![]() MMPI-2 over 20,000 published studies no longer apply MMPI-2 must revalidate all of the scales inability to make comparisons with adolescent scores (MMPI-2 vs. MMPI-2 more representative norms (based on projected census data) relevance of the items language employed for the items (both temporally laden references like “drop the hanky”, and gender biases in item content) addition of new scales of relevance today Uniform T-score transformation now used so that T-scores reflect percentile ranks that are the same across all clinical scales Disadvantages to all updates MMPI vs. ![]() ![]() 70 on the MMPI Advantages of updating the test MMPI vs. MMPI-2 (1989) MMPI validation and norm samples were ones of convenience with limited variability on education (M=8 years), coming from a rural background in the midwest Normative data collected in the 1930s Clinical cut-off now defined by t-score of 65 vs. MMPI was the most widely used personality test in all pops (though only validated for inpatient adult samples) MMPI vs. Later developed two non-clinical scales M/F – initially to identify male homosexuals was augmented with broader items Si – derived from an introversion/extraversion scale and cross validated by predicting involvement in college activities in a second sample (all female college students) Validity scales were either derived rationally (L & K) or from baserates in the normal group (F) Not considered a diagnostic inventory (as was originally intended) Utility of the MMPI Ineffective at differential diagnosis (based on how it was originally developed) Numerical scale labels was intended to further minimize the connection with a specific diagnostic label Method of determining the criterion group Some problems with MMPI The PIGs were not a truly random group (relatives and friends of those in the hospital – though largely the medical patients) convenient Criterion and PIGs were largely from the midwest, in the late 1930s/early 1940s Utility of some of the scales as it matched diagnostic concerns of that era, dated and culture-specific item content, and representativeness of the norm group. Hospitals, 265 recent high school grads, 265 administration workers, and 254 medical patients Clinical groups – 221 patients representing the major psychiatric categories (excludes those with multiple diagnoses, or questionable diagnoses) Item analysis to identify those items differentiating the clinical and normal groups The items that could differentiate were then cross validated with new groups of normals and patients MMPI development – cont. Criterion group composition MMPI development Minnesota normals – 724 relatives and visitors of patients at the U. MMPI (Hathaway & McKinley, 1943) 10 clinical scales and 3 validity scales Empirical scale development with items selected based on their ability to differentiate normals, from a target group (another clinical group with similar symptoms was sometimes also employed) Clients should be 18 or older & 6th grade education Generally lower face validity (breaks with tradition of items that clearly sample the domain of interest) most relevant for clinical population Item pool derived from psychological and psychiatric reports, textbooks, previous scales, etc. Age - 16-84 years and Used as a diagnostic tool to help in the diagnosis clarification and in assessment of personality.Items- 567 items comprising 10 clinical scales and 7 validity scales.The MMPI-Adolescent also known as MMPI-A (Butcher, Williams, Graham, Archer, Tellegen, Ben-Porath & Kaemmer, 1992) The MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dalstrom, Graham, Tellegen & Kaemmer, 1989). ❑ The original MMPI was revised into two separate versions: MMPI was developed by Stark Hathway and J.The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is a truefalse self-report inventory.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |