Comparison of the Wiener-Harmon Subtle-Obvious scales and the standard validity scales in detecting valid and invalid MMPI-2 profiles.

Abstract

The results from this study were presented in part at the 26th Annual Symposium on Recent Developments in the Use of the MMPI, St. Petersburg Beach, FL.The authors wish to thank Yossef S. Ben-Porath for his many helpful comments and suggestions made on earlier versions of this article.

Assessing Antisocial and Psychopathic Personalities

“…Since response style should be considered (Bannatyne et al, 1999;, and distortion should be assumed in all forensic evaluations (Meloy, 1989), the MMPI-2 validity scales take on special importance when assessing psychopathy. It appears that Scales L and F remain the most useful in classifying fake-bad and fake-good profiles (Timbrook, Graham, Keillor, & Watts, 1993), but attention must be paid to the relative configurations of VRIN, TRIN, Fb, Ds, and F(p). Megargee (2006b) has also developed a criminal infrequency scale (Fc) which may prove to be helpful in identifying problematic profiles among criminal offenders.…”

MMPI-2 validity scales versus domain specific measures in detection of factitious traumatic brain injury

“…The Infrequency scale ( F ; Greene, I99 l), Obvious and Subtle subscales (04; Wiener, 1948;Timbrook, Graham, Keiller, & Watts, 1993) and the Dissimulation Index (F-K, Gough, 1950) were developed as means of detecting exaggeration or outright manufacture of complaints atypical of psychiatric syndromes. The L scale was developed to detect extreme defensiveness, that is, the active attempt to hide or deny adjustment problems.…”

Differential validity of the MMPI-2 subtle and obvious scales with psychiatric inpatients: Scale 2

“…The clinical use of the Wiener and Harmon (Wiener, 1948) Subtle and Obvious scales has had a long and controversial history. Originally developed to detect deviant test-taking attitudes in the MMPI, the clinical utility of the Subtle and Obvious scales is questionable, as research that used the original MMPI clearly has shown (Dannenbaum & Lanyon, 1993;Herkov, Archer, & Gordon, 1991;Peterson, Clark, & Bennett, 1989;Rogers, 1983;Schretlen, 1988Schretlen, , 1990Wrobel & Lachar, 1982) and MMPI-2 (Berry, Baer, & Harris, 1991;Boone, 1994a;Butcher, 1989;Graham, Watts, & Timbrook, 1991;Herkov, Gordon, Gynther, & Greer, 1994;Peterson et al, 1989;Timbrook, Graham, & Watts, 1993;Weed, Ben-Porath, & Butcher, 1990). To summarize, the Subtle and Obvious scales "have led to ambiguous identification of faking" (Dubinsky, Gamble, & Rogers, 1985, p. 67) and may "attenuate the validity of the Full Scale by introducing variance that is not related to variance in the criterion measure" (Weed et al, 1990, p. 12).…”