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.     

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 predictive capacity of the MMPI-2 and PAI validity scales and indexes to detect coached and uncoached feigning

The objective of this study was to examine the relative effectiveness of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) validity scales and indexes to detect malingering. Research participants were either informed (coached) or not informed (uncoached) about the presence and operating characteristics of the validity scales and instructed to fake bad on both the MMPI-2 and PAI. The validity scale and index scores produced by these research participants were then compared to those scores from a bona fide sample of psychiatric patients (n = 75). Coaching had no effect on the ability of the research participants to feign more successfully than those participants who received no coaching. For the MMPI-2, the Psychopathology F scale, or F(p), proved to be the best at distinguishing psychiatric patients from research participants instructed to malinger, although the other F scales (i.e., F and Fb) were also effective. For the PAI, the Rogers Discriminant Function index (RDF) was clearly superior to the other PAI fake-bad validity indicators; neither the Negative Impression Management scale nor Malingering Index were effective at detecting malingered profiles in this study. Overall, RDF proved to be marginally superior to F and F(p) in distinguishing MMPI-2 and PAI protocols produced by research participants asked to malinger and psychiatric patients. Both the RDF and the F and F(p) scales, however, were able to increase the predictive capability of one another.     

Another look at paradoxical severity effects in head injury with the Personality Assessment Inventory

Previous investigations of psychiatric symptomatology after head injury using the MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) have consistently revealed greater Basic scale elevations in mild injuries versus more severe injuries. In this study, we tested this pattern of paradoxical severity effects using the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991). We gathered PAI and MMPI-2 data from 34 patients with moderate-to-severe head injuries and from 52 patients with mild head injuries. MMPI-2 Basic scale profiles were consistent with the paradoxical severity effect; mild injury patients had significantly more elevated scores on four Basic scales (Scales 1, 2, 3, and 7). PAI Clinical scale profiles showed significantly more elevated scores among mild injury patients on 2 scales, Somatization and Depression, and more elevated scores among moderate-to-severe patients on 2 scales, Antisocial Features and Alcohol Problems. We consider unique contributions of the PAI for the psychological assessment of head injury.     

Detecting random, partially random, and nonrandom Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 protocols

The ability of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; J. N. Butcher et al., 2001) validity scales to detect random, partially random, and nonrandom MMPI-2 protocols was investigated. Investigations included the Variable Response Inconsistency scale (VRIN), F, several potentially useful new F and VRIN subscales, and Fb- F>or=30 and Fb>or=90. Protocols completed by 150 adults participating in custody evaluations at a juvenile court setting, screened for randomness with a matched-pair Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (T. Millon, R. Davis, & C. Millon, 1997), were compared with 500 computer-generated all-random protocols and with three levels of partially random protocols. VRIN was the most effective scale in detecting uninterpretable random protocols; however, VRIN >or= 80 failed to identify 37% of them. Fb- F>or=30 and Fb>or=90 misidentified 41% of the 50%-65% random protocols as partially interpretable. Using the new scales, a decision algorithm was described that correctly classified 97%-100% of the protocols as interpretable, partially interpretable, or uninterpretable.     

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.     

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.     

The utility of the PAI and the MMPI-2 for discriminating PTSD, depression, and social phobia in trauma-exposed college students

This study investigated the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Revised (MMPI-2; Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) and the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991) with regard to each instrument's utility for discriminating post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) from depression and social phobia in a sample of college students with mixed civilian trauma exposure. Participants were 90 trauma-exposed undergraduates (16 male, 74 female) classified into one of four groups: PTSD, depressive disorders, social phobia, and well-adjusted. For both the PAI and the MMPI-2, profile analysis revealed that the groups differed in the elevation and shape of their profiles. The PAI Traumatic Stress subscale demonstrated good discriminant validity.     

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.     

Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) Profiles of Male Veterans With Combat-Related Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

The Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; L. C. Morey, 1991) is a promising tool for the assessment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), but few studies have examined the PAI profiles of individuals with the diagnosis. In this study, the PAI was administered to 176 combat veterans with PTSD. Results showed significant elevations on scales measuring depression, somatic complaints, anxiety, anxiety-related disorders, schizophrenia, and negative impression management. The Traumatic Stress subscale was the highest point in the mean score profile and was moderately correlated with several established measures of PTSD. Veterans with and without comorbid major depression differed on PAI scales assessing depression, anxiety, and warmth. Analysis of two-point codetypes for the PAI and the MMPI-2 revealed substantial heterogeneity in symptom endorsement on both instruments, suggesting that there may be no clear PTSD profile on either instrument. Results provide a reference point for future work with the PAI in PTSD samples.     

Validity rates of the Personality Assessment Inventory and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 in a VA Medical Center Setting

In this study, we compared protocol validity rates between the MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) and the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991) in a veteran population. Veterans (N=472) were administered both instruments as part of routine psychological evaluations. Profile validity was based on previously published criteria. When applying primary validity indicators, inpatients produced significantly fewer invalid PAI profiles (37%) than MMPI-2 profiles (63%). We found similar results among outpatients for which we considered 47% of MMPI-2 profiles invalid compared to only 21% of PAI profiles. When applying both primary and supplementary validity indicators, both inpatients and outpatients continued to produce fewer invalid PAI profiles than MMPI-2 profiles. We discuss factors that may be related to the differences in validity rates.     

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.     

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.     

Validity of the Personality Assessment Inventory Aggression scales and Violence Potential index in veterans with PTSD

In this study, we examined the validity of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991) Aggression (AGG) scales and Violence Potential index (VPI) in 399 male combat veterans presenting for formal evaluation of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The AGG scales exhibited convergence with other measures of hostility and violence and demonstrated discriminant validity with alternative constructs. When we examined reports of interpersonal violence in the past year, the AGG composite scale displayed substantial incremental validity over the effects of PTSD severity, demographics, a simple dichotomous question regarding violence in the past 30 days, and MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) scales measuring aggression. The VPI, however, added no unique explanatory power over the AGG composite scale.     

MMPI-2 Assessment of Varying Levels of Posttraumatic Stress in Vietnam Combat Veterans

The effectiveness of the MMPI-2 in the detection of posttraumatic stress (PTS) symptomatology was investigated. Forty-nine veterans at a VA posttraumatic stress clinic were evaluated for PTS symptomatology according to DSM-III-R criteria. The ability of the MMPI-2 to differentiate between Vietnam combat veterans (VCV) who met DSM-III-R criteria for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD; N = 36) and those who reported varying levels of posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS; N = 13) was examined. Overall, the MMPI-2 was effective in differentiating between the two groups of veterans. Of the 15 MMPI-2 scales used to evaluate PTS symptomatology, 12 significantly differentiated veterans with PTSD from those with PTSS. Diagnostic efficiency statistics for the MMPI-2 PTSD scales (PS and PK) were calculated at four cutoff points (T 65, 70, 75, and 80). The PS Scale was the most robust and effective index in differentiating between veterans with PTSD and those with PTSS. Implications for the assessment of varying degrees of PTS are discussed.     

Classification accuracy of MMPI-2 validity scales in the detection of pain-related malingering: a known-groups study

The purpose of this study was to determine the accuracy of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 2nd edition (MMPI-2; Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) validity indicators in the detection of malingering in clinical patients with chronic pain using a hybrid clinical-known groups/simulator design. The sample consisted of patients without financial incentive (n = 23), nonmalingering patients with financial incentive (n = 34), patients definitively determined to be malingering based on published criteria ( n = 32), and college students asked to simulate pain-related disability (n = 26). The MMPI-2 validity scales differentiated malingerers from nonmalingerers with a high degree of accuracy. Hypochondriasis and Hysteria were also effective. For all variables except Scale L, more extreme scores were associated with higher specificity. This study demonstrates that the MMPI-2 is capable of differentiating intentional exaggeration from the effects on symptom report of chronic pain, genuine psychological disturbance, and concurrent stress associated with pursuing a claim in a medico-legal context.     

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.     

Susceptibility of the MMPI-2 clinical, restructured clinical (RC), and content scales to overreporting and underreporting

The authors examined and compared the susceptibility of three Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) scale sets (Clinical, Restructured Clinical [RC], and Content) to over- and underreporting using five analog samples. Two samples of 85 and 191 undergraduate students, respectively, took the MMPI-2 under underreporting versus standard instructions. Three samples consisting of 42 undergraduates, 73 psychiatric inpatients, and 84 medical patients took the MMPI-2 under overreporting versus standard instructions. A comparison of the effect sizes across the three sets of scales indicated that Clinical Scale scores are not less susceptible to distortion than the Content or RC Scales. An apparent lesser susceptibility to underreporting for the Clinical Scales was an artifact of the subtle items' effect on these scales.     

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).