Background

MMPI-2 Psychological Test: Controversial, but Hard to Fake

Uploaded 12/10/2012, approx. 3 minute read

My name is Sam Vaknin, and I am the author of Malignant Self-Love, Narcissism Revisited.

My name is Sam Vaknin, and I am the author of Malignant Self-Love.

It is true or false as applied to me. There are no correct answers.

The test booklet allows the diagnostician to provide a rough assessment of the patient, the basics case, based on the first 370 queries.

It is recommended, though, to administer all 567 items in order to reach a much better founded diagnosis.

Based on numerous studies, the items are arranged in scales. The responses are compared to answers provided by control subjects. The scales allow the diagnostician to identify traits and mental death problems based on this comparison.

In other words, there are no answers that are typical to a paranoid or a narcissistic or an antisocial patient. They are only responses that deviate from an overall statistical pattern and conform to the reaction patterns of other patients with similar scores.

The nature of the deviation determines the patient's traits and tendencies, but not his or her diagnosis.

The interpreted outcomes of the MMPI-2 are phrased this way.

The test results place subject X in this group of patients who, statistically speaking, reacted similarly. The test results also get subject X apart from these groups of people who, statistically speaking, reacted or responded differently to subject X.

The test results would never say subject X suffers from this or that mental health problems.

There are three validity scales and ten clinical ones in the original MMPI-2, but other scholars derived hundreds of additional scales.

For instance, to helping diagnosing personality disorders, most diagnosticians use either the MMPI-1 with the Maury-Wright-Bashfield scales in conjunction with the Wiggins-Cannon-Onston scales, or, more rarely, the MMPI-2 updated to include the Colligan-Maury-Offron scales.

The validity scales indicate whether the patient responded truthfully and accurately or was trying to manipulate the test.

They pick up patterns. Some patients want to appear normal. Some patients want to appear abnormal and consistently choose what they believe are the correct answers to reflect their choices.

And this kind of behavior triggers the validity scales.

These are so sensitive that they can indicate whether the subject lost his or her place on the answer sheet and was responding randomly.

The validity scales also alert the diagnosticians to problems in reading comprehension and other inconsistencies in response patterns of the subject.

The clinical scales are dimensional, though not multiphasic, as the test misleading name implies.

Clinical scales measure hypochondriacids, depression, hysteria, psychopathic deviation, masculinity, femininity, paranoia, schizophrenia, schizophrenia, hypomania, and social introversion. They also scale for alcoholism, post-traumatic stress disorder, and a variety of personality disorders.

The interpretation of the MMPI-2 is now fully computerized. A computer is fed with a patient's sex, age, educational level, and marital status, and does the rest.

Still, many scholars have criticized the scoring of the MMPI-2, and it is a hotly debated issue.

Thank you.

If you enjoyed this article, you might like the following:

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI): Fortune Cookie or Reliable Test?

The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) is a widely used and contested personality assessment test with various versions and millions of users worldwide. It is based on Jungian theory and classifies individuals into one of 16 personality types. While some studies have found the MBTI to be valid and useful, others criticize its dichotomous nature, lack of reliability, and deviation from Jung's original theory. Despite these criticisms, the MBTI remains popular and can provide insight, raise self-awareness, and help individuals understand their past experiences and relationships.


Psychological Tests and Structured Interviews: Introduction

Personality assessment combines both art and science, with standardized psychological tests and structured interviews designed to minimize bias and ensure objectivity. These tests often limit responses to specific formats, such as true or false, and rely on automated scoring to reduce human involvement in data gathering. However, interpretation remains crucial, and practitioners typically use multiple tests to create a coherent picture of an individual's personality, ensuring that results align across different assessments. The distinction between objective and projective tests highlights the varying levels of structure and potential bias in scoring, with projective tests relying heavily on the clinician's judgment and interpretation.


Are You a Pathological Gambler? Test Yourself!

The lecture presents a test designed to help individuals assess whether they are compulsive gamblers or professional gamblers based on their gambling behaviors and attitudes. It includes a series of yes or no questions that explore patterns of betting, emotional responses to wins and losses, and decision-making during gambling sessions. Positive responses to specific questions indicate a higher likelihood of being a pathological gambler, while negative responses suggest a more controlled approach to gambling. The lecturer emphasizes that the test is not clinically validated and serves as a fun reflection of observations made in various gambling environments, ultimately advising caution and awareness of the inherent risks in gambling.


Rorschach's Inkblot Test

The Rorschach Ink Blots Test is a diagnostic tool developed by Swiss psychiatrist Hermann Rorschach. The test uses ambiguous ink blots to provoke free associations in the test subject, and the diagnostician records the patient's responses as well as the ink blots' spatial position and orientation. The test is highly subjective and depends on the skills and training of the diagnostician and his interpretative abilities. It cannot be used to reliably diagnose patients, but it can draw attention to the patient's defenses and personal style.


Body Language of the Personality Disordered

Patients with personality disorders have a body language specific to their personality disorder. The body language comprises an unequivocal series of subtle and not-so-subtle presenting signs. A patient's body language usually reflects the underlying mental health problem or pathology. In itself, body language cannot and should not be used as a diagnostic tool.


PCL-R (Psychopathy Checklist Revised) Test

The Psychopathy Checklist Revised Test (PCLR) is a structured interview that is used to rate symptoms common among psychopaths in forensic populations. The test is designed to cover the major psychopathic traits and behaviors, but it has very dubious, predictive and retrodictive power. The PCLR is based on a structured interview and collateral data gathered from family, friends, and colleagues and from documents. The hope of the designers of the PCLR test is that information gathered outside the scope of a structured interview will serve to rectify any potential abuse, diagnostic bias, and manipulation by both the testee and the tester.


Personality Types: Which Are YOU?

Type theory in psychology categorizes individuals based on personality characteristics, with historical roots tracing back to ancient Greek humoral theory and later developments by figures like Freud and Jung. Freud's libidinal types theory classifies personalities into erotic, obsessional, and narcissistic types based on the distribution of libido, while Jung's typology focuses on attitudinal and functional types, emphasizing introversion, extroversion, and the dominant functions of the psyche. Additionally, personality classifications such as type A, B, D, and T highlight various traits, with type A being competitive and ambitious, type B being easygoing, type D being distressed, and type T being thrill-seeking. Despite the appeal of categorizing personalities, the rigor and substantiation of these theories remain limited, reflecting a desire for control and understanding in a complex world.


Disorders of Eating and Personality (3rd International Conference on Neurology and Brain Disorders)

Eating disorders are complex and often comorbid with personality disorders, particularly borderline personality disorder. The key to improving the mental state of patients with both disorders is to focus on their eating and sleeping disorders first. By controlling their eating disorder, patients can reassert control over their lives, leading to better regulation of their sense of self-worth, enhanced self-confidence, and self-esteem. Treatment options include medication, cognitive or behavioral therapy, psychodynamic therapy, and family therapy. Recovery prognosis is good after two years of treatment and support.


Psychopath Therapy Notes

A therapist writes notes on a first therapy session with a psychopathic patient, John Male, who was referred to therapy by the court as part of a rehabilitation program. John is serving time in prison for grand fraud, which involved hundreds of retired men and women in a dozen states over a period of three years. John shows no remorse for his actions and is contemptuous towards his victims. He is also dismissive of the therapist's attempts to understand his motivations and needs.


Eating Disorders and Personality Disorders

Eating disorders are impulsive behaviors that can exist with cluster B personality disorders, particularly with borderline personality disorders. The key to improving the mental state of patients who have been diagnosed with both a personality disorder and an eating disorder lies in focusing it first upon their eating and sleeping disorders and only then on their personality disorders. The treatment of personality disorders requires enormous, persistent and continuous investment of resources of every kind by everyone involved, especially the patient. Patients with eating disorders may be in mortal danger, and the therapist's goal is to buy them time.

Transcripts Copyright © Sam Vaknin 2010-2024, under license to William DeGraaf
Website Copyright © William DeGraaf 2022-2024
Get it on Google Play
Privacy policy