Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-Restructured Form Validity Scales: Complementary Approaches to Evaluate Response Validity

  • Published:
Psychological Injury and Law Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Responsible forensic assessment is dependent on an appreciation for how validity scales differ from one another and function across different evaluation contexts. The primary goal of this review is to evaluate whether there is sufficient empirical support to provide expert testimony using MMPI-2 or MMPI-2-RF validity scales. Towards this goal, we briefly describe the development of MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-RF validity scales and review empirical studies that support interpretative strategies. We describe and illustrate with case examples how the respective sets of MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-RF validity scales utilize complementary strategies to detect over- and under-reporting of psychological, cognitive, and physical symptoms. Additionally, the review describes standards for expert psychological testimony and illustrates how MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-RF validity scales are particularly well suited to assess symptom validity and psychological status in secondary-gain settings.

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. To simplify presentation of material, when we reference both instruments simultaneously, we will call them the MMPI-2/RF.

  2. Greene (2011) provides concise and informative summaries for additional MMPI validity scales that are not currently endorsed by the University of Minnesota Press.

  3. One item is shared between FBS-r, RBS, and Fp-r.

  4. Mnookin (2008) and Faigman et al. (2011) provide comprehensive reviews of this topic.

  5. It is beyond the scope of this review to elaborate on all continued efforts to criticize FBS by a minority group of researchers (e.g., see Butcher et al., 2008; Williams, Butcher, Gass, Cumella, & Kally, 2009). We refer readers interested in this issue to Ben-Porath, Greve, Bianchini, and Kaufman’s (2009b) thoughtful response to issues raised by Butcher et al. (2008) that describes how current FBS criticisms put forth are in part related to faulty premises and a very narrow literature review.

References

  • 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). Psychological Assessment, 7, 424–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arbisi, P. A. & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (1997). Characteristics of the MMPI-2 Fp scale as a function of diagnosis in an inpatient sample of veterans. Psychological Assessment, 9, 102–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arbisi, P. A., Ben-Porath, Y. S. & McNulty, J. L. (2003). Refinement of the MMPI-2F(p) scale is not necessary: A response to Gass and Luis. Assessment, 10, 123–128.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, E. M., Hagan, L. D., Mason, J., Handel, R. & Archer, R. P. (2012). MMPI-2-RF characteristics of custody evaluation litigants. Assessment, 19, 14–20.

    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, 84–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, R. P., Handel, R. W. & Couvadelli, B. (2004). An evaluation of the incremental validity of the MMPI-2 superlative (S) scale in an inpatient psychiatric sample. Assessment, 11, 102–108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Archer, R. P., Fontaine, J. & McCrae, R. R. (1998). Effects of two MMPI-2 validity scales on basic scale relations to external criteria. Journal of Personality Assessment, 70, 87–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Austin, J. S. (1992). The detection of fake good and fake bad on the MMPI-2. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 669–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baer, R. A. & Miller, J. (2002). Underreporting of psychopathology on the MMPI-2: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Assessment, 14, 16–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bagby, R. M. & Marshal, M. B. (2004). Assessing underreporting response bias on the MMPI-2. Assessment, 11, 115–126.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bagby, R. M., Nicholson, R. A., Buis, T., Radovanovic, H. & Fidler, B. J. (1999). Defensive responding on the MMPI-2 in family custody and access evaluations. Psychological Assessment, 11, 24–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bagby, R. M., Rogers, R., Buis, T. & Kalemba, V. (1994). Malingered and defensive response styles on the MMPI-2: An examination of validity scales. Assessment, 1, 31–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bathurst, K., Gottfried, A. W. & Gottfried, A. E. (1997). Normative data for the MMPI-2 in child custody litigation. Psychological Assessment, 9, 205–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porath, Y. S., Graham, J. R. & Tellegen, A. (2009a). The MMPI-2 Symptom Validity Scale (FBS): Development, Research Findings, and Interpretive Recommendations. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porath, Y. S., Greve, K. W., Bianchini, K. J. & Kaufmann, P. M. (2009b). The MMPI-2 symptom validity scale (FBS) is an empirically-validated measure of over-reporting in personal injury litigants and claimants: Reply to Butcher et al. (2008). Psychological Injury and the Law, 1, 62–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Porath, Y. S. & Tellegen, A. (2008). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF): Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry, D. T. R., & Schipper, L. J. (2007). Detection of feigned psychiatric symptoms during forensic neuropsychological examinations. In G. J Larrabee (Ed.), Assessment of malingered neuropsychological deficits (pp. 226–263). New York: Oxford.

  • Berry, D. T. R., Wetter, M. W., Baer, R. A., Larsen, L., Clark, C. & Monroe, K. (1992). MMPI-2 random responding indices: Validation using a self-report methodology. Psychological Assessment, 4, 340–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berry, D. T. R., Wetter, M. W., Baer, R. A., Widiger, T. A., Sumpter, J. C. & Hallam, R. A. (1991). Detection of random responding on the MMPI–2: Utility of F, back F, and VRIN scales. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 3, 418–423.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borum, R. & Grisso, T. (1995). Psychological test use in criminal forensic evaluations. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26, 465–473.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bow, J. N., Flens, J. R. & Gould, J. W. (2010). MMPI-2 and MCMI-III in forensic evaluations: A survey of psychologists. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 10, 37–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Arbisi, P. A., Atlis, M. M. & McNulty, J. L. (2003a). The construct validity of the Lees-Haley Fake Bad Scale: Does this scale measure somatic malingering and feigned emotional distress. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 18, 473–485.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Cheung, F. M. & Lim, J. (2003b). Use of the MMPI-2 with Asian populations. Psychological Assessment, 15, 248–256.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Dahlstrom, W. G., Graham, J. R., Tellegen, A. & Kaemmer, B. (1989). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory—2 (MMPI-2). Manual for administration and scoring. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Gass, C. S., Cumella, E., Kally, Z. & Williams, C. L. (2008). Potential for bias in MMPI-2 assessments using the Fake Bad Scale (FBS). Psychological Injury and the Law, 1, 191–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Graham, J. R., Williams, C. L. & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (1990). Development and use of the MMPI-2 content scales. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Hamilton, C. K., Rouse, S. V. & Cumella, E. J. (2006a). The deconstruction of the Hy scale of MMPI-2: Failure of RC3 in measuring somatic symptom expression. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87, 186–192.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N. & Han, K. (1995). Development of an MMPI-2 scale to assess the presentation of self in a superlative manner: The S scale. In J. N. Butcher & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment (Vol. 10, pp. 25–50). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Morfitt, R. C., Rouse, S. V. & Holden, R. R. (1997). Reducing MMPI-2 defensiveness: The effect of specialized instructions on the retest validity of a job applicant sample. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 385–401.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Butcher, J. N., Tsai, J., Coelho, S. & Nezami, E. (2006b). Cross cultural applications of the MMPI-2. In J. N. Butcher (Ed.), MMPI-2: The practioner’s handbook (pp. 505–537). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camara, W. J., Nathan, J. S. & Puente, A. E. (2000). Psychological test usage: Implications in professional psychology. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31, 141–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Childs, R. A. & Eyde, L. D. (2002). Assessment training in clinical psychology doctoral programs: What should we teach? What do we teach? Journal of Personality Assessment, 78, 130–144.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (1993). 509, U.S. 579, 113 S.Ct. 2786.

  • Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. 43 F.3d 1311 (9th Cir., 1995) [Daubert II].

  • Dean, A. C., Boone, K. B., Kim, M. S., Curiel, A. R., Martin, D. J. & Lang, Y. K. (2008). Examination of the impact of ethnicity on the MMPI-2 Fake Bad Scale. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 22, 1054–1060.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dragon, W. R., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2007, April). Examining the impact of unscorable item responses on the validity and interpretability of MMPI-2 substantive scale scores. Paper presented at the 42nd Annual Meeting of Recent Developments in MMPI-2 and MMPI-A Research, Fort Lauderdale, FL.

  • Dragon, W. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S. & Handel, R. W. (2012). Examining the impact of unscorable item responses on the validity and interpretability of MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF Restructured Clinical (RC) scale scores. Assessment, 19, 101–113.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dwyer, C. A. (1996). Cut scores and testing: Statistics, judgment, truth, and error. Psychological Assessment, 8, 360–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Exner, J. E. (2003). The Rorschach: A comprehensive system: Vol. I: Basic foundations (4th ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Faigman, D. L., Blumenthal, J. A., Cheng, E. K., Mnookin, J. L., Murphy, E. E. & Saunders, J. (2011). Modern scientific evidence: The law and science of expert testimony. (2011–2012 ed., Vol. 1). Egan: West.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Judicial Center (2000). Federal Judicial Center reference manual on scientific evidence. (2nd ed.) Retrieved from http://air.fjc.gov/public/fjcweb.nsf/pages/16

  • Frye v. United States, 392, F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923).

  • Gallen, R. T. & Berry, D. T. R. (1996). Detection of random responding in MMPI-2 protocols. Assessment, 3, 171–178.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gass, C. S. & Luis, C. A. (2001). MMPI-2 Scale F(p) and symptom feigning: Scale refinement. Assessment, 8, 425–429.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gervais, R. O. (2005, April). Development of an empirically derived response bias scale for the MMPI-2. Paper presented at the Annual MMPI-2 Symposium and Workshops, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, USA.

  • 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, 196–208.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gervais, R. O., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Wygant, D. B. & Green, P. (2008). Differential sensitivity of the Response Bias Scale (RBS) and MMPI–2 validity scales to memory complaints. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 22, 1061–1079.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J. R. (2011). MMPI-2: Assessing personality and psychopathology (5th ed.). New York: Oxford.

  • Graham, J. R., Watts, D. & Timbrook, R. E. (1991). Detecting fake-good and fake-bad MMPI-2 profiles. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 264–277.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Green, P., Rohling, M. L., Iverson, G. L. & Gervais, R. O. (2003). Relationships between olfactory discrimination and head injury severity. Brain Injury, 17, 479–496.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, R. L. (1995). [MMPI-2 data research file for Big Spring State Hospital patients.] Unpublished raw data.

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Greiffenstein, M. F., Fox, D. & Lees-Haley, P. R. (2007). The MMPI-2 Fake Bad Scale in detection of noncredible brain injury claims. In K. Boone (Ed.), Detection of noncredible cognitive performance. New York: Guilford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greve, K. W. & Bianchini, K. J. (2004). Response to Butcher et al.: The construct validity of the Lees-Haley Fake Bad Scale. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 19, 337–339.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gynther, M. D., Altman, H. & Warbin, R. (1973). Interpretation of uninterpretable MMPI profiles. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 40, 78–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harkness, A. R., McNulty, J. L. & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (1995). The Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5): Constructs and MMPI-2 scales. Psychological Assessment, 7, 104–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Handel, R. W., Arnau, R. C., Archer, R. P. & Dandy, K. L. (2006). An evaluation of the MMPI-2 and MMPI-A True Response Inconsistency (TRIN) scales. Assessment, 13, 98–106.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Handel, R. W., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Tellegen, A. & Archer, R. P. (2010). Psychometric functioning of the MMPI-2-RF VRIN-r and TRIN-r scales with varying degrees of randomness, acquiescence, and counter-acquiescence. Psychological Assessment, 22, 87–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Harp, J. P., Jasinski, 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 Law, 4, 32–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hathaway, S. R. & McKinley, J. C. (1943). Manual for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. New York: The Psychological Corporation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helms, E. & Reddon, J. R. (1993). A perspective on developments in assessing psychopathology: A critical review of the MMPI and MMPI-2. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 453–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoelzle, J., Arbisi, P., Nelson, N., & Meyer, G. (2010, March). Exploratory factor analysis of the MMPI-2 Symptom Validity Scale. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Personality Assessment, San Jose, CA.

  • Hoelzle, J. & Meyer, G. (2008). The factor structure of the MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 443–455.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Howe, L. L. S. & Loring, D. W. (2009). Classification accuracy and predictive abilityof the Medical Symptom Validity Test's dementia profile and genuine memoryimpairment profile. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23, 329–342.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, R. F. (1999). The structure of common mental disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry, 56, 921–926.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J. & Iacono, W. G. (2005). Externalizing psychopathology in adulthood: A dimensional-spectrum conceptualization and its implications for DSM–V. Journal of Abnormal Psychopathology, 114, 537–550.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lally, S. J. (2003). What tests are acceptable for use in forensic evaluations? A survey of experts. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 34, 491–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larrabee, G. J. (2003). Exaggerated MMPI-2 symptom report in personal injury litigants with malingered neurocognitive deficit. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 18, 673–686.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, T. T. C., Graham, J. R., Sellbom, M. & Gervais, R. O. (2012). Examining the potential for gender bias in the prediction of symptom validity test failure by MMPI-2 symptom validity scale scores. Psychological Assessment, 24, 618–627.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lees-Haley, P. R. (1989). MMPI F and F-K scales: Questionable indices of malingering. American Journal of Forensic Psychology, 7, 81–84.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lees-Haley, P. R., Iverson, G. L., Lange, R. T., Fox, D. D. & Allen, L. M., III. (2002). Malingering in forensic neuropsychology: Daubert and the MMPI-2. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 3, 167–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim, J. & Butcher, J. N. (1996). Detection of faking on the MMPI-2: Differentation among fake-bad, denial, and claiming extreme virtue. Journal of Personality Assessment, 67, 1–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, R. E., Mitchell, M., Kim, B. H. & Hough, L. (2010). Evidence for response bias as a source of error variance in applied assessment. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 450–470.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meehl, P. E. & Hathaway, S. R. (1946). The K factor as a suppressor variable in the MMPI. Journal of Applied Psychology, 30, 525–564.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mnookin, J. L. (2008). Expert evidence, partisanship, and epistemic competence. Brooklyn Law Review, 73, 1009–1033.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morey, L. C. (2007). The Personality Assessment Inventory professional manual. Lutz: Psychological Assessment Resources.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, N. W., Hoelzle, J., Sweet, J., Arbisi, P. & Demakis, G. (2010). Updated meta-analysis of the MMPI-2 Symptom Validity Scale (FBS): Verified utility in forensic practice. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 24, 701–724.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, N. W., Sweet, J. J., Berry, D. T. R., Bryant, F. B. & Granacher, R. P. (2007). Response validity in forensic neuropsychology: Exploratory factor analytic evidence of distinct cognitive and psychological constructs. Journal of International Neuropsychological Society, 13, 440–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, D. S. (2001). Essentials of MMPI-2 Assessment. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, D. S. (2006). The trials of separating the bath water from baby: A review and critique of the MMPI–2 Restructured Clinical scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87, 121–138.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598–609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pearson Assessments (2006, August). FBS (Symptom Validity) Scale added to MMPI-®2 standard scoring materials. [Press release.] Retrieved from http://www.pearsonassessments.com/pai/ai/about/news/ NewsItem/2006/newsrelease0806ca.htm

  • Piotrowski, C. & Zalewski, C. (1993). Training in psychodiagnostic testing in APA-approved PsyD and PhD clinical psychology programs. Journal of Personality Assessment, 61, 394–405.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pope, K. S., Butcher, J. N. & Seelen, J. (1993). MMPI/MMPI-2/MMPI-A in court: Assessment, testimony, and cross-examination for expert witnesses and attorneys. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, R., Gillard, N. D., Berry, D. T. R. & Granacher, R. P., Jr. (2011). Effectiveness of the MMPI-2-RF validity scales for feigned mental disorders and cognitive impairment: A known-groups study. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavior Assessment, 33, 355–367.

    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, 160–177.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rohling, M. L., Larrabee, G. J., Greiffenstein, M. F., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Lees-Haley, P. & Greve, K. W. (2011). A misleading review of response bias: Comment on McGrath, Mitchell, Kim, and Hough (2010). Psychological Bulletin, 137, 708–712.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rothke, S. E., Friedman, A. F., Jaffe, A. M., Greene, R. L., Wetter, M. W. & Baker, K. (2000). Normative data for the F(p) scale of the MMPI-2: Implications for clinical and forensic assessment of malingering. Psychological Assessment, 12, 335–340.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Simms, L. J., Casillas, A., Clark, L. A., Watson, D. & Doebbeling, B. N. (2005). Psychometric evaluation of the Restructured Clinical scales of the MMPI–2. Psychological Assessment, 17, 345–358.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sellbom, M. & Bagby, R. M. (2008). Validity of the MMPI-2-RF (Restructured Form) L-r and K-r scales in detecting under-reporting in clinical and nonclinical samples. Psychological Assessment, 20, 370–376.

    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, 22–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. R., Gorske, T. T., Wiggins, C. & Little, J. A. (2010). Personality assessment use by clinical neuropsychologists. International Journal of Testing, 10, 6–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strong, D. R., Green, R. L., Hoppe, C., Johnstone, T. & Olesen, N. (1999). Taxometric analysis fo impression management and self-deception on the MMPI-2 in child-custody litigants. Journal of Personality Assessment, 73, 1018.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tellegen, A. & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2008). The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form: Technical manual. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tellegen, A., Ben-Porath, Y. S., McNulty, J. L., Arbisi, P. A., Graham, J. R. & Kaemmer, B. (2003). The MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales: Development, validation, and interpretation. Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tellegen, A., Ben-Porath, Y. S. & Sellbom, M. (2009). Construct validity of the MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) scales: Reply to Rouse, Greene, Butcher, Nichols, and Williams. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 211–221.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tellegen, A., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Sellbom, M., Arbisi, P. A., McNulty, J. L. & Graham, J. R. (2006). Further evidence of the MMPI–2 Restructured Clinical (RC) scales: Addressing questions raised by Rogers et al. and Nichols. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87, 148–171.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tombaugh, T. N. (1996). Test of Memory Malingering. Toronto: MultiHealth Systems.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wechsler, D. (2008). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale–Fourth Edition (WAIS–IV). San Antonio: Pearson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, C., Wygant, D., Hoelzle, J., & Gervais, R. (2012, March). The more you say, the less it means: Over-reporting and attenuated criterion validity. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the American Psychology-Law Society, San Juan, Puerto Rico.

  • Wiggins, J. S. (1959). Interrelations among MMPI measures of dissimulation under standard and social desirability instructions. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 23, 419–427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, C. L., Butcher, J. N., Gass, C. S., Cumella, E. & Kally, Z. (2009). Inaccuracies about the MMPI-2 Fake Bad Scale in the reply by Ben-Porath, Greve, Bianchini, and Kaufman (2009). Psychological Injury & the Law, 2, 182–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, A. G. C., Thomas, K. M., Hopwood, C. J., Markon, K. E., Pincus, A. L. & Krueger, R. F. (2012, March 26). The Hierarchical Structure of DSM-5 Pathological Personality Traits. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. doi:10.1037/a0027669. Advance online publication.

  • Wygant, D. B., Ben-Porath, Y. S. and Arbisi, P. A. (2004, May). Development and initial validation of a scale to detect somatic over-reporting. Paper presented at the 39th Annual Symposium on Recent Developments in the Use of the MMPI-2 and MMPI-A, Minneapolis, MN.

  • Wygant, D. B., Sellbom, M., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Stafford, K. P., Freeman, D. B. & Heilbronner, R. L. (2007). The relationship between symptom validity testing and MMPI-2 scores as a function of forensic evaluation context. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 22, 489–499.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wygant, D. B., Sellbom, M., Gervais, R. O., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Stafford, K. P. & 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, 745–756.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Marquette University, P.O. Box 1881, Milwaukee, WI, 53201, USA

    James B. Hoelzle

  2. University of St. Thomas, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Nathaniel W. Nelson

  3. Minneapolis VA Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Nathaniel W. Nelson & Paul A. Arbisi

  4. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Paul A. Arbisi

Authors
  1. James B. Hoelzle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nathaniel W. Nelson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul A. Arbisi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James B. Hoelzle.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hoelzle, J.B., Nelson, N.W. & Arbisi, P.A. MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-Restructured Form Validity Scales: Complementary Approaches to Evaluate Response Validity. Psychol. Inj. and Law 5, 174–191 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-012-9139-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12207-012-9139-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation