MMPI-2™ (MINNESOTA MuUITIPHASIC PERSONALITY INVENTORY—2™) MANUAL FOR ADMINISTRATION, SCORING, AND INTERPRETATION REVISED EDITION The Restandardization Committee of the University of Minnesota Press James N. BUTCHER, JOHN R. GraHam, Yosser S. BEN-PORATH, AUKE TELLEGEN, W. Grant DAHLSTROM BEVERLY KAEMMER, COORDINATOR FOR THE PRESS University OF MINNESOTA Press MINNEAPOUS Scanned with CamScanner 'published by: University of Minnesota Press Disiruted by: NCS Pearson Inc. AIMPE2 (Minnesota Multiphasie Personality nventory-2) Manual for Administration, Scomns and Interpretation, Revised Edition Copyright © 2001 The Regents of the Universit ‘of Minnesota, All rights reserved, Distributed excl- sively by NCS Pearson, Inc. under license from the University of Minnesota. canpr ia registered uademark and “Minnesota Maltiphasic Personality Inventory-2" and “MMPI-2” are trademarks of the University of Minnesova. WARNING: No pan of this manual, oF the inventory, answer and recording forms, norms, and aennna keys associated with it may be reproduced in any form of printing or By any other means, electronic oF mechanical, including, but not limited to, photocopying, audiovisual recording and baleen and pontayal or eupiation in any information storage and retrieval system, without srmission in writing from NCS Pearson, Inc., PO Box 1416, Mi 727 Cee ee onssor inneapolis, MN 55440 800-627 Printed in Ue United States of America, BODE Scanned with CamScannerINTRODUCTION, 1 Development of the Original MMPI, 1 Development of the MMPI-2, 3 Preparation of the National Norms 4 Derivation of Standardized Scores, 5 Basic QUALIFICATIONS FOR Use; ADMINISTERING, SCORING, AND PROFILING THE MMPI-2, 7 Qualifications, 7 Tnterprofessional Relationships 8 “Administering the MMPI2, 8 “Appropriateness of the MMPI? for Adolescents, 10 Scoring the MMPL-2, 10 Complesing the Validiey and Clinical Scales Profile, 11 INTERPRETATION OF THE MMPI-2, 13 i col Acceprabiliys 14 Determining Proto “The Clinical Scales, 24 The Content Seales: 32 “The Supplementary Scales: 36 Case Examples, Rererences, 53 canned with CamscannerT- Minnesors Muphasic Panonl Tove rory-2™ (MMFL-2™) isa broad-band test designed ro assess a number ofthe major patterns of personality and poychologial dione. ean be administered eaily ro an individual arto groups A sixth-grade elementary school level of reading comprehension is quired, ay i a stir facrory degree of cooperation and commitment tw the tak of completing the inventory. The test provides internal checks to identify when these gencral requirements have not been satisfied. The IMPI2 provides objective sores and profiles based on well-documented national norms. Re search on che MMPL2 seales and their parernt (of incerelacionship, a well as research on the ‘original MMPI® scales, is available ro guide inter- pretation of MMPI-2 est scores. The research lie- rare provides « wealch of data on the ways in which che MMPI? can be applied in various assessment sertings. Computer-bsed inverpreive services providing « wide range of diagnostic and ‘seesiment hypotheses are also avaiable, DEVELOPMENT OF THE ORIGINAL MMPI “The inventory was developed in a hospieal secting, at the University of Minnesota on groups of pa- tients and nonpatients (visitors to the wards and dinics who volunteered to take the tet during, the ime spent waiting for fiends or relatives receiving medical retment). These nonpatients ‘were representative of the adult population of che state of Minnesora during the 1930s: mosdy mar- fied, ranging in age from 16 ro 63 and averaging in their mid-thites, living in small towns or ru- ral areas, with an eighth-grade education. Hathaway and McKinley began work on the tescin the late 1930s and in 1940 published their first ance on the inventory (Hathaway & Mc- Kinley, 1940), initially called the Minnesosa Per- sonality Schedile. In this article they summarized the steps they had followed in writing and editing the items, having gained ideas for potential items from many rourcer, induding a number of tex fon paychiacric interviewing and differential diag- nosis, social and emotional atitudes, and person- ality processes. Each irer was: in the forma ‘fz statement of some personal experience, belief, atinude, or concern. ‘The content of the original items reflected the range of prychiatti, medical, and neurological disorders in which the investigators were interest. ed. Aficr considerable preliminary work on the schedule, Hathaway and McKinley added new items to cover genderrole characteristics and a defensive style of self-presentation. These addi tions broughe the original number of items to '350. (Some versions of che MMPI included the 30, the test record may be invalid (sce Table 5). Two important caveats to this general rule of thumb should be considered before deciding that a pro- tocel is completely invalid based on excessive item omissions. First, to facilicare an abbreviated test administration, all of the items needed to score the original validity scales (L, Band K) and the clinical seales appear within che first 370 items. Therefore, in a protocol characterized by ‘cxcessive item omission, if most of the Cannot Say responses occur after item 370, there is no reason to question the validity of scores on the scales just mentioned on the bass of excessive item omission. Second, many computerized scor ing systems now provide for each scale the per- centage of items answered by the respondent. ‘This information can be used to determine whether, and to whar extent, item omissions have affected cach of the MMPI-2 scales, including the remaining validity indicacors. Because excessive item omissions can affect all other MMPI-2 scales, this index should always be examined first ‘After determining whether a sufficient number of test items has been answered, the interpreter should next turn to the MMPI-2 messuces of inconsistent responding.) @ MEASURES OF INCONSISTENT RESPONDING (VRIN (Variable Response Inconsistency) Seale ‘and TRIN (Tiue Response Inconsistency) Scale ‘These scales, fashioned after similar eee developed by Tellegen (1982, 1988), complement the peat rt validity indicators. Neither scale reflects particular item content, as do meas- tures of the tendencies to ike good or dissimulate poor prychological functioning. Rather, VRIN and TRIN scores provide an index of the test- takers tendency to respond ro items in ways that are inconsistent or contradictory. Both VRIN and TRIN consist of pairs of spe- cially selected items. The members of each VRIN item paic have either similar or opposite content; cach pur is cored for the occurrence of an ineon- sistency in the responses to the two items. (For cach item pair, either one or two response pat- terns are scored as inconsistent. For example, for item pair 3/39, only a True response to both items is scored as inconsistent; for item pair 6/ 90, both a True response to item 6 and a False response to item 90 and vice versa are scored as inconsistent) The raw score on the VRIN scale is the total number of item pairs answered inconsis- tently. A high VRIN score (above T score 79) is a warning that a respondent answered the invento- zy items in an inconsistent manner and indicates that che protocol is invalid and uninterpretable. (Gee Table 6 for interpretive guidelines for the VRIN scale) ‘The TRIN scale, unlike VRIN, is made up exclusively of item paits that are opposite in con- tent. In this case, inconsistency is scored as fol- ‘a testtaker respond: inconsistently by answeting True to both items of certain pairs, one point is added to the TRIN raw score; if she or he responds inconsistently by answering False to cernin item pairs, one point is subtracted. A con- stant is added to the raw scores to avoid negative values, and this score is converted to aT score. AILTRIN T scores are set to be equal to or great- cr than 50. For example ifthe original score is. 15 Scanned with CamScanner16 ay) 8 - implications of Scores Interpretive Fossbities Possible Reasons ‘TSeore Level __ Profle Vaity {or Coven 20 Proll is vad Roading ccues Corfusion Intentional randont responding rein rocordng reepanges 65-70 Carsosaness ccasionalioss of chwacteind by cancentaton 1019 consistent ‘ospookig 404 Protos vad 30-90 Prof is vals one standard deviation above the mi ing yea-taying, ic will be assigned a T-score value of 60T. Ifthe original score is one standard devia- tion below the mean, indicating nay-saying, it will be assigned a T-score value of 60F. The “I” and “F” notations are used in computerized scor- ing reports and Appendix Tables A-1 through A-4 in this manual, designating the direction of indis ‘riminate fixed responding found in the protocol (The hand-scored profile sheets contain separate columns for TRIN True and False scores). T scores grearer than 79 on TRIN (in cither the ‘True or False direction) indicate an excessive level of yea- of nay-saying, reising questions about the protocol’ interpretability. (See Table 7 for inte:- pretive guidelines for the TRIN scale.) TRIN and VRIN complement the remaining MMPI-2 validity scales in unique and useful ways. For example, high scores on the infrequency scales combined with a high VRIN score indicate 1 profile that is uninterpresable owing to random responding, If VRIN is not elevated, however, random reiponding isles likely to account for dlevations on the infiequency scales which may, then, be interpreted as reflecting either true psy- chopathology or deliberate efforts to fake bad. To take another example, high scores on the de- fensiveness indicators L, K, and S (which consist primarily of False-keyed items) combined with a high TRIN-False score, likely reflect indiscrimi- nate False-tesponding (nonacquiescence) rather “Tha profi ie unierpretale ‘The profile is hely htorpetable; however, cautionary statement shoul be made abot some incensetent respording being present As theT score on VAIN ‘apgroaches 79, he cavtonary statement shoud te ampitied. “The test ahr wa able to understand and respond lo ‘he tems in a consistent mancer. ‘The tester wes partularycautous and deberae in responding tothe tems. than defensiveness. On the other hand, high scores on the defensiveness indicators coupled swith an average score on TRIN reflect defensive- ness rather than the effects of response set.) (@)MEASURES OF INFREQUENT RESPONDING (The MMPL-2 has three measures of infrequent responding, designed ro alert the interpreter to the presence of an unusual pattern of answers to the tes items and its possible causes. There are, csecntidlly, dhrce non-murually exclusive reasons why an individual may provide a relatively lage number of infrequent responses to the MMPI-2: (1) random or fixed responding. (2) accurate desciiption of severe psychopathology, and (3) faking bad, a deliberate effort to portray oneself in an overly negative manner. A comparison of scores on the infrequency scales and the consis- tency scales assists the interpreter in clarifying the meaning of scores on the primary infrequency indicator, the F scale) F (Infiequency) Scale (The F scale is made up of 60 items endorsed in- frequently by the original MMP! normative sam- ple. Elevated scores on this scale indicate chat the respondent provided a large numberof infiequent and therefore unlikely answers to the MMPL-2 items, Individuals who respond randomly to the MMPI-2, cither intentionally or unintentionally Scanned with CamScannerIntro Posies eT roles vai ‘Acquescertesponsa so! —_Pralta unineprotbl est7oT Presa Paral acquessent role cho be Inapetd wh cation. Parise rower is responce set tonto shoul be paid Seals Land S ose ‘haracenzed Dy oars maybe arttecualycofeled ovrg to ha same soquesseres ona: oT a roi ie wae oer can Pies yak: Part nenaequiecont Profle shoul be hpreted wit cautor.Pancular weve, reponse set tention eheud be pai to Seales LK, and S, wns chancerves ‘ee maybe anttatualy elevated owing tthe by some non reeponce et aoquoscence 2a Pros iat Nenacauescent Pros suninepeabe, response set (eg. because of reading difficulties), produce an smal numberof infrequent responses ro the ext, resulting in elevated scores on the F scale, To deemine whether an clevaed sore on Fis a product of random responding, the VRIN scale thould be examined It ci elevated beyond T score 79, the profile is marked by excessive ran- dom responding and is, therefore, invalid and tninterpreable, Ifthe VRIN score fll within ‘normal limizs, random responding can be ruled ‘out as a reason for elevation on the F scale. Next, {he TRIN scale should be examined. If is ele- sated beyond 797 in either the Tue or Fale di rection, fixed responding may be the primary rea- \Py #00 for the elevation on F, and the profile should be considered invalid and untaterpretable. If both VRIN and TRIN are within normal limits, che incerpreee then nceds to different enue reporting of severe psychopathology and faking bad as sources of elevation on F __ Because severe psychopathology is uncommon in he general population, individuals who des- ctbe sceuatly the presence of severe psycho Pathological symptoms produce elevated scores ‘on che F scale. The Infiequency-Psychopathology \wAy (Pp) scale (ee description below) can help differ Enliate berween genuine paychopathology and fing bad easoues ofCoeaon on fF lerated in a non-random profile, and the Fp T Score is greater than 99, the profile is marked by Significant overreporting of psychopathology and iatc berween is therefore likely invalid owing to faking bad. Tf, ‘on the other hand, Fp is below T score 70, the levared scote on F likely reflects accurate report ing of severe psychopathology and, consequently, provided that there are no other questions about protocel validity, che profile may be interpreted. Scores inthe 70-99 range represent increasing levels of overreporting of psychopathology, probs- bly reflecting symptom exaggeration of a “ery for help.” Because of the F scale's sensitivity to accurately reported severe psychopathology, recommended guidelines for inerpretive possibilities differ as a function of the prevalence of such pathology across settings. Tables 8-10 provide recommend cd interpretive possibilities for inpatient and out- patient clinical sertings as well as for nonclinical settings which take into account these differences actos sexcngs) Fy (Back F) Scale Pi Fase apa infgcne sponding to the later part of the test andl assists in identify pena e eancipcie ae MMPI-2 that occur over the course ofthe test administration, To allow for an abbreviated administration of the test (see page 13) all ofthe F scale items appear within the fist 370 iceas. Consequently, the Fscsle cannot identify changes in the individual’ test-taking approach that occur afier he or she has answered the items in the first Scanned with CamScanner 7TABLE 8. F(infroquenoy) Seno: Impllentlons of Sores In npalont To Fn Sonlen! Prova bron ier Pas 07,0 pte ‘reaped agndng «VAN TN toe T 7, ” eden geno i erent He oa fainted Fra es oren pow tam nab oy va plow peep Felt 0, Pen aang pacers an ANT wea Sees tna oro shay 8009 Nay bo xaggoratn of xieg ‘conde exaggerto of syrptors, perhaps asa ery org, son toa! uy ea sm aya restr sce wpe anb peep problens. xamie delenahanoss sales, parteualy Lo ss Maybe dotonsie detomie whether es: takermay be denying oF rising morale ets. TABLES. F (Infrequency) Scale: Implications of Scores in Outpatient Clinical Settings Possible Reasons ‘TSoue Level Profle Val fe Elrain Intoprotv Possbiies 290 Maybe invalid andonxed responding _‘NVRINer TRIN s above Tszore 79, tis san iva Severe psychopaholyy _—_and unitrprelabl prof. both are win noral Faking baa lit, Fp shouldbe examined. Fic alo win ronal is, tis ket a valid profile retocting severe pajehopahelogy Fp is abovo 100, te test-takers ‘verepering psychopathology in an atop to appear more dturbed than he or seis in eat. 08 May be Exaggorato of exting Consider exaggeration of symptoms, puhaps as ‘ey exaggerated, ‘problems forty but heli vai 50 Unely aid Tesla accurately reported a number ol psyetoogical probles. so May be delaras Examine doencivenass cca o detomine wear the {astaker may be denying or minimizing meta eath cites. art of the test. Fy is made up of 40 items it i Ps Fp is made up of 40 items that symptoms. In addition, elevations may reflect a appear throughout he acer part of the test. They _ change in the test-takers approach to the tet if F scab Hering te th ef na tnd theT soe on Fy is gale frequently byw Sere se a a substantially higher than the F scale score. Setsoageiad dee w eFoalstFevee_minevhaiers Ritema dere be aoe is also ten to random ot fixed responding, én the indivicual’s approach to in MMPI severe psychopathology, and overreporting of described in Table 11, when the MMPI-2 is Scanned with CamScannerTABLE 101 F (iniroquency) Bo EScor Loves Pre Vali 200 May ove Ferecrsines rngerirg ever pychegtabay Fokeg bad 17 Maybe Enoggaraton of eiing ‘xoggertes, probire ut tka on ost Uy vals <0 Maybe defen In Nonolintoal Satitngs Iron ttn Yor Tas ose 08 7, i ‘nah cpt pt, Nth a0 i eal lia, Fy adh ta zai NF y al tin ts, Wo uy 6 pin otc vere popconatiinngy Fp aera Wh, tthe ‘assert yoyteaitebny man eergh to ‘nt rea Cut aba Fm key. Consider exaggeration of yen, yrhags waa xy fora? Teeater accurate ose is ohr crc, eyeliner, Examinn donenencs eile cctemina whee ‘70 testaher mx bo deryeg or miirézng ments hath cies. administered in clinical settings, such a change in indicated when the T seore on Fy, exceeds 109 and is at east 30 points greater than the'T score on F In nonclinical settings a significant change is indicated when the Fp T score exceeds 69 and is atleast 30 points greater than the T score on ‘Whenever a significant change is indicated by the pattern of scores on Fy, and F, caution should be ‘cxciciscd in interpreting seales thar have items in the lacer part of the test, primarily the MMPL-2 conteat sales) Fp (Infrequency-Prychopathology) Seale (The Fp scale provides a measure of infrequent re- sponding that is less sensitive than F to the pees- cence of severe psychopathology. Arbisi and Ben- Porath (1995) developed the scale by identifying 27 MMPI-2 items that were answered infrquently bby members of the normative sample and indi- viduals receiving inpatient psychiatric treatment. As described above under the F scale, scores on Fp, can asist in differentiating elevations on F that are a product of genuine psychopathology TSoretevl fife Vly pre Poster Cuno. serrnes Zid Naybeinaid ——-Ranhnbedvepnirg ToT xowonF sli conpand ioe Taare Some peereparongy on. Fy ata 0 Taso por peat, Fargtes faaca#gptan hang nt ers tpn lays iremoring tat latr put ta wet Sr rte late pt be wt, econ seen Ss nt be ere / woncunea.sermics > Maytomald ——~aontuedsercng ToT cro en Fy eld congas aT ace Sewrepchpebalgy en NF kaa SDT pons pee purges fetes tegecartcrarge nb st rs gph Charge heoning ——tat pct tt Seaee wn tee be tio par of thet et certom scale) shou net Deinterete.. 19 Scanned with CamScannerFro those that result faam overreporting, after random atl Bxed responding have heer ruled out hase on the VRIN and TRIN scales, Table 12 provides tegommended interpretations for dif ferent levels of Fy These recon based on research conducted primarily in clinkal seatings.) (©) MEASURES OF DEFENSIVENESS (in completing the MMT'-2, some individuals provide an overly positive sel presentation. Such 4 defensive res-taking approach may distort the respondent’ scores on the dinieal, content, and supplementary scales. The MMPI-2 defensiveness scales are designed to alert the interpreter to the presence and degree of defensiveness in atest protocel.) L (Lie) Seale lathaway and McKinley developed the L seale to ‘ass the likelihood that the test-taker approached the instrument with a defensive mind set, The scale’ items provide the respondent the opporni- nity to deny various minor faults and character flaws that most individuals are quite willing to 2c- Imowledge as being true of themselves. Although the L scale can reflec deceie inthe test-taking sruation, ic should not necessarily be viewed a5 a measure of any general tendency to lic, fabricate, ‘or deceive others on the part of individuals in their day-to-day activities. Rather, it serves as an index of the likelihood that a given test proto- ‘ol may be distorted by this particular style of se=ponding to the inventory. Because all ofthe items on L are keyed False, itis essential that the TRIN scale be examined for possible acquiescent cor nonacquiescent response styles prior to inter- preting scores on L. _/ TABLE 12. Fp (lalrequency-Psychopathology) Scal “Tables 13 and! 14 indicate interpretive possibil- iti For different levels of elevation on L in elini= cal and nonclinical settings respectively. T scores greater than 79 in either setting likely teflect an profile matked either by pervasive non- quiescence (if TRIN it grater than 79F) or fak- ing good manifested in « pervasive and rather unsophisticaced pattern of denial of minor fauls and shortcomings. Differences between the two tables reflect differential motivational scts thar ray be present in the two types of setings. In nonclinical settings, particularly when there exits a strong press for presenting oneseiFin the most favorable manner (eg, employment and child custody cvalustions), moderate elevations on L are common and do not necessarily indicate an invalid profile In clinical sertings, denial of shortcomings is less likely to occur, although itis sometimes found in patients with psychotic dis- orders charscterized by paranoid delusions. In- dividuale who come from very traditional families which they were raised co aspire ro the kinds of virtues included among the L items may pro duce moderate elevations on this scale thar do not reflect a fake-good test-taking approach.) (K (Correction) Seale “The K seale was developed to astess an individ. tals lovel of defensivenes in responding to the MMPI-2 items and to correct for the effee this response style has on clinical scale scores. Ic was designed co identify a less blatant form of defea- siveness than is reflected in elevations on L. Indi- viduals who produce elevated scores on the K scale are unlikely o report significant prychologi- cal problems in response to the MMPL2 inca ‘This, in itself, does noc indicate thar chere are problems that are being covered up, However, an levated score on K means that it is not possible Impileations of Score Possbe Ressies Score Level Profie vatty for Eevatcn LeteyrotivePossties 210 Unely val Fandom responairg LUVAIN or TRIN i above T seo 79, thee en iad ating bad ‘nd unniopretatla profi, F both are win nema lis, the tetiater& overepotingpeychepathlogy In anaterp to agpear maa ditrbed than he or shes inreally, 70-9 [Uke exaggerated, Exaygeratin of existing Corder oxaggerton ol symptoms, perhaps es a ‘batmay bo vata probioms “erytorhalp” se Ly vat ‘Toottahar eceuatelydescsbed curent mera heath abs, Scanned with CamScanner —én Clinical Settings Inervatv Possbiios TABLE 13. L (Lie) Scale: implications of Se Possible Rovaont EScw Lovol__ Poti Vasty {or Etoviton A) bay iva Fahing good Pewvatha ronarquescence e570 Mey beinwaia Faling good Trina bschgound Moder onacauesconce <6 Ley raid. IVTRIN a grostr than TOF, tho protocol is characte ty pervetvepatiom of renaccuiesonce ard i, tbeelore Iva and uinteprtbl. TAIN within ranma iis, he igh Leora ret avery org fatten ol aking god end a aay inva test protec. IFTAN nthe 65*-76F range, the slevaton on L Ikaly rete + moteraia patter of ronacquiescence rater than fting bad, TR is within normal es, ‘hw abvaton on Lely rellects a rater unsophstcated fatten of aking geod. The higher the L sore, the (eater the tkelnoed tat re MP2 scales ¢o not sccutely represent excting paychopatolgy BLE 14. L (Lin) Scale: Implioat in Nonetinical Settings rere Possiiies Possible Reasees Sewe Lovel__ Profi Valty for Elvaon 28) Une vals Falina 900d Povashe ronacquescence 079 May be ima Moderate ating 00d Mederae nonacquescence e589 ‘Quesvonany vaio Overy positve sel presentation 6084 Ley vad Unsopisticated olesivenoss <8 vets {TAN is greater an TF the protools characte ya parative patem of nenactuescence ard i, Inerloe, raid and uintepreble. TRIN win ‘oral nts, fe igh L sore reflects avery org pat ot taking god znd a tney inte proteot [TAN is ine 65F-79F rage, the elevation on IWelyrefects a madera pati of ronacquiescence ‘ther han fang. TRIN witin normals, be tlevebonon Lite ofects a moderate and rer nsophistate pate of ekng good. The ngner ne secre, the great’ he ikestood that the MNPL2 rote may nal accurately represent existng psyehopanoeny. ‘esyondent key minnized psychobgical and behav- ‘ra ities. Ths may resut 1 underestimation f pesblone Respondent denied mior faults and shotcamrings hat nos peoole ehnowedye readily, paras owing © ‘ho tole! atts mht of is best iret to do so. Tastisker may cone fom «tastoral background, to rule out the presence of psychological difficul ties based on che MMPI-2 profile. T ulaily truc for scales that are very direct in asess- ing peychopathology such as the MMP!-2 content teales. Because all but one of the K scale items are keyed False. it is essential chat the TRIN scale be is parcic- cxamined for possible acquiescent or nonacquies- cent response styles prior vo interpreting deviant scores on K. Tables 15 and 16 provide imerpre- tive guidelines for various ranges of scores on the K sealein clinical and nonclinical settings, respec- tively, As isthe case with L, differences beeween a1 i Scanned with CamScannerthe two tables reflect varying motivational sets across the no types of setting (8 (Superlative Self-Presentation) Seale “The S Seale was developed by Butcher and Han (1995) using a modification of the empirical scale evelopment approach, Initially, items we duded in s provisional scale only if they emplri- cally discriminated between a group of extremely efeasive job applicants (sccking airline pilot positions) and members of the MMPI-2 norm- ative sample. The seale was then refined using item anc contere analyses designed to ensure scale homogeneity. Although the S and K scales are highly correlated and both are measures of ness, the K scale items are restricted to defensi TABLE 15. K (Correeton) Scale: Impications of Scores in Clinical Settings Possble Reasons Sev tovel__ Posie Valiy lee Eevaion Ieprtie Possblies 265 May bo ind Fakirggrod I-TRINégetr thar 79, he prc is characterized Panashe by apanasie peter of enarquescence adi, ranecquescone tera, ald and urterpetable. THN is win sonra tins be igh K sce reese dense lestakg gprouch Pat may inate an inal prc va <0 May tials Fakir bed IFTRIN reaterthar 7, the proto is characrtzed Fenasve by aponasie patio of aoqdescence ants, her acqescerce ‘or, iva, TRIN win oral ets, fw K score may be theres akg tad. Nove ns ‘eretonis vara ony i areare elevations ne equeey sees / TABLE 16. K (Correction) Scale: impli Scores in Nonclinical Settings J Posse Reions [Sir Let PoteValdty ty Bevason Inieoreive Fossiies 21s ay te nas Faklg good NTR ret than 75 pote is shancernad Ponashe by apenasie stom ol mnacquescance ands, enacuesconca there, ali andunireretao, TIN win ‘oma ins he igh K score refectsa dlenive tnstakrg aproach hat may inate an ald protec oom ay ve ro Moda {TPs nh 65-79F range, te evatonn K Ahlonvorees holy eects nodeata pater of enacquiexcere Moda ‘ahaha ng good TR is itn nora ts, ronacescerca the devatonon Kay aes a motors ptr of Aoensvoess. Th higher he K sor, te greterthe Wlboo! ht the MP2 pela mayo sca tmpeson extn pxchpatoloy 084 vats <0 May iva Faking bad {TTA groban 7s, he proc is ehaactized Penashe ty aporaste pao of acquescancs ans, he sequeserca {or iva. TRIN win soa its, ow K 007 may bo tho rest el aking bad, However, this lfarotton le waranad ony! hare are eleatione ‘on te inroquaney sales. Scanned with CamScannerthe frst part of the text, whereas the § see tems ave spread throughout the test, A& ie the case with Land X, deviant seores oa S shoul be iterptet= ‘din the contest of the soore on TRIN becstse 44 of the $0 S seae items ave heye! False, Inter revive guidelines tor the S scale are presented in Tables 17 and 18 for clinical and nonclinical set- tings respectively: At iethe ease with L and Ky Aitferenoes in the interpretive possibilities scrost seutings reflect the varying motivational sets. The ssi items were factor analyzed to develop subscales indicating the different conte dives sons that appeared to result in sponding ro the MEL, The five subycles and representative items from eich are provided in “Table 19. These subscales should be examined and interpreted only when the subscale scores ai the fill §seleT score exceed 64.) vlation Index developed by Gough (1950) isa usefal measure of test response dis- simulation or enelorsing an excessive number of problems, Scores beyond +15 are generally preted as “faking bad” or claiming excessive psy- chological problems. Random and fixed response sets may abo generate elevated scores on this lex. Therefore, T scores on VRIN and TRIN should he examined before one concludes that an elevated F-K reflects overreporting of psycho- pathology. ) VALIDITY CASES, #1 AND #2 loge To illustrate how the MMPI-2 validity scales ean assist the interpreter in identifying invalid pro- files, two case examples are provided. Figure 2 TABLE 17_S (Superlative Soll-Presentation) Sot ications of Scores in Clinical Settings Posse Reasons ‘TSsoreLeve! Profi Vlisty for Elevation erretine Posstiies 270 Maybe imal Faking oad [TTR s greater han 78, te protocol is characterized Penasie by aperasve patem otnanacauescarce ads, onacquenearce ther, inva and urinerpretable. TRIN wan rollins, tb high S score rcs a defense ‘eseting appreacn tat may inca an ral protocd, annette 8 subsales Yo deny parole areas of delncivencet. <0 net aia Tseelevel prof vay lo: levaion ‘rtprtv Postitios 275 May be iva Feng ocd 1 TRINIs geater han 7H, he poten schamcerzed Penasive Dyapervase pater of naacquescerce anit, ronacauescarce ‘perl, vali and unintrpretabe. TRIN is wie ‘oma ini, tghS sear rect a delenive ‘est-nting approach thal may heat an rad rotacal, Examino to suscaes ery partular trons of dls, 70% Maybe inva Modarate ITTRIN sin te 65-79 range, ne eleven on S nlonshoress holy rissa madera pater ofronacyuescorce Moderate rather fa oleg good. TFN is win rornal its, ronacauescarce ‘he elevation on S tka otets a rmoseraapatom ch ‘olnsvenss. Te higher 5 sor, he gear the tkelood that be MMPI? pela may nt ecsuratey represen! exitig piychopatlgy Examine he Ssub- Scales tort partovar vas of dotensveness. so vats Scanned with CamScanner24 TABLE 19, S (Superlative Sell-Presentation) Subsct TABLE 19_S (Superlative Sell-Prosentation) Subecaieg Ball in Hunan 104, Most people era honest cll baceus thay ae ata of ing cauant (F) Gooaness 1374. Mest poopo wil us srtevhal una means fo gat aad ina (F) Sp, Sereiy (69, My hardeat tls are wah mal) 19, | equenty red myset woryng about something (F) Sq Conertmen!wihLils 534 I Lcould he my i Je agal, | would rotchange much, (7) 560, | a taflod wi he arountofmaney make 7) Sq Patonen and Deval 212 {gp ad easly and on gat over sor (9) of iebty and Anger 302. | easly become natn wh pen. F) ‘35 DerialotMoralFans 258, Itave used slechoorcesively. (F) ‘ 487, rave enya wseg maruara (F) presents the validity scale profile for Case #1 S,, 2 33-year-old Caucasian male who completed the MMPI-2 in an inpatient psychiatric faciicy par: of an evaluation of his eligibility for disbili- ty benefit. A review of his scores on the MMPI- 2 validity scales indicates that he omitted very few items ( = 2) and provided largely consistent responses to the test questions, However, his ele- vated score on F (T= 113) indicates an excessive gree of infrequent responding, Because VRIN and TRIN are well within normal limics, we can rule out random or fixed responding as sources of the elevation on F. Having ruled out inconsistent responding as a source of the elevation on F for J. S.,we then tura to an examination of his score fon Fp (T = 107), which indicates that he provid- ‘eda large number of responses given infrequently by individuals with severe psychopathology. The combination of high scores on F and Fy, and the within normal limits scores on VRIN and TRIN indicate that J. S. feed bad in responding to the MMPI-2. Asa result, his profil is invalid and uninterpretable. Figure 3 presents the validity scale data for Case #2, R. B, a 29-year-old Affican American female who completed the MMPI-2 as part of the intake procest at a ubstance cbuse treatment program, R. Bs scores on the validity sales in ceate that she responded eo all of the test items @=0). However, her score on VRIN (T= 98) vdicates that she previded an excesiive number of inconsistent responses, strongly suggesting random test-taking response set. In this ease, ek vations on F Fy. and Fp are not necessarily indi- cations of overeporting psychopathology; rates, they area by-product of a random response set that yielded an invalid and uninterpretable MMPI2 profile. Faced with such findings, the test interpreter chould attempt to determine whether the random responding occurred as a result ofa conscious decision by the test-tker not to patticipate meaningfully in the assessment, ox, alternatively, resulted from confusion, reading difficulties, or other unintentional reasons that an individual might provide 2 large number of ran- dom responses to the MMPI-2. @THE CuNICAL ScaLes ‘The MMPI-2 clinical seales are essentially the same as for the original MMFI, but a few items were deleted from some scales because of objec- tionable content. Thus, the large research base that exists concerning correlates of the MMPI clinical scales. 2s well as the rapidly growing re- earch base concerning correlates of the MMPI-2 scales, an be used in generating inferences about test-takers. Harris and Lingoes (1955, 1968) grouped items in some of the lineal scales ito concent homogeneous tubscales. They reasoned that scores atany given T-score level on a clinical sale can result from endorsing different secs of items within the scale and thar understanding the kinds of items endorsed can be helpful in interpreting, elevated scores for a particular test-takers, Because some of the Harsis-Lingocs subscales have very few items and ate relatively unreliable and be- cause there is only limiced research concerning extractest correlates of the subscales, they should not be interpreted independently of their parent scales.{The subscales should be esting when T scores are greater than 64 and when T scores on the parent scales are also greater than Scanned with CamScannetFIQURE 2. Validity Seale Profle for Case at! JS. es oe4ee8 38 VAN TAN F Fy Fp lk 8 Reser 4 3 2 nos 0 5 9 ree TSeoe 46 50 113 67 107 35 3 64 Interpretations of the subscales should be limited to trying ro understand why high scores wer obtained on the parent sels) (ef, Seale 1 (Hs: Hypochondsiasis) This scale was developed using a group of newor- ic patients who showed an excessive concern shout their health, presented a varity of somatic ‘complaines with litle or no organic Bess, and rejected repeated assurances thac there was noth- ing physically wrong with chem. Some of the items comprising this scale eflect particular symptoms or specific complaints, bus many oth- x reflec a more general bodily preoccupation or a self-centered focus. One of the items on the original scale was eliminared because of objec- Sonable content, Ieaving 32 items in the MMPI- 2 version of the scale. A fraction (5) of the raw score on the K scale is added to che raw score on Seale 1. Harris and Lingoes did not develop con- tent subscales for Scale | because they believed the content of its items were very homogeneous. ‘Scale 2 (D: Depression) ‘This scale was developed using psychiatric pa- tients with various forms of symptomatic depres- sion, primarily these with depressive reactions or in a depressive episode of a manic-depressive dis- order. [n the MMPI-2, three items were dropped from Seale 2 because of objectionable content, leaving a total of 57 items. Some items compris- ing this scale reflect the feelings of discourage ment, pessimism, and hopelessness chat character- ite the dinical strus of depressed individuals. ‘Other items cover a variery of symptoms and behaviors, including somatic complaints, worry FIGURE 3. Velldity Scale Profile for Cae #2: A. P. B588388 8 VANTIN F Fy Fp LK Paw Score 17 10 m4 21 12 7 15 BF 2-0 TSeero 98 SET 120 120 120 66 9 82 or tension, denial of hostile impuiltes, and diffi aly in contolling one’s own thought processes. The items on Seale 2 are divided into five Harrie. Lingoes content subscales: Dy: Subjecive Depression. High scorers on this subscale report thar they fel unhappy or depressed, lick energy for coping with the Problems of everyday life and are not imter- ‘sted in what goes on around them. They fee inferior, lack self-confidence, and are tuneasy in socal situations. Da: Psychomotor Retardation. High scorers on this subscale report thar chey lack energy 10 cope with everyday activites, feel emotionally immobilized, and avoid other people. They ate denying hostile or aggresive impulses or 5: Physical Malfunctioning. High scorers on this subscale express preoccupation with their own physical functioning, deny good health, and repre a variety of specific somat- ic symproms. Dg Mental Dullness. High scorers on this sub- scale indicate lack of energy o cope with problems of everyday life and report tension and difficulties with concentration, atten- tion, and memory. They lack self-confidence and feel inferior. They aso report getting lit te enjoyment out of life and may have con- cluded that life is no longer worthwhile. Dg: Brooding. High scorers on this subscale report lack of energy to cope with problems and may have concluded that life it no longer worthwhile. They also report that they brood, ery, ruminate, and may feel that D, Scanned with CamScanner 2526 they ate losing control of their thought processes, Seale 3 (ys Hysteria) ‘This scale was constructed using patients who exhibited some form of sensory ot motor disorder for which no organic basis could be established. All of the 60 items tained in the MMPI-2, Some of the icems reflect specific physical complains or disorders, but many other items involve a denial of problems in cone’ life and denial of social anxiery. The items con Seale 3 are divided into five HartisLingoes content subscales: the original scale were re- Hy: Denial of Social Anziery. Items on this subscale have to do with social extroversion, feeling comfortable interacting with other people, and not being easily influenced by social standards and customs. Because this subscale has only six items and it is noc possible to obtain a T score equal to or greater than 65 on this subscale, itis not helpful in understanding why 2 high score was obtained on Seale 3. Hy,: Need for Affection. High scorers on this subscale describe strong needs for attention and affection from others, as well as fears thar these needs will not be met if they are honest about their feelings and belief. They describe others as honest sensitive, and reasonable, and they deny having nega- tive feelings about other people. Hyg: Lassitade-Malaise. High scorers on this subscale report fecling uncomfortable and not in good heilth. They also report feeling ‘weak and fatigued and having difficulties concentrating and sleeping. They may also express felings of unhappiness. Hyg: Somatic Complain, High scorers on this subscale report multiple somatic complaints ‘They deny expressing hostility toward other people. Hyg Inhibition of Aggression, High scorers oon this scale deny hostile and aggressive im- pulses. They report feeling sensitive about how others respond to them, ‘Scale 4 (Pd: Peychopathic Deviate) ‘This measure was developed using individuals who were referred to a psychiatric service for clar- ification of why they had continuing difficulties with the law cven though they suffered no ealtur- al deprivation and despite their possessing normal Intelligence and a relative freedom from serious neurotic or psychotic disorders, All 50 of the items on the original scale were retained on the MMPI.2 cale. Some items on Scale 4 concern the willingness to acknowledge difficulties in school and/or with the law. Other icems reflece a lack of concern about most social and moral stan- dards of conduct, the presence of family prob- lems, and absence of life satisfaction. A fraction (4) of the raw score on the K scale is added to the raw score on Scale 4. The items on Scale 4 are divided into five Hartis-Lingoes content sub- scales: Pd,: Familial Discord. High scorers on this sub- scale describe their current families and/or their families of origin as lacking in love, understanding, and support. They feel that ‘their families are or have been critical and have not petmitted them adequate freedom and independence. Pda; Authority Problems. High scorers on this subscale express eacntment of societal and parental standards and customs, have defi- nice opinians about what is right and. wrong, and seand up for their own beliefs. “They may admit co having been in trouble in school or with the law. Pdg: Social Imperturbability. ‘This subscale includes items having to do with feeling comfortable and confident in social sirua~ tions, having strong opinions about many things, and defending one’s opinions vigor- ‘ously, Because this subscale has only sx items and beeause itis not passible to obtain aT score equal to or greater than 65 ‘on this subscale, it is not helpful in under- standing why a person obtained 2 high score ‘on Scale 4. Pd4: Social Alienation. High scorers on this subscale express felings of alienation, isola- tion, and estrangement. They seem to be- lieve that other people do not understand. them and thar they get a raw deal from life. elf-Alienation, High scorers on this sub- scale describe themselves as uncomfortable and unhappy. They do not find daily life inceresting or rewarding, They may express reget, guile, and remorse for pase deeds Scale 5 (Mf: Masculinity-Femininity) ‘This sale was constructed using men who were upset about homoerotic felings and confused about their gender role, Similar efforts to develop Scanned with CamScannerA measure of pendemrole divergence in women were tot maecesf but Seale 5 subsceptently ae ‘used fit both men and women, In the MMPI-2, four items were clirninated from Scale § because of objectionable content, leaving 56 ixems. Ale though a few othe ives have frankly sexual omtent, most items are not seal in nature and cover a diversity of ropicsinchuding work and recreational interests, worries and feats, excessive sensitivity, and family relationships, Fiy-rw0 of the items ae yo inthe same directo for both genden, whereas four tems al ding with ‘ly sexual material, are heyed in opposite directions for men and women. After obtaining, raw scores, Tscore conversions are reversed for men and worncn so that 2 igh raw score for men is auromatially cansformed by means ofthe pro- fie shect co high T score, whereas a high raw score for women is transformed to 2 low T score. Harris and Lingoes did not develop content sub- seals for Scale 5, and later artempts to develop ‘content subscales for the MMPI.? version of the scale were not succes Seale 6 (Ps: Paranoia) This scale was developed using patients primasily showing some form of paranoid condition or paranoid state, but few individuals with a fully developed paranoia were available for this effort. All 40 of the original ites on Seale 6 have beea retained in the MMPI.2. Some items deal with frankly psychotic behaviors (eg, suspiciousness, ideas of reference, delusions of persecution, and srandiosity), and other items in the scale cover such diverse topics as sensicviey, cynicism, asocial behavior, excessive moral virtue, and complaints about other people. The items on Scale 6 are divided into three Harris and Lingoes content subscales: Persecutory Ideas. High scorers on this subscale describe the world as a chreatening place, and they fee! misunderstood and unfairly treated. Some high scorers may be describing delusions and ideas of reference, Pap: Poignancy. High scorers on this subscale ae indicating that they are more high strung and sensitive than other people. They feel lonely and misunderstood and may seek cout risky or exciting activities to make themselves feel beter agi Naivete. High scorers on this subscale have unrealistically optimistic attitudes abou tether people, They present themselves 2s trusting, having high moral standards, and, not having hostile or negative impulse Seale 7 (Pt: Prychasthenia) ‘This sale was consteueted primatily using ‘ents showing obsessive worries, com rituals, or exaggerated fears. The diagnosis used for such patients at the time the scale was devel- ‘oped was prychsthenia, but the more eontempo- rary label would be obsessive-compulsve disor- der, All 48 itcms on the original scale have been ~ ‘Taincained on the MMPI-2. Some of the items eal with uncontrollable or obsessive thoughts, feelings of fear and/or anxiety, and doubts about ‘one’s own ability. Unhappiness, physical com- plaints, and difficulties in concentration are also represented in this scale. The fall value of che K raw scare is added to the raw score on Scale 7. Harris and Lingoes did net develop content sub- scales for Seale 7. Scale 8 (Se: Schizophrenia) ‘This seale was constructed using peychiatric patients who were manifesting various forms of schizophrenic disorder. Initial efforts to devise separate measures of the various forts of schizo- phrenia were unsuccessful (Hathaway, 1956). All 78 of the items on the original scale have been maintained on the MMPI-2. Some of the items deal wich Gankly psychotic symptoms, such a8 bizarre mentation, peculiarities of perception. delusions of persecution, and hallucinations. ‘Other topics covered include social alienation, poor family relationships, sexual concerns, dif culties in impale control and concentration, and fears, worries, and dissatisfctions. The full value of the raw scove on the K scale i added to the taw score on Seale 8, The items on Scale 8 are divided into six Hatris-Lingoes content subscales: Sey: Social Alienation, High scorers on this sub~ scale report feeling mistreated, misunder- stood, and unloved. In extreme cases they may believe that others ae crying ro harm them physically, Although high scorers may ig that they feel lonely and empry, they also indicace chat they avoid social stu ations and interpersonal relationships when- ever possible, Seq: Emotional Alienation, High scorers on this subscale report feelings of fea, depression, and apathy, and at times they ray wish they were dead. 27 Scanned with CamScanner