No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the author.
معايير اختبار مينسوتا المتعدد الأوجه للشخصية(النسخة الثانية) واختبار كاتل ذي العوامل الستة عشر للشخصية(النسخة الخامسة)
Abstract
The norms of Minnesota multi faces personality inventory (second edition) MMPI-2 and the sixteen personality factor questionnaire of catel (fifth edition) The aim of the current study is to create special norms of the second edition of Minnesota multi faces personality inventory, and the fifth edition of the sixteen personality factor questionnaire of cattell. To this end, the researcher applied the Minnesota multi-faces personality inventory over a sample of (1646) secondary and university students as well as plenty of disorders. She also applied the sixteen personality factor questionnaire of cattell on (4700) secondary and university students. SPSS tools were used to process data.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Validity scales of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory—2 (MMPI-2) are widely used for the detection of exaggerated psychological complaints, although little is known about the results of these scales with racial or ethnic minority individuals. Five validity scales derived from the MMPI-2, including the F Scale, the Back Infrequency Scale, the Symptom Validity Scale, the Infrequency-Psychopathology Scale, and the Dissimulation Scale-MMPI-2, were evaluated in 157 medical patients—109 Caucasian Americans and 48 Asian Americans. All patients were involved in personal injury litigation or seeking compensation for alleged psychological conditions. Analyses of variance (ANOVAs) conducted on the five validity scales revealed no significant group effects for race. The results were consistent with the limited available data on the MMPI-2 validity scales with minority group samples. Further research with other racial minorities, including relevant extra-test criteria for malingering, is encouraged.
This study investigated the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2 (MMPI-2) characteristics of 209 chronic pain patients in an inpatient pain treatment program. Patients completed the MMPI-2, Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale, and Oswestry Low Back Pain Disability Questionnaire. Participants in this sample were matched with comparison participants from the MMPI-2 normative sample on the demographic variables gender, age, and ethnicity. Chronic pain patients reported higher levels of general maladjustment and affective distress than did the normative control group, including more anxiety, depressive symptomatology, and somatic complaints. The MMPI-2 basic scales Hypochondriasis, Depression, and Hysteria were the most useful discriminating factors between chronic pain patients and normal controls, and the content scales Health Concerns and Depression showed significant elevations for the chronic pain group. The 1-3/3-1, 1-2/2-1, and 2-3/3-2 code types accounted for more than two thirds of all two-point classifications for the chronic pain group, and four cluster analysis types classified nearly half of all of these protocols.
This study examined the utility of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2's (MMPI-2) malingering discriminant function index (M-DFI), recently developed by Bacchiochi and Bagby, in the detection of malingering in a forensic sample. Criminal defendants were divided into “malingering” and “not malingering” groups using the structured interview of reported symptoms (SIRS) criteria proposed by Rogers. Logistic regression analysis (LRA) revealed that the MMPI-2 infrequency (F) scale had the best predictive utility of the traditional infrequency scales. Although the M-DFI did significantly differentiate the malingering from the not malingering groups, it did not add significantly to the predictive utility of the MMPI-2 F scale. Receiver operating characteristics analyses demonstrated acceptable sensitivity and specificity for the MMPI-2 F scale, but poor sensitivity for the M-DFI scale. The results are discussed in terms of the utility of the M-DFI in detecting malingering and problems of extending the findings of simulation studies to the forensic context.
Two issues regarding the factor structure of the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF) Fifth Edition were investigated: (a) unidimensionality of the 16 noncognitive scales and (b) hierarchical factor structure of the inventory. The Schmid and Leiman orthogonalization procedure was applied to obtain a hierarchical factor solution in which multi-item composites were mapped directly onto first- and second-order orthogonal factors while simultaneously illustrating the relative positions of factors in the hierarchy. Unidimensionality was assessed using modified parallel analysis. The results indicated that the noncognitive multi-item composites could be factored into 16 first-order and 5 second-order orthogonal factors.
Undergraduates (63 men, 68 women) were administered the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and MMPI-2 in counterbalanced order, 1 week apart, to examine invalid response sets in the MMPI versus the MMPI-2, in research volunteers. A number of participants had clinically significant elevations on Infrequency (F) and Back F (Fb). Examination of Variable Response Inconsistency (VRIN), True Response Inconsistency (TRIN), and the new Infrequency-Psychopathology [F(p)] scale suggested elevations were due to endorsing highly infrequent items rather than random responding or psychopathology. When the profiles were rated for goodness-of-fit to six modal-invalid profile types, a number of profiles were possibly invalid. Gender differences were observed but few differences between the MMPI and MMPI-2 were found. However, the additional MMPI-2 validity scales and the F(p) scale improve detection of invalid response sets. Demographic and motivational factors, and recommendations for obtaining valid results from undergraduate volunteers, are discussed.
In each chapter of this [psychological testing and assessment textbook], students are invited to think critically and generatively about numerous measurement-related issues ranging from the workplace use of a test that purports to be a measure of personality type . . . to the psychometric pros and cons of a widely used neuropsychological test battery. Additionally, students are encouraged to understand the complexity of, and form their own opinions about, some of the controversial issues of the day.
This textbook is designed to be a tool for instructors who teach a course, and the students who take a course, variously called "Psychological Testing," "Psychological Assessment," "Psychological Measurement," "Testing and Assessment in Education," and so forth. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Chief operators at the Chernobyl power plant were assessed at four time points after the nuclear disaster and compared to a comparable group of chief operators at another nuclear power station. MMPI findings demonstrated a significant increase over time in health concerns, depression, and other indicators of stress in those operators working at the station at the time of the assessment. There was also an increase in the proportion with at least one MMPI clinical scale in the abnormal range. The authors hypothesize that the continuing uncertainty of the safety of working at Chernobyl may have contributed to these findings by either increasing the stress levels of those who remained at this power station, or through attracting workers who were less well adjusted before volunteering to work there.
A sample of 36 patients considered by French clinicians as suffering from a borderline personality disorder was evaluated using the International Personality Disorder Examination, the Diagnostic Interview for Borderline-Revised, and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. First, global descriptive analysis of the sample elicited the socio-demographic and standard clinical characteristics of the borderline individuals. After diagnostic evaluation, the sample appeared to be quite homogeneous with 25 of the 36 patients evaluated (69.5%) being defined as borderline by two of the three diagnostic systems: ICD 10, DSM III-R and Gunderson (15/36 = 41.5% of patients were defined as borderline by all three systems). It is the types of BL personality co-diagnoses which differentiated the BL subjects in the sample from those classically described in the international literature, since the most frequent personalities were the Dependent and Avoiding ones, not the Antisocial, Histrionic, Narcissistic or Schizotypic personalities of the DSM III-R. ICD 10 elicited the same significant prevalence of Anxious and Dependent personalities. Lastly, the patients diagnosed as borderline both by clinicians and by all diagnostic systems (forming the sample "core") were compared with the rest of the sample with regard to socio-demographic, clinical and diagnostic characteristics. A few hypotheses are proposed on the type of variables that may permit to discriminate between these two types of patients.
Fair usage ofthe16PFin personality assessment in South Africa: A response to Abrahams and Mauer with special reference to issues ofresearch methodology
- J Butcher
- J Derksen
- H Sloore
- S Sirigatti
Butcher, J., Derksen, J., Sloore, H., Sirigatti, S. (2003). Objective personality assessment of
people in diverse cultures: European adaptations of the MMPI-2. Behaviour Research and
Therapy 41(pp. 819-840). Pergamon.
-Buthcer, J. (2015). Fifty Historical Highlights in Cross-Cultural MMPI/MMPI-2/MMPI-A
Assessment. Retrieved from http://www.umn.edu/mmpi.
-Cas H. Prinsloo & Ingrid Ebersohn(2002). Fair usage ofthe16PFin personality assessment in
South Africa: A response to Abrahams and Mauer with special reference to issues ofresearch
methodology. S. Afr. J. Psycho. 2002, 32 (3).
Computer versus paper and pencil administration of the MMPI-2 In
- J Derksen
- H De Mey
- H Sloore
- G Hellenbosch
Derksen, J. de Mey, H., Sloore, H., & Hellenbosch, G. (1996). Computer versus paper and pencil
administration of the MMPI-2 In: Abstract 31 st Annual Symposium on Recent Developments in
the Use of the MMPI-2 and the MMPI-A, 5-9 June, Minneapolis, MN.
The MMPI-2 Symptom Validity Scale (FBS) Not Influenced by Medical Impairment: A Large Sleep Center Investigation
- J Graham
Graham, J. (2000). MMPI-2 Assessing personality and psychopathology, Third Edition. Oxford
University Press, Inc.
-Greiffenstein, M. (2010). The MMPI-2 Symptom Validity Scale (FBS) Not Influenced by
Medical Impairment: A Large Sleep Center Investigation. Sage Publications Ltd, Vol.17, Issue 2,
Pages (269-277).
Institute for Personality and Ability Testing
- Groth-Marnat
Groth-Marnat(2003). Handbook of Psychological Assessment. Fourth Edition. Wiley & Sons,
Inc. Institute for Personality and Ability Testing, Inc. Champaign, Illinois.
-Kokkevi, A. (1996). The Greek MMPI-2: a progress note. In J. Butcher (Ed.), International
adaptations of the MMPI-2: research and clinical applications (pp. 442-447). Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
International adaptations of the MMPI-2: a handbook of research and clinical applications
- P Pancheri
- S Sirigatti
- M Biondi
Pancheri, P., Sirigatti, S., & Biondi, M. (1996). The MMPI-2 in Italy. In J. Butcher (Ed.),
International adaptations of the MMPI-2: a handbook of research and clinical applications
(pp. 416-441). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
-Pluzek, Z. (1969). DiagnosticI Value Of The MMPI among psychiatric groups. (in Polish)
Roczniki Filozoficze: Annales de philosophie, 17, 125-143
Male Recidivists and psychopathy. Paper presented at the VIth European Congress of Psychology
- G Rossi
- H Sloore
Rossi G.m & Sloore H. (1999).Male Recidivists and psychopathy. Paper presented at the
VIth European Congress of Psychology. Rome.
The Turkish MMPI: Translation, standardization, and validation
- M Russell
- D Karol
Russell, M.& Karol, D.(1999): 16PF Fifth Edition, Administrators' Manual, Institute for
Personality and Ability Testing, Inc. Champaign, Illinois.
-Savasir, I. (1981). Handbook of the Turkish MMPI. Ankara: sevin Matbaasl.
-Savasir, I., & Erol, N. (1990). The Turkish MMPI: Translation, standardization, and
validation. In J. Butcher, & C. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment, Vol.