Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Effectiveness of the MMPI-2-RF in Detecting Feigned Mental Disorders and Cognitive Deficits: a Meta-Analysis

  • Published:
Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A cornerstone of forensic assessments involves the assessment of response styles, including feigning and malingering. As a forensic relevant instrument (FRI), the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) contains embedded overreporting scales that cover the three major domains: feigned mental disorders (i.e., F-r and Fp-r), feigned cognitive impairment (RBS and FBS-r), and feigned medical complaints (Fs). This meta-analytic review of 30 studies examined the effectiveness of various detection strategies and cut scores for the MMPI-2-RF. As an important clinical concern, several feigning scales (F-r, FBS-r, and RBS) exhibited marked elevations (Ms > 80 T) for genuine responders diagnosed with major depressive or somatoform disorders. However, the Fp-r—a true rare-symptoms detection strategy—proved highly effective for discriminating feigned from genuine psychopathology (ds > .90). For feigned cognitive impairment, the FBS-r produced very large effect sizes with feigned TBI (M d = 1.41); however, its cut scores were more indicative of general feigning than feigned cognitive impairment. Finally, Fs yielded a large effect size (d = 1.23) for feigned medical complaints, but its cut scores were more likely to identify examinees feigning mental disorders (M sensitivity = .74) than medical complaints (M sensitivity = .43). These findings are discussed within the context of clinical forensic evaluations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We recognize the divergence of opinion, whether the MMPI-2-RF should be viewed as a revision or a separate but related measure (see, e.g., Butcher et al. 2015).

  2. Please note that F was originally developed as a measure of carelessness for which this comparison to the normative sample would be entirely relevant.

  3. Following the effect size conventions were set forth by Rogers (2008): moderate ≥0.75, large ≥1.25, very large ≥1.50.

  4. Using somatoform disorder as an example (i.e., M + 1 SD = 115.20 T), F-r ≥ 120 would likely result in only a small number of false-positives.

  5. Besides classification errors, these close scores are also vulnerable to measurement errors (see Rogers et al. 2012).

References

  • Anderson, J. L. (2011). A multi-method assessment approach to the detection of malingered pain: Association with the MMPI-2 Restructured Form. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (UMI Number: 1497182).

  • Arbisi, P. A., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (1995). An MMPI-2 infrequent response scale for use with psychopathological populations: the infrequency-psychopathology scale, F(p). Assessment, 7(4), 424–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arbisi, P. A., Polusny, M. A., Erbes, C. R., Thuras, P., & Reddy, M. K. (2011). The Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory-2 restructured form in National Guard soldiers screening positive for posttraumatic stress disorder and mild traumatic brain injury. Psychological Assessment, 23(1), 203–214. doi:10.1037/a0021339.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, R. P., Buffington-Vollum, J. K., Stredny, R. V., & Handel, R. W. (2006). A survey of psychological test use patterns among forensic psychologists. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87(1), 84–94. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8701_07.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ardolf, B. R., Denney, R. L., & Houston, C. M. (2007). Base rates of negative response bias and malingered neurocognitive dysfunction among criminal defendants referred for neuropsychological evaluation. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 21(6), 899–916. doi:10.1080/13825580600966391.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bagby, R. M., Marshall, M. B., Bury, A. S., Bachhiochi, J. R., & Miller, L. S. (2006). Assessing underreporting and overreporting response styles on the MMPI-2. In J. N. Butcher (Ed.), MMPI-2: a practioner’s guide (pp. 39–69). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2012). Interpreting the MMPI-2-RF. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porath, Y. S., Greve, K. W., Bianchini, K. J., & Kaufmann, P. M. (2009). The MMPI-2 symptom validity scale (FBS) is an empirically validated measure of over-reporting in personal injury litigants and claimants: reply to Williams et al. (2009). Psychological Injury and Law, 3(1), 77–80. doi:10.1007/s12207-009-9049-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porath, Y. S., Tellegen, A., & Graham, J. R. (2008). The MMPI-2 symptom validity scale (FBS). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, D. T. R., Baer, R. A., & Harris, M. J. (1991). Detection of malingering on the MMPI: a meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 11(5), 585–598. doi:10.1016/0272-7358(91)90005-F.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blasco Sáiz, J. L., & Pallardó Durá, L. (2013). Detección de exageración de síntomas mediante el SIMS y el MMPI-2-RF en pacientes diagnosticados de trastorno mixto ansioso-depresivo y adaptativo en el contexto medicolegal: Un estudio preliminar [Symptom exaggeration detection by the SIMS and the MMPI-2-RF in patients diagnosed of mixed anxiety-depressive disorder and adjustment disorder in the medico-legal context: a preliminary study]. Clínica y Salud, 24(3), 177–183. doi:10.1016/S1130-5274(13)70019.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bolinger, E., Reese, C., Suhr, J., & Larrabee, G. J. (2014). Susceptibility of the MMPI-2-RF neurological complaints and cognitive complaints scales to over-reporting in simulated head injury. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 29, 7–15. doi:10.1093/arclin/act082.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Boone, K. B. (2007). Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment: a neuropsychological perspective. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burchett, D. L., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2010). The impact of overreporting on MMPI-2-RF substantive scale score validity. Assessment, 17(4), 497–516. doi:10.1177/1073191110378972.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Graham, J. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Tellegen, A., Dahlstrom, W. G., & Kaemmer, B. (2001). Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory–2 (MMPI–2): manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation (Rev. ed.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

  • Butcher, J. N., Hass, G. A., Greene, R. L., & Nelson, L. D. (2015). The MMPI-2-restructured form. In Using the MMPI-2 in forensic assessment (pp. 249–263). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/14571-015.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chmielewski, M., Zhu, J., Burchett, D., Bury, A. S., & Bagby, R. M. (2016). The comparative capacity of the Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and MMPI-2-restructured form (MMPI-2-RF) validity scales to detect malingering in a disability claimaint sample. Psychological Assessment. doi:10.1037/pas0000328.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crighton, A. H., Tarescavage, A. M., Gervais, R. O., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2015). The generalizability of overreporting across self-report measures: an investigation with the Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory-2-restructured form and the personality assessment inventory in a civil disability sample. Assessment, 1–20. doi:10.1177/1073191115621791.

  • Crisanti, L. (2014). The ability of the MMPI-2-RF validity scales to detect feigning of cognitive and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptoms. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (UMI Number: 3630144).

  • Dahlstrom, W. G., Welsh, G. S., & Dahlstrom, L. E. (1972). An MMPI handbook, volume 1: clinical interpretation (rev. ed.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

  • Friedman, A. F., Bolinskey, P. K., Levak, R. W., & Nichols, D. S. (2015). Psychological assessment with the MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gass, C. S., Williams, C. L., Cumella, E., Butcher, J. N., & Kally, Z. (2010). Ambiguous measures of unknown constructs: the MMPI-2 fake bad scale (aka symptom validity scale, FBS, FBS-r). Psychological Injury and the Law, 3(1), 81–85. doi:10.1007/s12207-009-9063-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gervais, R. O., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Wygant, D. B., & Green, P. (2007). Development and validation of a response bias scale (RBS) for the MMPI-2. Assessment, 14(2), 196–208. doi:10.1177/1073191106295861.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gervais, R. O., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Wygant, D. B., & Sellbom, M. (2010). Incremental validity of the MMPI-2-RF overreporting scales and RBS in assessing veracity of memory complaints. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 25(4), 274–284. doi:10.1093/arclin/acq018.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gervais, R. O., Wygant, D. B., Sellbom, M., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2011). Associations between symptom validity test failure and scores on the MMPI-2-RF validity and substantive scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93(5), 508–517. doi:10.1080/00223891.2011.594132.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goodwin, B. E., Sellbom, M., & Arbisi, P. A. (2013). Posttraumatic stress disorder in veterans: the utility of the MMPI-2-RF validity scales in detecting overreported symptoms. Psychological Assessment, 25(3), 671–678. doi:10.1037/a0032214.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Granacher, R. J., & Berry, D. R. (2008). Feigned medical presentations. In R. Rogers (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed., pp. 145–156). New York: Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene, R. L. (2011). The MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF: an interpretive manual (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Green, J. E. (2013). Identifying probable malingering of depressive symptomatology. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (UMI Number: 3553290).

  • Harp, J. P., Jasinkski, L. J., Shandera-Ochsner, A. L., Mason, L. H., & Berry, D. T. R. (2011). Detection of malingered ADHD using the MMPI-2-RF. Psychological Injury and the Law, 4, 32–43. doi:10.1007/s12207-011-9100-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V. (1981). Distribution theory for Glass’s estimator of effect size and related estimators. Journal of Educational Statistics, 6, 107–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heilbrun, K., Rogers, R., & Otto, R. (2002). Forensic assessment: current status and future directions. In J. P. Ogloff (Ed.), Taking psychology and law into the twenty-first century (pp. 119–146). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A., Ingram, M. V., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2012). Scores on the MMPI-2-RF scales as a function of increasing levels of failure on cognitive symptom validity tests in a military sample. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 26(5), 790–815. doi:10.1080/13854046.2012.693202.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kolinsky, M. (2013). Utility of the MMPI-2-RF to identify overreporting of psychopathology symptoms in a simulated sample of an inmate population. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest. (UMI Number: 3568491).

  • Lees-Haley, P. R., English, L. T., & Glenn, W. J. (1991). A fake bad scale on the MMPI-2 for personal injury claimaints. Psychological Reports, 68, 203–210. doi:10.2466/pr0.1991.68.1.203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks: CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marion, B. E., Sellbom, M., & Bagby, R. M. (2011). The detection of feigned psychiatric disorders using the MMPI-2-RF overreporting validity scales: an analog investigation. Psychological Injury and Law, 4, 1–12. doi:10.1007/s12207-011-9097-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marion, B. E., Sellbom, M., Salekin, R. T., Toomey, J. A., Kucharski, L. T., & Duncan, S. (2013). An examination of the association between psychopathy and dissimulation using the MMPI-2-RF validity scales. Law and Human Behavior, 37(4), 219–230. doi:10.1037/lhb0000008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, P. K., Schroeder, R. W., Heinrichs, R. J., & Baade, L. E. (2015). Does true neurocognitive dysfunction contribute to minnesota multiphasic personality inventory-2nd edition-restructured form cognitive validity scores? Archives of General Nueorpsychology, 30, 377–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, L. H., Shandera-Ochsner, A. L., Williamson, K. D., Harp, J. P., Edmundson, M., Berry, D. R., & High, W. M. (2013). Accuracy of MMPI-2-RF validity scales for identifying feigned PTSD symptoms, random responding, and genuine PTSD. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95(6), 585–593. doi:10.1080/00223891.2013.819512.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, H. A. (2001). Miller-forensic assessment of symptoms test professional manual. Lutz: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morey, L. C. (2007). Personality assessment inventory professional manual (2nd ed.). Lutz: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, N. W., Hoelzle, J. B., Sweet, J. J., Arbisi, P. A., & Demakis, G. J. (2010). Updated meta-analysis of the MMPI-2 symptom validity scale (FBS): verified utility in forensic practice. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 24, 701–724. doi:10.1080/13854040903482893.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, C. T., Green, D., & Barr, W. B. (2015). Evaluation of the MMPI-2-RF for detecting over-reported symptoms in a civil forensic and disability setting. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 29(2), 255–271. doi:10.1080/13854046.2015.1033020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, D. S., & Gass, C. S. (2015). The fake bad scale: malingering or litigation response syndrome--which is it? Archives of Assessment Psychology, 5(1), 5–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, E. V. (2016). Feigning ADHD: effectiveness of selected assessment tools in distinguishing genuine from simulated ADHD (unpublished doctoral dissertation). Denton: University of North Texas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R. (2008). Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed.). The Guilford Press: New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., & Bender, S. D. (2013). Evaluation of malingering and related response styles. In R. K. Otto (Ed.), Comprehensive handbook of psychology: forensic psychology (Vol. 11, 2nd ed., pp. 517–539). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., & Fiduccia, C. E. (2015). Forensic assessment instruments. In B. L. Cutler & P. A. Zapf (Eds.), APA handbook of forensic psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 19–34). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Gillard, N., Berry, D., & Granacher, R. (2011). Effectiveness of the MMPI-2-RF validity scales for feigned mental disorders and cognitive impairment: a known-groups study. Journal of Psychopathology & Behavioral Assessment, 33(3), 355–367. doi:10.1007/s10862-011-9222-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Gillard, N. D., Wooley, C. N., & Ross, C. A. (2012). The detection of feigned disabilities: the effectiveness of the personality assessment inventory in a traumatized inpatient sample. Assessment, 19(1), 77–88. doi:10.1177/1073191111422031.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Harrell, E. H., & Liff, C. D. (1993). Feigning neuropsychological impairment: a critical review of methodological and clinical considerations. Clinical Psychology Review, 13(3), 255–274. doi:10.1016/0272-7358(93)90023-F.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Salekin, R. T., Sewell, K. W., Goldstein, A., & Leonard, K. (1998). A comparison of forensic and non-forensic malingerers: a prototypical analysis of explanatory models. Law and Human Behavior, 22(4), 353–367. doi:10.1023/A:1025714808591.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., & Gillard, N. D. (2010). SIRS-2: structured interview of reported symptoms: professional manual. Lutz: Psychological Assessment Resources, Incorporated.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., & Salekin, R. T. (1994). A meta-analysis of malingering on the MMPI-2. Assessment, 1(3), 227–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., Martin, M. A., & Vitacco, M. J. (2003). Detection of feigned mental disorders: a meta-analysis of the MMPI-2 and malingering. Assessment, 10(2), 160–177. doi:10.1177/1073191103252349.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, R. W., Baade, L. E., Peck, C. P., VonDran, E. J., Brockman, C. J., Webster, B. K., & Heinrichs, R. J. (2012). Validation of MMPI-2-RF validity scales in criterion group neuropsychological samples. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 26(1), 129–146. doi:10.1080/13854046.2011.639314.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sellbom, M., & Bagby, R. M. (2010). Detection of overreported psychopathology with the MMPI-2 RF form validity scales. Psychological Assessment, 22(4), 757–767. doi:10.1037/a0020825.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sellbom, M., Toomey, J. A., Wygant, D. B., Kucharski, L. T., & Duncan, S. (2010). Utility of the MMPI-2-RF (restructured form) validity scales in detecting malingering in a criminal forensic setting: a known-groups design. Psychological Assessment, 22(1), 22–31. doi:10.1037/a0018222.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sellbom, M., Wygant, D. B., & Bagby, R. M. (2012). Utility of the MMPI-2-RF in detecting non-credible somatic complaints. Psychiatry Research, 197(3), 295–301. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2011.12.043.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sollman, M. J., & Berry, D. R. (2011). Detection of inadequate effort on neuropsychological testing: a meta-analytic update and extension. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 26(8), 774–789. doi:10.1093/arclin/acr066.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tarescavage, A. M., Wygant, D. B., Gervais, R. O., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2013). Association between the MMPI-2 restructured form (MMPI-2-RF) and malingered neurocognitive dysfunction among non-head injury disability claimants. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 27(2), 313–335. doi:10.1080/13854046.2012.744099.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tellegen, A., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2008). MMPI-2-RF: Technical manual. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tombaugh, T. N. (1996). Test of memory malingering: TOMM. New York/Toronto: MHS.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tombaugh, T. N. (2002). The test of memory malingering (TOMM) in forensic psychology. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 2, 69–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wall, T. D., Wygant, D. B., & Gallagher, R. W. (2015). Identifying overreporting in a correctional setting: utility of the MMPI-2 restructured form validity scales. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 42(6), 610–622. doi:10.1177/0093854814556881.

  • Widows, M. R., & Smith, G. P. (2004). SIMS: structured inventory of malingered symptomatology professional manual. Lutz: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, C. W., Wygant, D. B., Hoelzle, J. B., & Gervais, R. O. (2012). The more you say the less it means: over-reporting and attenuated criterion validity in a forensic disability sample. Psychological Injury and Law, 5, 162–173. doi:10.1007/s12207-012-9137-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wygant, D. B., Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M., Rapier, J. L., Algeier, L. M., & Granacher, R. P. (2011). Association of MMPI-2 restructured form (MMPI-2-RF) validity scales with structured malingering criteria. Psychological Injury and Law, 4, 13–23. doi:10.1007/s12207-011-9098-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wygant, D. B., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Arbisi, P. A. (2004). Development and initial validation of a scale to detect infrequent somatic complaints. In Poster presented at the 39th annual symposium on recent developments of the MMPI-2/MMPI-A. Minneapolis: MN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wygant, D. B., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Arbisi, P. A., Berry, D. R., Freeman, D. B., & Heilbronner, R. L. (2009). Examination of the MMPI-2 restructured form (MMPI-2-RF) validity scales in civil forensic settings: findings from simulation and known group samples. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 24(7), 671–680. doi:10.1093/arclin/acp073.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wygant, D. B., Sellbom, M., Gervais, R. O., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Stafford, K. P., Freeman, D. B., & Heilbronner, R. L. (2010). Further validation of the MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-RF response bias scale: findings from disability and criminal forensic settings. Psychological Assessment, 22(4), 745–756. doi:10.1037/a0020042.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Youngjohn, J. R., Wershba, R., Stevenson, M., Sturgeon, J., & Thomas, M. L. (2011). Independent validation of the MMPI-2-RF somatic/cognitive and validity scales in TBI litigants tested for effort. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 25(3), 463–476. doi:10.1080/13854046.2011.554444.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #311280, Denton, TX, 76203-5017, USA

    Allyson J. Sharf, Richard Rogers, Margot M. Williams & Sarah A. Henry

Authors
  1. Allyson J. Sharf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard Rogers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Margot M. Williams
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Sarah A. Henry
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Allyson J. Sharf.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This study was not funded by any outside entities.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors. It is assumed that all procedures performed in the included studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

It is assumed that informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

Allyson J. Sharf, Richard Rogers, Margot M. Williams and Sarah A. Henry declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Experiment Participants

This study did not require this university's Institutional Review Board approval because it was limited to re-analysis of previously published data. It is assumed that all studies included in the meta-analysis received approval by their respective Institutional Review Boards.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sharf, A.J., Rogers, R., Williams, M.M. et al. The Effectiveness of the MMPI-2-RF in Detecting Feigned Mental Disorders and Cognitive Deficits: a Meta-Analysis. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 39, 441–455 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-017-9590-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-017-9590-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation