The standard Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory with and without the K correction was compared for hit rate across patient (referral) and nonpatient (control) groups, both drawn from Air Force trainees. The impact of the K correction on profile height and configuration among the subjects in the referral group was also determined. Results show a total hit rate of 80.2% for the K correction and 78.3% for no K correction. Hit rate among the referral group only was 87.5% and 82.8% for K-corrected and non-K-corrected scales, respectively. The K-corrected Psychasthenia (Pt) and Schizophrenia (Sc) scales had higher means than did scales that were not K-corrected, but Psychopathic Deviate (Pd) was higher without the K. There were no differences for Hypochondriasis (Hs) and Hypomania (Ma). Single-scale and two-scale high points were frequently different under K and no-K conditions. It is suggested that the interpretive hypotheses available in the literature may not be applicable when K is not used. Overall, the data favor the use of the K correction.
Examined MMPI profiles in a sample of 345 patients who were referred for neuropsychological evaluation because of known or suspected brain damage in an effort to determine how these profiles compare to MMPI profiles among general mental health outpatients. The relationship between the severity of brain damage as determined by the neuropsychological evaluation and the severity of emotional problems as reflected by the MMPI also was examined. A third part of the study focused on two MMPI “organic” codes (“29” and “139”) to determine whether these code types reflect brain disorders at greater than chance level. Results indicate that a large majority of neuropsychology patients exhibit significant emotional problems as evidenced by one or more scale elevations on the MMPI. These patients differ considerably from general outpatients in terms of the scales most frequently elevated. In contrast to earlier findings, present results suggest only a low relationship between the severity of emotional problems and the severity of brain damage with much of this relationship reflected in SC scale elevations.
Investigated the effectiveness of the MMPI HS‐PT index to separate patients with a brain disorder from those with functional disturbance. A sample of 303 male patients who were referred for neuropsychological evaluation because of known or suspected brain damage was used in the study. Of these, 187 were diagnosed as organic and 116 as functional. The HS‐PT index failed to separate these groups beyond a chance level. Hit rates were 52.4% for the organic patients and 36.2% for the functional patients using the cut‐off established in previous research. No discriminations were possible at any of the HS‐PT ranges. Failure of the HS‐PT index to hold up in this sample of patients is probably due to some very different patient characteristics from those prevalent in earlier research.
The standard MMPI was compared with the MMPI based on local norms for hit rate between a patient and nonpatient sample. Using the patient group only, a comparison was also made between the two sets of norms to determine their differential influence on profile height and configuration. The standard MMPI produced a significantly better hit rate overall (80.2%) than did the MMPI with local norms (71.8%). Standard norms produced significantly higher means for all scales except Si. A majority of single scale and two scale high points were different under the two sets of norms. It is concluded that the standard norms are more effective among these subjects than are the local norms. Results also indicate that the usual interpretations applied to scale elevations with the standard norms may not be applicable when other norms are used.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.