Stability of the personality and symptom scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory

This study examines the stability of the basic and pathological personality and symptom scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI) in three clinical samples. Consistent with the theory upon which the MCMI is based, higher stability estimates were found among basic personality scales in comparison with symptom scales. However, stability estimates which included initial MCMI administrations at intake into treatment were generally lower than those based upon administrations which occurred later in the treatment process. This later finding suggests the need to consider timing of administration when interpreting the MCMI.     

An examination of the relationship between personality patterns and symptom/mood patterns

Relationships between various personality styles measured by the basic and pathological personality scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI) and mood or symptom states measured by the Profile of Mood State scales were examined. The MCMI personality scale-POMS symptom/mood scale relationships found in this study are compared with MCMI personality scale-MMPI and SCL-90 symptom/mood scale relationships reported in the MCMI manual. Consistent associations of moderate strength were found between: (a) the MCMI Compulsive-Conforming and Passive-Aggressive (Negativistic) scales (negative and positive associations, respectively) and various measures of depression, anxiety and hostility; (b) the MCMI Avoidant, Schizotypal and Borderline-Cycloid scales and various measures of depression and anxiety; (c) the MCMI Schizoid-Asocial scale and various measures of depression; and (d) the Histrionic-Gregarious scale and various measures of high energy-activity. These MCMI personality scale-symptom/mood scale relationships are generally consistent both with the underlying theory of personality and psychopathology upon which the MCMI is based and with the personality-symptom scale relationships found within the MCMI.     

Evaluation of evidence for sufficiency, for necessity, and for necessity-and-sufficiency

We report two experiments with 120 undergraduate subjects. The tasks presented clearly articulated hypotheses concerning necessity, sufficiency, and necessity-and-sufficiency, together with possible combinations of treatment conditions, and required subjects to judge whether, according to the hypotheses, the relevant outcomes will occur, will not occur, or might occur. The patterns of responses reveal how subjects understand the extensions of the concepts, i.e. what each hypothesis permits, requires, and excludes. Only necessity-and-sufficiency hypotheses generally led to logically adequate responses, and the most typical error for both necessity hypotheses and sufficiency hypotheses was to treat them as extensionally equivalent to necessity-and-sufficiency. This error tendency was more evident for necessity than for sufficiency hypotheses. Further, although responses to both necessity hypotheses and sufficiency hypotheses were affected by the complexity of the hypothesized conditions, responses to necessity-and-sufficiency hypotheses were not. We argue that the results are not a function of a response bias but reflect differences in the way the hypotheses are understood. Implications for the causal attribution literature are discussed.     

Activation of semantic and phonological codes during reading

Three experiments used a new paradigm to examine word-coding processes during reading. Subjects read text passages and occasionally responded to lexical-decision probes. Experiment 1 focused on semantic and surface codes. The activation of semantic codes appeared to increase over time, whereas surface codes did not. In addition, subjects who were instructed to remember the exact wording of the passages showed stronger activation of surface codes than did subjects who read for comprehension. Experiments 2 and 3 explored the role of phonological codes. Experiment 2 showed that phonological codes were activated by specific words in a passage. In contrast, Experiment 3 found no evidence that phonological codes were activated by the more general passage context. Taken together, the experiments suggest some of the roles semantic and phonological codes may play during reading.