Detection of Random Responding on the MMPI--A

We examined random responding on the MMPI-A in 106 adolescents from the general population. Participants were asked to report on the frequency, location, and reasons for any random responses occurring during a standard administration of the MMPI-A. Relationships between self-reported random responding and validity indices (F1, F2, F, and Variable Response Inconsistency [VRIN] scale) were examined. In addition, each participant was randomly assigned to 1 of 5 groups, with each group completing an assigned portion (0, 25%, 50%, 75%, or 100%) of an MMPI-A answer sheet without access to the test booklet, and the utility of the validity scales in discriminating standard protocols from all or partially random protocols was investigated. Most adolescents acknowledged one or more random responses correlated significantly with F but not VRIN. Validity scales were sensitive to all or partially random protocols, and produced high classification rates when discriminating among groups.     

Detection of random responding on the MMPI-A

We examined random responding on the MMPI-A in 106 adolescents from the general population. Participants were asked to report on the frequency, location, and reasons for any random responses occurring during a standard administration of the MMPI-A. Relationships between self-reported random responding and validity indices (F1, F2, F, and Variable Response Inconsistency [VRIN] scale) were examined. In addition, each participant was randomly assigned to 1 of 5 groups, with each group completing an assigned portion (0, 25%, 50%, 75%, or 100%) of an MMPI-A answer sheet without access to the test booklet, and the utility of the validity scales in discriminating standard protocols from all or partially random protocols was investigated. Most adolescents acknowledged one or more random responses correlated significantly with F but not VRIN. Validity scales were sensitive to all or partially random protocols, and produced high classification rates when discriminating among groups.     

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.     

Detecting fake-bad MMPI-A profiles

This study examined the extent to which the validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI-A; Butcher et al., 1992) could identify adolescents who were faking-bad. This study also examined the extent to which the validity scales could differentiate between nonclinical adolescents instructed to fake-bad and both clinical and nonclinical adolescents who received standard instructions. Participants were 58 male and 80 female high school students and 58 male and 80 female adolescents from clinical settings. Results indicated that the mean profiles resembled those previously reported for adults on the MMPI (Graham, 1987) and MMPI-2 (Graham, Watts, & Timbrook, 1991) and for adolescents on the original MMPI (Archer, Gordon, & Kirchner, 1987). Accurate identification of students who were faking-bad was achieved. It was possible to differentiate between the clinical adolescents and nonclinical adolescents who were faking, and it was possible to differentiate between nonclinical adolescents who were faking and nonclinical adolescents with standard instructions; however, different cutoff scores were needed for these two discriminations. Optimal cutoff scores were presented.     

Identifying faking bad on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent with Mexican adolescents

This study examined the extent to which the validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent identified Mexican adolescents who were instructed to fake bad. Validity scales data were used to differentiate between nonclinical adolescents instructed to fake bad and both clinical and nonclinical adolescents who received standard instructions. Participants were 59 male and 87 female Mexican high school students and 59 male and 87 female Mexican adolescents from clinical settings. This is the first study onfaking with adolescents in Mexico. The F, Fl, and F2 Scales and the F-K index discriminated adequately between the three different groups. Results were similar to those previously reportedfor adults and adolescents in Mexico and the United States. High positive and negative predictive powers and overall hit rates were obtained in this study. Higher cut scores were needed to discriminate between the groups of girls than between the groups of boys.     

MMPI-A validity scale uses and limitations in detecting varying levels of random responding

Although there is a substantial research literature on the effects of random responding on the MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989), there are very few studies available on this topic with the MMPI-A (Butcher et al., 1992). Archer and Elkins (1999) found that MMPI-A validity scales F and VRIN were particularly useful in detecting entirely random profiles from those derived standardly in clinical settings but noted that "all random" protocols could not be used to evaluate the usefulness of the T-score difference between the first half (F1) and the second half (F2) of the MMPI-A test booklet. Following up on this issue, this study extended the methodology of previous research by examining the hit rate, positive predictive power, negative predictive power, sensitivity, and specificity of VRIN, F, F1, F2 and the absolute value of the T-score difference between F1 and F2 (denoted as IF1-F21) in 5 samples varying in the degree of protocol randomness. One of the samples consisted of 100 adolescent inpatients administered the MMPI-A under standard instructions, and another sample consisted of 100 protocols randomly generated by computer. The additional 3 samples of 100 protocols each contained varying degrees of computer-generated randomness introduced in the latter half of the MMPI-A item pool. Over- all, the results generally indicate that several MMPI-A validity scales are useful in detecting protocols that are largely random, but all of these validity scales are more limited in detecting partially random responding that involves less than half the total item pool located in the second half of the test booklet. Clinicians should be particularly cautious concerning validity inferences based on the observed T-score difference that occurs for the F1 and F2 subscales and current findings do not support the clinical usefulness of this index.     

Incremental validity of the MMPI-A content scales in the prediction of self-reported symptoms

The incremental contribution of the MMPI-A (Butcher et al., 1992) content scales to the prediction of scores on self-report measures of psychopathology was examined in a sample of 62 adolescents in inpatient treatment and 59 adolescents from the community. All participants completed the MMPI-A and a battery of criterion measures. A series of hierarchical regression analyses was conducted in which the MMPI-A clinical and content scales served as the independent variables and the criterion measures as the dependent variables. The content scales were found to have incremental validity beyond the clinical scales in predicting variance in the criterion measures. Similarly, the clinical scales also demonstrated incremental validity over the content scales in making these predictions. Both sets of scales made independent contributions to the prediction of sample membership (clinical vs. nonclinical). Findings suggest that both the clinical and content scales of the MMPI-A make significant contributions to the assessment of adolescents' psychological functioning.     

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.     

Normal range MMPI-A profiles among psychiatric inpatients

The present study examined the base rates of normal range Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI-A) profiles in an inpatient sample and examined the differences between adolescents with apparently valid normal range profiles (all clinical scale T-scores < 60) and those with elevated profiles on prior interventions, reported internalizing and externalizing symptoms, and MMPI-A validity scale scores and other indexes of underreporting. Normal range profiles cannot be adequately explained by a less pathological history prior to hospitalization or by defensiveness. Thirty percent of male and 25% of female adolescents produced valid MMPI-A profiles in which none of the clinical scales were elevated. Both male and female adolescents with normal range profiles were generally less likely to report internalizing symptoms than those with elevated profiles, but both groups report externalizing symptoms. Neither the standard MMPI-A validity scales nor additional validity scales discriminated between profile groups. Clinicians should not assume that normal range profiles indicate an absence of problems.     

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.     

A comparison of the PAI and MMPI-2 as predictors of faking bad in college students

Both the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; Butcher et al., 2001) and Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991) offer a large set of scales devoted to the identification of response styles. This study directly compared the effectiveness of the 2 inventories as indicators of overreporting. The 2 measures were administered to 52 college students instructed to fake bad under conditions describing either a forensic (n = 24) or psychiatric (n = 28) setting as well as to 432 psychiatric patients. Results indicated that the MMPI-2 F - K index and Fp Scale were the best single indicators of a faking bad response style and that the MMPI-2 scales were the better indicators as a set. However, the PAI scales demonstrated a significant level of incremental validity over the MMPI-2 indicators in every analysis conducted. The findings suggest that either inventory offers an effective approach to the detection of overreporting, and administering both inventories can enhance the accuracy of prediction further.     

Effects of response sets on NEO-PI-R scores and their relations to external criteria

Validity scales indicate the extent to which the results of a self-report inventory are a valid indicator of the test taker's psychological functioning. Validity scales generally are designed to detect the common response sets of positive impression management (underreporting, or faking good), negative impression management (overreporting, or faking bad), and random responding. The revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R; Costa & McCrae, 1992b) is a popular personality assessment tool based on the 5-factor model of personality and is used in a variety of settings. The NEO-PI-R does not include objective validity scales to screen for positive or negative impression management. The purpose of this study was to examine the utility of recently proposed validity scales for detecting these response sets on the NEO-PI-R (Schinka, Kinder, & Kremer, 1997) and to examine the effects of positive and negative impression management on correlations between the NEO-PI-R and external criteria (the Interpersonal Adjective Scale-Revised-B5 [Wiggins & Trapnell, 1997] and the NEO-PI-R Form R). The validity scales discriminated with reasonable accuracy between standard responding and the 2 response sets. Additionally, most correlations between the NEO-PI-R and external criteria were significantly lower when participants were dissimulating than when responding to standard instructions. It appears that response sets of positive and negative impression management may pose a significant threat to the external validity of the NEO-PI-R and that validity scales for their detection might be a useful addition to the inventory.     

MMPI-A performance of African and Mexican American adolescent first-time offenders

54 African and Mexican American adolescent first-time offenders were examined with the MMPI-A to evaluate ethnic differences. Multivariate analyses by ethnicity and MMPI-A scales (validity, clinical, content, and supplementary scales) were not significant; however, there was a significant univariate difference where African American adolescents scored significantly higher on the Repression scale than the Mexican American group. A greater percentage of within-normal-limits profiles were African American (50%) than Mexican American (25%). Research and clinical implications for using the MMPI-A with these groups are discussed.     

Reliability and validity of the Spanish version of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI-A)

The aim of this study was to determine the test-retest reliability and internal consistency of the scales of the Spanish version of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI-A; Butcher et al., 1992). Two samples of 939 and 109 Spanish adolescents ages 14 to 18 years were assessed with the MMPI-A in their school environment. The first sample responded to the inventory once, whereas the second sample responded to it on 2 occasions with a 2-week interval between sessions. Results showed no significant differences in means or variances between the first and the second test administration for most MMPI-A scales. Test-retest reliability ranged between .62 (Amorality, Ma(1)) and .92 (Immaturity, IMM); most correlations exceeded .70. Internal consistency values for the MMPI-A scales in the pretest and posttest were very similar overall. External validity of the MMPI-A was demonstrated through several significant correlations between its scales and YSR/11-18 syndromes and social interaction measures. The highest correlations were established between the Anxious/Depressed YSR/11-18 scale and other MMPI-A scales such as Schizophrenia (Sc), Welsh's Anxiety (A), Adolescent-Anxiety (A-anx) and Adolescent-Alienation (A-aln), and between the Social Avoidance and Distress Scale and the MMPI-A Adolescent-Social Discomfort (A-sod) scale.     

Ability of substance abusers to escape detection on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI-A) in a juvenile correctional facility

The ability of respondents to underreport successfully on substance abuse and validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI-A; Butcher et al., 1992) was evaluated. Incarcerated teens (67 substance abusing, 59 non-substance abusing) completed the MMPI-A twice: once under standard instructions (SI) and once under instructions to fake good (FG). Under SI, substance scales correctly classified about 60% to 85% of adolescents. Under FG, substance- and non-substance-abusing juveniles produced lower scores on substance scales. However, the Lie Scale (L) was able to detect more than 75% of deceptive profiles and about 77% of honest profiles. When scale L and the best substance scale were used in combination, only about 18% of faking substance abusers were not identified as either substance abusers or as underreporting. For feigning substance abusers, only about 10% of substance abusers were detected, with about 72% being categorized as faking and needing further assessment.     

Psychometric properties of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent (MMPI-A) Clinical, Content, and Supplementary scales in a forensic sample

In this study, we evaluated the internal psychometric properties and external correlates of scores on the Clinical, Content, and Supplementary scales in a forensic sample of 496 adolescents (315 boys and 181 girls) who were court-ordered to receive psychological evaluations. We examined Cronbach's alpha coefficients, scale intercorrelation matrices, and frequencies of scale elevations. Further, we found varying degrees of support for the convergent and discriminant validity of scores on the MMPI-A (Butcher et al., 1992 ) Clinical, Content, and Supplementary scales. This study adds to the body of literature establishing the utility of the MMPI-A in forensic evaluations.     

The incremental validity and clinical utility of the MMPI-2 infrequency posttraumatic stress disorder scale

The incremental validity and clinical utility of the recently developed Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) Infrequency Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Scale (Fptsd) was examined in relation to the family of MMPI-2 F scales in distinguishing feigned post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) from disability claimants with PTSD. Research participants instructed to feign PTSD when completing the MMPI-2 scored significantly higher on the MMPI-2 family of F scales and the Fptsd scale compared with their responses when completing the MMPI-2 under standard instructions and the sample of claimants with PTSD. Although comparable in magnitude, effect sizes derived from mean group differences and hierarchical logistic regressions for the Fptsd scale never exceeded those for F(B), and F(P), F, F(B), and F(P) added incrementally to Fptsd in the prediction of feigned PTSD. These results suggest that the Fptsd scale does not afford any incremental predictive utility for detecting feigned PTSD relative to the complement of the existing family of F scales.     

Relations between Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-A scales and Rorschach variables with the scope and severity of maltreatment among adolescents

This study examined preexisting Rorschach (Exner, 2001) and Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-A (MMPI-A; Butcher et al., 1992) profiles to determine if selected MMPI-A scales and Rorschach variables would jointly associate with the number and severity of maltreatment subtypes (physical abuse, sexual abuse, neglect, and emotional maltreatment) of 157 adolescents (ages 14-17) with documented maltreatment histories. The Maltreatment Classification System was used to systematically code the maltreatment attributes. Six Rorschach variables (MOR, PER, Afr, SumY, SumC', Human Content) were significantly correlated with the number of maltreatment subtypes, but none of the anticipated MMPI-A scales were related. MMPI-A Scale 7 and Rorschach variables Ego, MOR, and PER were jointly associated with physical abuse severity. MMPI-A Scale 0 and Rorschach variables MOR, PER, SumY, SumC', PTI, Human Content, and Texture jointly associated with sexual abuse severity. This study supports the potential for certain MMPI-A scales and Rorschach variables to reflect the impact of adolescents' maltreatment experiences in terms of the number and severity of types of maltreatment experienced. Because both instruments captured different aspects of adolescents' maltreatment experiences, clinicians should consider using both when evaluating the impact of maltreatment on adolescents.     

Incremental validity of selected MMPI-A content scales in an inpatient setting

To date, relatively few studies have been published evaluating the validity or incremental validity of the content scales from the adolescent version of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-A; J. N. Butcher et al., 1992). A sample of 629 psychiatric inpatient adolescents who had completed the MMPI-A was used to evaluate the ability of selected clinical and content scales to predict conceptually related clinical variables. Criteria were based on clinician ratings, admission and discharge diagnoses, and chart reviews. Results from hierarchical multiple and logistic regression analyses indicated the content scales offered incremental validity over the clinical scales and supported the use of the content scales as an adjunct to the traditional clinical scales.     

Psychoanalytic Theory and the Rorschach (Book)

The purpose of this study was to explore how Mexican American adolescents (N = 120) would perform on the MMPI-A given that Hispanic adolescents were seriously underrepresented in the national norming sample during the development of the MMPI-A. The participants completed the MMPI-A, a short demographic questionnaire, and a 5-item version of the Acculturation Rating Scale for Mexican Americans. Results indicated that the present sample of Mexican American adolescents' performance on the Validity, Clinical, and Content scales differed minimally from the national norming group's performance, and their performance varied as a function of their levels of acculturation and socioeconomic status. Implications of these data are discussed.