This article provides an overview of issues related to the development and evaluation of competency in psychological assessment. Specifically, we delineate the goals, ideas, and directions identified by the psychological assessment work group in the Competencies Conference: Future Directions in Education and Credentialing in Professional Psychology. This is one of a series of articles published in this issue of the Journal of Clinical Psychology. Several other articles that resulted from the Competencies Conference will appear in Professional Psychology: Research and Practice and The Counseling Psychologist. The psychological assessment group was charged with the tasks of: (a). identifying the core components of psychological assessment competency; (b). determining the central educational and training experiences that will aid competency development; (c). explicating strategies for evaluating competence; and (d). establishing future directions for furthering the identification, training, and evaluation of competence in psychological assessment. We present a set of eight core competencies that we deemed important for achieving psychological assessment competency and discuss four guidelines for training in the domain of psychological assessment. A variety of methods for evaluating competencies in this domain are suggested, with emphasis on using a collaborative model of evaluation. Recommendations for future directions include strengthening the academic prerequisites for graduate school training; increasing training in culturally sensitive measures; incorporating innovative assessment-related technologies into training; and addressing discontinuities between academic training, internship, and practice environments.

The MMPI and Rorschach are consistently ranked among the most widely used psychological assessment instruments across adolescent and adult clinical settings. Although there is an extensive research literature available on each instrument individually, relatively little research attention has been focused on the interrelationships between these measures. This article reviews the literature derived from 37 studies that have reported interrelationships between MMPI and Rorschach variables in adult populations. The results of these studies generally indicate limited or minimal relationships between the MMPI and Rorschach. A number of methodological issues, however, prevent drawing firm conclusions from the literature at this time. Directions for future research are discussed, including consideration of issues related to sources of alpha and beta error and the need for studies examining the incremental validity of combinations of Rorschach and MMPI data in prediction to relevant external criteria.

This investigation extends the earlier research by Archer and Gordon (1988) by examining the extent to which combining indices from the newly released MMPI-A and the revised Rorschach Comprehensive System furnishes incremental validity in terms of improved diagnostic prediction. The predictive accuracy of selected MMPI-A and Rorschach variables conceptually related to diagnoses of depression and conduct disorder were compared in a clinical sample of 152 adolescents. Results of multivariate analyses of variance revealed some significant differences between diagnostic groups on several MMPI-A scales, and 1 significant difference on the Rorschach involving the Vista variable. Stepwise discriminant function analyses resulted in 2 MMPI-A scales and 2 Rorschach variables that collectively accounted for a small proportion of variance in the diagnosis of depression, and 3 MMPI-A scales that accounted for a significant component of variance in the conduct disorder diagnosis. Classification accuracy results indicated that the hit rate for depression diagnosis did not improve using an optimal linear combination of the 4 variables over the rates produced by the single use of either the MMPI-A Depression content scale (A-DEP) or Scale 2. For the conduct disorder diagnosis, the optimal linear combination of MMPI-A Conduct Problems (A-CON), Cynicism (A-CYN), and Immaturity (IMM) scales served as the best predictor, and no Rorschach variables contributed significantly to classification accuracy. Our results replicated the findings of Archer and Gordon (1988) in indicating that the combined use of MMPI-A and Rorschach variables does not appear to produce incremental increases in accuracy of diagnostic classification.

We examined empirical findings related to the integration of the Rorschach and the MMPI in assessing adolescents. Intercorrelations between 50 Rorschach variables and the 13 MMPI basic scales are reported for a clinical sample of 197 adolescents. Significant correlations only slightly exceeded the number expected by chance. A review of six additional studies of adolescent samples also generally revealed either very modest or nonsignificant relationships between the Rorschach and the MMPI. These findings leave open the possibility that combining data from the two instruments may increase incremental validity, an issue that should be assessed by using multivariate analyses. Guidelines for integrating Rorschach and MMPI data in clinical practices with adolescents are provided.

Principal axis factor analyses of the Rorschach Comprehensive System (CS) in a clinical sample of 152 adolescents yielded three clearly defined factors: Synthesized Complexity (defined by Zf, DQ+, and F%), Productivity (defined by R, D, and Dd), and Form Quality (defined by X+%, F+%, and X-%). Variables on the Synthesized Complexity and Form Quality factors were generally correlated with Wechsler Full Scale IQ, Verbal IQ, and Performance IQ scores. Overall, the factors in this adolescent sample replicated factors identified in earlier studies with adults. Implications for clinical practice are discussed.

We undertook this study to provide empirically derived interpretative recommendations for the MMPI-A Structural Summary through an evaluation of factor elevation patterns. We examined the frequency of single-factor, two-factor, and multifactor elevations in a clinical sample of 363 adolescents receiving inpatient, outpatient, or residential treatment. Two methods of determining factor elevation (a simple majority of scales and subscales within a specific factor with T-score elevations at critical level, versus the mean T score generated by all the scales and subscales for each factor) yielded comparable findings concerning the frequency of factor elevation, permitting reliance on the former, easier-to-use method to define elevation. The most salient two-factor co-elevations were the 3-7 (Disinhibition-Familial Alienation), 2-8 (Immaturity-Psychoticism), 1-5 (General Maladjustment-Health Concerns), and 2-7 (Immaturity-Familial Alienation) patterns. This study also examined whether factor pattern elevations varied as a function of age, gender, or diagnosis. Data analyses revealed no differences between younger (ages 13-14) and older (ages 15-18) adolescents on factor elevation as defined by the first criterion. However, significant differences were found between boys and girls on Factors 3 (Disinhibition) and 5 (Health Concerns). Results also indicated that a larger proportion of depressed adolescents obtained factor elevations on Factors 4 (Social Discomfort) and 5 (Health Concerns) compared to adolescents with conduct disorder diagnoses and other diagnoses. The findings of this study are discussed with reference to recommended procedures for using the Structural Summary in clinical assessment practice.

No abstract

The adolescent form of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-A) Structural Summary was developed from the results of a scale-level factor analysis conducted by Archer, Belevich, and Elkins based on the MMPI-A normative sample. The present study examined the scale-level factor structure of the MMPI-A in a clinical sample of 358 adolescents receiving outpatient or inpatient psychiatric services. A Principal Factor Analysis was performed using the raw score intercorrelation matrix from the 69 scales and subscales of the MMPI-A. The procedure yielded nine factors that accounted for 75.6% of the total variance in scale and subscale raw scores. Results from this clinical sample indicated that seven of the eight dimensions that appear on the MMPI-A Structural Summary were replicated in terms of producing highly similar factor structure correlation coefficients with those reported by Archer, Belevich, et al. for a normal sample. The present findings support the use of the MMPI-A Structural Summary for the assessment of adolescents in clinical settings.