Are the MMPI subtle subscales subtle measures of their scales?

Abstract

This study investigated the ability of the MMPI Wiener-Harmon subtle subscales (on scales D, Hy, Pd, Pa, and Ma) to serve as subtle or unobtrusive measures of their scales. Forty outpatients completed the MMPI under standard instructions, followed by a fake-good or fake-bad instructional set. First, we investigated the paradoxical effect found in the MMPI faking literature (in which, overall, the subtle subscale T-scores change in a direction opposite of the faking instructions) and found that not every subtle subscale shows this effect. Secondly, the subtle subscale T-scores achieved under faking conditions showed no significant relationship to their respective full-scale T-scores achieved under standard conditions. Therefore, our results do not support the Wiener-Harmon subtle subscales as subtle measures of their scales.

Assessment of Biopsychosocial Risk Factors for Medical Treatment: A Collaborative Approach

“…The MMPI 2 was also administered to some of the patient subjects with particular attention being given to the Hs, D and Hy scales. The MMPI 2 Hysteria-Obvious score (Hy-O) was also utilized in this study, as the MMPI-2 Hy scale includes ''subtle'' items thought by some to reduce the validity of this scale (Mihura, Schlottmann, & Scott, 2000;Osberg & Harrigan, 1999;Sellbom, Ben-Porath, McNulty, Arbisi, & Graham, 2006). As the Hy-O Scale omits these ''subtle'' items, this scale was included as it may more closely approximate the core construct of the Hy scale.…”

¿difiere La Capacidad De Clasificación De Respuestas Simuladas De La Escala De F Del Mmpi-2 Cuando Se Contrasta Con Un Grupo Control Y Con La Población Normativa? Una Revisión Meta-Analítica / [Does the Performance to Classify Malingering Responses of Mmpi-2 F Scale Differ When Is Contrasted With a Control Group and With the Normative Sample? A Meta-Analytic Review]

“…En primer lugar, observamos que en unos estudios (Arbisi y Ben-Porath, 1998;Hahn, 2005;Wetter, Baer, Berry, Smith, y Larsen, 1992) se instruyó a los sujetos experimentales las instrucciones dadas a los sujetos experimentales que fingieran sintomatología muy grave y sin instruirlos en que podrían ser detectados por escalas, buscando de este modo una simulación extrema en la que este tipo de medidas son las efectivas. En segundo lugar, advertimos que la causa de los tamaños del efecto exageradamente elevados que habían encontrado descansaba en el grupo de contraste que no era ni de población general ni la población normativa, sino la penitenciaria (Gassen, Pietz, Spray, y Denney, 2007;Kurtz, 1992;Vaughan, 1995) o la psiquiátrica (Mihura et al, 2000). Por tanto, en estos estudios no se mide propiamente la simulación al no comprarse las respuestas simuladas con respuestas bajo instrucciones estándar de población normal.…”