Detection of Random Responding on the MMPI--A

Abstract

We examined random responding on the MMPI-A in 106 adolescents from the general population. Participants were asked to report on the frequency, location, and reasons for any random responses occurring during a standard administration of the MMPI-A. Relationships between self-reported random responding and validity indices (F1, F2, F, and Variable Response Inconsistency [VRIN] scale) were examined. In addition, each participant was randomly assigned to 1 of 5 groups, with each group completing an assigned portion (0, 25%, 50%, 75%, or 100%) of an MMPI-A answer sheet without access to the test booklet, and the utility of the validity scales in discriminating standard protocols from all or partially random protocols was investigated. Most adolescents acknowledged one or more random responses correlated significantly with F but not VRIN. Validity scales were sensitive to all or partially random protocols, and produced high classification rates when discriminating among groups.

The Short Form-12 Health Survey was a valid instrument in Chinese adolescents

“…This may indicate questionable internal reliability of the SF36v2 or the lack of representation, with only two items of MH in SF-12v2 to the five items of the same scale in SF36v2. On the other hand, the low internal reliability of MH may also be attributed to the presence of inconsistent responding, which may occur when respondents complete a questionnaire without comprehending the items [46]. The MH is the only scale in the SF-12v2 with one positively worded and one negatively worded item.…”

“…Inconsistent responding appeared to be common in adolescents or students, especially in a long questionnaire. Different scales have been developed and incorporated to discriminate between valid and inconsistent responses [46,48,49]. Unfortunately, none of these scales are available and tested in the Chinese population, and further work is urgently needed to determine their applicability in ethnic Chinese.…”

The Conscientious Responders Scale

“…In addition, the classification accuracy of the CRS should be examined at finer gradients of random responding, for example, in identifying responders who engage in random responding in only 25% of a questionnaire's items versus 100% of them. Research on the prevalence of random responding suggests that this form of intermittent random responding may account for the bulk of all random responding cases, as most responders admit to responding randomly to at least some of a questionnaire's items, but few report doing it to all of them (e.g., Baer, Ballenger, Berry, & Wetter, 1997).…”

Inconsistent reports of risk behavior among Brazilian middle school students: National School Based Survey of Adolescent Health (PeNSE 2009/2012)

“…Fewer than 4% of the participants were flagged in more than two domains, consistent with previous estimates of careless responding 59,60 . This finding may suggest that, in the case of the PeNSE survey, the inconsistencies are unlikely to derive from "complete indifference or pervasive carelessness" 60,61 .…”