Empirical correlates of frequently occurring two-point MMPI code types: A replicated study.

Abstract

Could a relatively small number of two-point code types account for a large proportion of MMPI protocols in a psychiatric setting? Also, could reliable behavioral and demographic correlates of these two-point code types be identified? To answer these questions, MMPI protocols of 588 hospitalized psychiatric patients were randomly divided into two subsamples. Within each, the profiles were classified according to 19 frequently occurring two-point code types (identified in a pilot study), permitting classification of 84% of the 588 profiles. For each subsample, each code type was compared with the remaining Ss on 68 behavioral and demographic variables. Although 300 or more significant differences were found for the comparisons in each subsample, in only 66 instances were the same differences significant in both subsamples. The relevance of these findings to MMPI interpretational practices is discussed.

Normalizing the MMPI

“…The available descriptions in the literature for scale combinations present a potpourri of contradictory descriptors to the MMPI interpreter. The D-PT combination, for example, is described by Marks, Seeman and Haller (1974) as Gilberstadt and Duker (1965) as chronically anxious and ambitious; by Lewandowski and Graham (1972) as less irritable and more socially competent than other patients; and by Caldwell (1972) as self-pitying and self-blaming. Descriptions constructed from the counterpart descriptors presented in Table 1 for these scales would be reflective, conscientious, and logical behavior for the adaptive D-PT combination, and inhibited and rigid behavior for the maladaptive mode.…”

Investigation of cluster analysis as a grouping procedure for MMPI

“…Lewandowski and Graham (1972) obtained similar results in their own repli-cated study. These results were impressive enough to con vince Marks, Seeman, and Haller (1974) to adopt a system which relaxes the old Marks and Seeman (1963) rules and be comes basically a two-point code system.…”

Interpretive Reliability of Six Computer-Based Test Interpretation Programs for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2

“…The CBTIs were based on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Second edition (Hathaway, McKinley, & MMPI Restandardization Committee, 1989), a self-report inventory composed of 567 true or false selfreferenced items. The MMPI-2 profiles chosen represent the most frequent codetypes in both inpatient and outpatient settings: 1/2, 1/3, 2/3, 2/4, 2/7, 2/8, 4/6, 4/7, 4/8, 4/9, 6/8, 6/9, 7/8, 8/9, 1/2/3, 2/4/7, 2/7/8, 6/7/8, over five scale elevations, and within normal limits (WNL; Archer, Griffin, & Aiduk, 1995;Graham, Ben-Porath, & McNulty, 1999;Greene, 2000;Lewandowski & Graham, 1972). The profiles were chosen with T-scores representing well-defined codetypes.…”