Assessing alcoholics with the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory: A review.

Craig, Robert J.; Weinberg, Donna

doi:10.1037/0893-164x.6.3.200

Cited by 7 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The MCMI has been used successfully in a series of cluster analytic studies involving substance abusers (2,8). Evidence is also available for its reliability, stability, and predictive validity (4, 7, 8) among substance abusers.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several researchers have drawn upon Millon's (1) theory of personality and psycho pathology, and have used the theory-linked and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association coordinated Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI), as tools for understanding differences among substance abusers that may allow for more effective treatment planning (2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8). One useful approach has been to cluster analyze MCMI records in various groups of substance abusers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Substance Abuse Problems, Psychiatric Symptoms, and Post-Treatment Status in MCMI Psychopathology Subgroups of Cocaine Dependent Males

McMahon¹

2008

The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study involved cluster analysis of Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-II (MCMI-II) records of 304 cocaine dependent males and examined differences among personality-based clusters in medical, legal, employment, drug, alcohol, family, and psychiatric problem severity at treatment intake and in outcome status during the 12 months after completion of residential drug treatment. A hierarchical cluster analysis (Ward's method) was used to identify 4 cluster subgroups: antisocial, subclinical, neurotic, and high psychopathology. MANOVA revealed that membership in Neurotic and High Psychopathology Cluster subgroups was linked with more severe family and psychiatric problems at treatment intake than found in the Subclinical Cluster Subgroup (all ps < .05). The High Psychopathology Cluster Subgroup also had more severe drug problems at intake than did the Subclinical Subgroup (p < .05). Logistic regression analysis revealed that membership in the High Psychopathology Subgroup predicted relapse/loss to follow-up status after controlling for age, education, ethnicity, treatment program attended, and pretreatment cocaine use frequency (X(2) = 21.25, df = 3, p < .001).

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Substance Abuse Problems, Psychiatric Symptoms, and Post-Treatment Status in MCMI Psychopathology Subgroups of Cocaine Dependent Males

McMahon¹

2008

The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…No profiles were excluded for missing items (>12). Although the MCMI has been criticized as a diagnostic instrument (convergent validity), the reliability and validity of the first (MCMI-I) and second (MCMI-II) versions has been extensively evaluated, particularly in substance abusers (Craig & Weinberg, 1992a, 1992b). However, it should be noted that, to date, few studies have used the MCMI-III in substance abusers, and there have been significant changes in item content, scoring, and scales.…”

Section: Methods Participantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The first and second editions of the MCMI (see reviews by Craig & Weinberg, 1992a, 1992b and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (see review by Graham & Strenger, 1988) have been the most widely used omnibus psychopathology inventories in substance abuse samples. Two methods are commonly used to identify psychopathology subtypes.…”

Section: Psychopathology Subtyping Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, this multivariate classification strategy is a complex, sample-based approach, and decisions about cluster number and names can be subjective. Even when cluster solutions generalize across samples (Ball, 1996), the definition of decision rules to identify subtypes a priori (e.g., cutoff scores from a subset of predictive indicators) remains complex and sample specific.MCMI-I and MCMI-II protocol sorting procedures have most often identified depression or anxiety as the most common Axis I scale elevations, and antisocial or narcissistic as the most common Axis II scale elevations (Calsyn, Fleming, Wells, & Saxon, 1996;Craig & Olson, 1990;Craig & Weinberg, 1992a, 1992bMarsh, Stile, Stoughton, & Trout-Landen, 1988). These primary elevations are often combined with secondary elevations on borderline, passive-aggressive, aggressive-sadistic, histrionic, and alcohol and drug abuse scales.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III Subtypes of Opioid Dependence: Validity and Matching to Behavioral Therapies.

Ball

Nich²,

Rounsaville³

et al. 2004

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concurrent and predictive validity of 2 different methods of Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III subtyping (protocol sorting, cluster analysis) was evaluated in 125 recently detoxified opioid-dependent outpatients in a 12-week randomized clinical trial. Participants received naltrexone and relapse prevention group counseling and were assigned to 1 of 3 intervention conditions: (a) no-incentive vouchers, (b) incentive vouchers alone, or (c) incentive vouchers plus relationship counseling. Affective disturbance was the most common Axis I protocol-sorted subtype (66%), antisocial-narcissistic was the most common Axis II subtype (46%), and cluster analysis suggested that a 2-cluster solution (high vs. low psychiatric severity) was optimal. Predictive validity analyses indicated less symptom improvement for the higher problem subtypes, and patient treatment matching analyses indicated that some subtypes had better outcomes in the no-incentive voucher conditions. Addiction subtyping research has identified constellations of personality dimensions (Barnes, Murray, Patton, Bentler, & Anderson, 2000) and psychiatric disorders (Kranzler & Rounsaville, 1998) that are associated with the onset and severity of substance abuse and may have relevance for predicting treatment response. The presence of co-occurring psychiatric disorders seems to indicate a need for specialized or more intensive addiction treatment, and depression, antisocial personality, and general psychiatric symptom severity have been the most commonly investigated problems. Depressed cocaine abusers benefit from cognitive-behavioral coping skills and pharmacotherapy (Carroll et al., 1994), and opiate abusers with greater psychiatric severity improve with more intensive psychosocial programs (McLellan et al., 1983). Antisocial alcohol abusers seem to have better outcomes with coping skills than with interactional approaches (Kadden, Cooney, Getter, & Litt, 1989;Longabaugh et al., 1994), although Kadden, Litt, Cooney, Kabela, and Getter (2001) failed to replicate this effect. Antisocial methadone patients do as well as (Brooner, Kidorf, King, & Stoller, 1998;Silverman et al., 1998), and perhaps better than (Messina, Farabee, & Rawson, 2003), non-antisocial patients when provided with potent behavioral incentives, individual psychotherapy (Woody, McLellan, Luborsky, & O'Brien, 1985), or enhanced psychosocial services (Cacciola, Alterman, & Rutherford, 1995;Cacciola, Rutherford, Alterman, McKay, & Snider, 1996). The current study evaluated psychopathology subtypes derived from the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (MCMI-III;Millon, 1994), the most recent edition of a widely used instrument that measures Axis I and II diagnoses of the fourth edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV; American Psychiatric Association, 1994) and is also rooted in a biopsychosocial personality theory that may be relevant to the treatments compared in this study. MCMI Psychopathology Subtyping ProceduresThe ability to prospe...

show abstract

Rigid and extreme: A geometric representation of personality disorders in five-factor model space.

O’Connor¹,

Dyce²

2001

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personality disorder rigidity and extremity can be geometrically defined and operationalized within the 5-factor model (FFM) of personality. A series of geometric and substantive assumptions were derived and then tested in samples of college students (N = 1,323) and psychiatric patients (N = 86). Normal and disordered personalities were found to coexist in a variety of regions of the FFM multivariate space. Within regions, the profiles of normal and disordered personalities were very similar in characteristic configuration but notably different in profile variability. Personality-disordered individuals tended to be located in the perimeters or outer regions of the FFM space, as indicated by their longer vector lengths. These findings generalized across 2 measures of personality disorders and across 2 measures of normal personality traits.

show abstract

Assessing alcoholics with the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory: A review.

Cited by 7 publications

References 0 publications

Substance Abuse Problems, Psychiatric Symptoms, and Post-Treatment Status in MCMI Psychopathology Subgroups of Cocaine Dependent Males

Substance Abuse Problems, Psychiatric Symptoms, and Post-Treatment Status in MCMI Psychopathology Subgroups of Cocaine Dependent Males

Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III Subtypes of Opioid Dependence: Validity and Matching to Behavioral Therapies.

Rigid and extreme: A geometric representation of personality disorders in five-factor model space.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About