Convergent validity of MCMI-III clinical syndrome scales.
ABSTRACT This study tested the convergent validity of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (MCMI-III) clinical syndrome scales.
Using a sample of 186 substance abusers from one single town referred for assessment, convergent and discriminant validity of the MCMI-III and Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) diagnoses was conducted. Additional measures included the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale and the Beck Anxiety Inventory.
A single Axis I factor based on the raw scores correlated adequately with the factor based on the other scales (r= .85), whereas the correlation between the factor based on the MCMI-III baserate scores was somewhat lower (r= .74), but still indicated substantial convergent validity. For individual disorders, area under the curve (AUC) analyses suggested that the convergent validity of the MCMI-III and the MINI was adequate. The raw score scales were superior to the baserate adjusted scores in all but one case. Discriminant validity was good for alcohol and drug dependence, moderate for major depression and delusion, and poor for thought disorder and anxiety.
The MCMI-III clinical syndrome scales generally measure the constructs they were intended for. The data did not support that the adjustments used in calculating the baserate scores improved validity.
- SourceAvailable from: Baptiste Barbot[show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This study explores longitudinally a four-factor structure of pathological personality trait dimensions (PPTDs) to examine both its structural stability and intra-individual changes among PPTDs over time. Personality Disorder (PD) scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III were administered to 361 low-income women with various psychiatric conditions (drug dependence, depression), who were followed in a two-wave study over 5-years. Cross-sectional and longitudinal factor analyses outlined a robust factorial structure of PPTDs, extrinsically invariant over time, representing Negative Emotionality, Introversion, Antagonism and Impulsivity. Despite moderate rank-order stability in the PPTDs, results also indicated substantial intra-individual variability in the degree and direction of change, consistent with trajectories of change in participants' clinical diagnoses. Results are discussed in light of current debates on the structure and dynamic of pathological personality.Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 06/2013; 35(2):173-185. · 1.55 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: a b s t r a c t This study systematically tested whether the use of specific technologies or media (including certain types of Facebook use), technology-related anxieties, and technology-related attitudes (including multi-tasking preference) would predict clinical symptoms of six personality disorders (schizoid, narcissistic, antisocial, compulsive, paranoid and histrionic) and three mood disorders (major depression, dysthymia and bipolar-mania). In addition, the study examined the unique contributions of technology uses after factoring out demographics, anxiety and attitudes. Teens, young adults and adults (N = 1143) completed an anonymous, online questionnaire that assessed these variables. Each disorder had a unique set of pre-dictors with 17 of the 22 significant predictors being Facebook general use, impression management and friendship. More Facebook friends predicted more clinical symptoms of bipolar-mania, narcissism and histrionic personality disorder but fewer symptoms of dysthymia and schizoid personality disorder. Technology-related attitudes and anxieties significantly predicted clinical symptoms of the disorders. After factoring out attitudes and anxiety, Facebook and selected technology uses predicted clinical symp-toms with Facebook use, impression management and friendship being the best predictors. The results showed both positive and negative aspects of technology including social media as well as apparently detrimental effects of a preference for multitasking.Computers in Human Behavior 01/2013; 29:1243-1254. · 2.07 Impact Factor