2021
DOI: 10.1037/pas0001042
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Criterion validity of MMPI-3 scores in preemployment evaluations of public safety candidates.

Abstract: The present study evaluated the criterion validity and practical utility of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-3 (MMPI-3) scores in preemployment evaluations of police candidates (n = 377) and candidates for other public safety occupations (n = 276) in the Midwestern United States. Preemployment psychological reports were used to rate problems in the ten California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training screening dimensions (POST-10 dimensions). MMPI-3 T score means and standard deviations… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

4
21
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
4
21
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Like the substantive scales, there were no practically meaningful differences across experience levels on the MMPI-3 underreporting Validity Scales, Uncommon Virtues (L) and Adjustment Validity (K). Mean scores on these scales were meaningfully higher than the MMPI-3 normative sample, which is to be expected in the context of a preemployment evaluation (Corey & Ben-Porath, 2020, 2022) and consistent with previous research (e.g., Roberts et al, 2019; Tarescavage, Corey, & Ben-Porath, 2015; Tarescavage, Fischler, et al, 2015; Whitman, Elias, et al, 2021). Those with no prior LE experience did produce L scores that were 1.16T and 1.99T higher than those with less than 5 years and 5 or more years of experience, respectively.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 89%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Like the substantive scales, there were no practically meaningful differences across experience levels on the MMPI-3 underreporting Validity Scales, Uncommon Virtues (L) and Adjustment Validity (K). Mean scores on these scales were meaningfully higher than the MMPI-3 normative sample, which is to be expected in the context of a preemployment evaluation (Corey & Ben-Porath, 2020, 2022) and consistent with previous research (e.g., Roberts et al, 2019; Tarescavage, Corey, & Ben-Porath, 2015; Tarescavage, Fischler, et al, 2015; Whitman, Elias, et al, 2021). Those with no prior LE experience did produce L scores that were 1.16T and 1.99T higher than those with less than 5 years and 5 or more years of experience, respectively.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 89%
“…Altogether, the median difference in elevation frequencies across all groups was 0.0%. Similar to previous research, clinical elevations (≥65T) on substantive scales were rare for all experience levels, with the exceptions of scores on CMP and SFI (Whitman, Elias, et al, 2021), and to a lesser extent, Dominance (DOM) and Aggressiveness (AGGR). There was also more variability across groups for elevations ≥65T on CMP and SFI, with 9.4% of those with no experience producing scores ≥65T on both scales and smaller proportions of the experienced group producing such elevations (4.2% and 3.6% of the groups with less than 5 years and 5 or more years of prior LE experience elevated CMP, and 1.4% and 6.0% of these groups elevated SFI, respectively).…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 85%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…To do so, we evaluated whether the validity of inferences drawn from MMPI-3 scores can generalize across male and female police candidates and across police candidates and correctional officer, dispatcher, and firefighter candidates. Like Whitman et al (2021), we compared the strength of validity evidence (i.e., correlations) across male and female police candidates. We also compared the strength of validity evidence across police candidates and nonpolice public safety candidates; however, rather than using an aggregate sample of all nonpolice candidates as did Whitman et al (2021), we compared correlations across police candidates and subsamples of correctional officer, dispatcher, and firefighter candidates.…”
Section: Present Studymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Like Whitman et al (2021), we compared the strength of validity evidence (i.e., correlations) across male and female police candidates. We also compared the strength of validity evidence across police candidates and nonpolice public safety candidates; however, rather than using an aggregate sample of all nonpolice candidates as did Whitman et al (2021), we compared correlations across police candidates and subsamples of correctional officer, dispatcher, and firefighter candidates. In addition, inferences drawn from MMPI-3 scores are impacted by consideration of means and standard deviations (SDs) of these scores in preemployment evaluation contexts as well as the frequency with which scales are elevated at particular T score cutoffs.…”
Section: Present Studymentioning
confidence: 99%