Empirical vs. factorial validity in personality inventories: The MMPI-2 and the restructured RC scales

Abstract

Since 2003, several American publications have appeared on "Restructured Clinical Scales RC". These scales were constructed in contradiction with the empirical psychometric strategy adopted from the outset for the MMPI (1943) and MMPI-2 (1989). Rather, the RC scales are based on a theory-factor strategy, which long-time MMPI/MMPI-2 experts disavow because it does not fulfill its promise of validity. In 2003, the RC scales (Tellegen et al., 2003) were first arbitrarily grafted to the set of empirical MMPI-2 scales. Then, in 2008 (see Tellegen and Ben-Porath), they were instead integrated as an asset to a brand-new instrument based on factor analysis, called MMPI-2-RF on the sole basis of borrowing 338 of the 567 items of the MMPI-2. The background to this article is therefore the possible adulteration of the most important personality test used in forensic expertise and in clinical contexts. Our goal is to review both the psychometric foundations of the MMPI-2 and the value of these RC scales (Tellegen et al., 2003) in the now open confrontation with the MMPI-2.

From MMPI to MMPI-2-RF/MMPI-3: The abandonment of subterfuge

“…Ben-Porath, no doubt to avoid controversy, laments from Friedman and Nichols (2017) the absence of "a serious and intellectually honest analysis" concerning the RC scales, the MMPI-2-RF and a future MMPI-3. Should we have hoped for such a serious analysis in The National Psychologist Newspaper, a publication deemed not particularly 'analytical' wheras, as documented above, Ben-Porath's regrets can easily be mopped up by the extensive literature catalogued here which includes, among others, Friedman and Nichols's (2017) questioning; see also Parisien (2021bParisien ( , 2021a. 3.…”

“…In the mean time, these scales have been the subject of serious warnings about their questionable validity as well as their vulnerability to attitudes of minimization or exaggeration on the part of the respondents. The reader can consult a recent review of the literature in this regard in Parisien (2021bParisien ( , 2021a.…”

“…By the publication and distribution of the MMPI-3, with the RC scales and the MMPI-2-RF integrated therein, it is on the contrary the identity and the very existence of the MMPI/MMPI-2 that are at stake, including the hundreds of thousands of accumulated data on which its empirical validity and 'practical utility' is based. Whatever their real motivation, the authors of the new instrument, through publishers, use the acronym MMPI to appropriate an instrument that no longer corresponds to what they subsequently created (see Parisien, 2021bParisien, , 2021a . The controlling commercial authorities play a much more powerful role here, that of relegating the MMPI-2 to oblivion.…”

“…2022 sent to us by Daniel Ruchenne). It is equipped with some improvements always based on the same premises and method of construction and it remains marked by the same methodological and psychometric discontinuity with the MMPI/MMPI-2 (see Parisien, 2021bParisien, , 2021a. It is still based on the restructured RC scales, while illegitimately keeping the "MMPI" acronym.…”

“…In 2008 , the MMPI-2-RF, "RF" for Restructured Form, a self-report instrument of 338 items grouped into 51 new or revised scales including the RC scales, appeared. The conceptual-factorial approach was again favored for all the scales of the MMPI-2-RF (see Parisien, 2021bParisien, , 2021a.…”