their blanket recommendation based on this argument, namely, that clinicians routinely plot both MMPI and MMPI-2 profiles, is unwarranted.     

Seven issues in Conducting Forensic Assessments: Ethical Responsibilities in Light of New Standards and New Tests

The publication of a new ethics code for the American Psychological Association (1992), new guidelines (Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists, 1991), and two new versions of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (the MMPI-2, Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989; and the MMPI-A, Butcher et al., 1992) provide an opportunity to review ethical aspects of forensic assessment. Seven major issues-appropriate graduate training, competence in the use of standardized tests, using tests that fit the task, using tests that fit the individual, administering tests correctly, using computers appropriately in forensic assessment, and assessing and reporting factors that may affect the meaning of test findings—are discussed. The revision of the MMPI is used to illustrate some of these issues.     

Interpretation of a Full-Information Item-Level Factor Analysis of the MMPI-2: Normative Sampling and Nonpathognomonic Descriptors

An exploratory item-level full-information factor analysis was performed on the normative sample for the MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989). This method of factor analysis, developed by Schilling and Bock (Bock & Schilling, 1997) and based on item response theory, works directly with the response patterns and avoids the artifacts associated with phi coefficients and tetrachoric coefficients. Promax rotation of the factor solution organizes the clinical scale items into 10 factors that we labeled Distrust, Self-Doubt, Fitness, Serenity, Rebelliousness, Instrumentality, Irritability, Artistry, Sociability, and Self-Reliance. A comparison was made to the results of Johnson, Butcher, Null, and Johnson (1984), who performed a principal-component analysis on an item set of 550 items from the previous version of the MMPI (Hathaway & McKinley, 1943). Along with version changes and sampling differences, the essential differences between Johnson et al.'s results and ours may be attributed to differences between the Schilling and Bock method, which uses all information in the item responses, and the principal-component analysis, which uses the partial information contained in pairwise correlation coefficients. This study included 518 of the complete 567 items of the MMPI-2, versus Johnson et al.'s retention of 309 of the initially included 550 items of the previous MMPI. The full-information analysis retained all 518 initially included items and more evenly distributed the items over the 10 resulting factors, all sharply defined by their highest loading items and easy to interpret. Sampling effects and factor label considerations are discussed, along with recommendations for research that would validate the clinical utility of the implied scales for describing normal personality profiles. The full-information procedure provides for Bayes estimation of scores on these scales.     

Convergent validity of alternative MMPI-2 personality disorder scales

The Morey, Waugh, and Blashfield (1985) MMPI (Hathaway et al., 1989) personality disorder scales provided a significant contribution to personality disorder research and assessment. However, the subsequent revisions to the MMPI and the multiple revisions to the diagnostic criteria sets that have since occurred may have justified comparable revisions to these scales. Somwaru and Ben-Porath (1995) selected a substantially different set of items from the MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) to assess Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed.; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) personality disorder diagnostic criteria. In our study, we compared the convergent validity of these alternative MMPI-2 personality disorder scales with respect to 3 self-report measures of personality disorder symptomatology in a sample of 82 psychiatric outpatients. The results suggested that Somwaru and Ben-Porath's scales are as valid as the original Morey et al. scales and might be even more valid for the assessment of borderline, antisocial, and schizoid personality disorder symptomatology.     

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.     

Everything You Wanted to Know About the MMPI

Tsai and Pike (2000) are to be commended for their novel approach to examining cultural differences in Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2; Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, &; Kaemmer, 1989) profiles. Their hypothesis that acculturation would moderate these differences is logically sound, and is likely to produce a line of informative research.     

Interpretation of a full-information item-level factor analysis of the MMPI-2: normative sampling and nonpathognomonic descriptors

An exploratory item-level full-information factor analysis was performed on the normative sample for the MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989). This method of factor analysis, developed by Schilling and Bock (Bock & Schilling, 1997) and based on item response theory, works directly with the response patterns and avoids the artifacts associated with phi coefficients and tetrachoric coefficients. Promax rotation of the factor solution organizes the clinical scale items into 10 factors that we labeled Distrust, Self-Doubt, Fitness, Serenity, Rebelliousness, Instrumentality, Irritability, Artistry, Sociability, and Self-Reliance. A comparison was made to the results of Johnson, Butcher, Null, and Johnson (1984), who performed a principal-component analysis on an item set of 550 items from the previous version of the MMPI (Hathaway & McKinley, 1943). Along with version changes and sampling differences, the essential differences between Johnson et al.'s results and ours may be attributed to differences between the Schilling and Bock method, which uses all information in the item responses, and the principal-component analysis, which uses the partial information contained in pairwise correlation coefficients. This study included 518 of the complete 567 items of the MMPI-2, versus Johnson et al.'s retention of 309 of the initially included 550 items of the previous MMPI. The full-information analysis retained all 518 initially included items and more evenly distributed the items over the 10 resulting factors, all sharply defined by their highest loading items and easy to interpret. Sampling effects and factor label considerations are discussed, along with recommendations for research that would validate the clinical utility of the implied scales for describing normal personality profiles. The full-information procedure provides for Bayes estimation of scores on these scales.