MMPI profiles of males accused of severe crimes: a cluster analysis

MCMI-III Profiles of Convicted Contact Sexual Offenders: A Cluster Analysis

“…First, results showed that there is considerable diversity in personality patterns among sexual offenders. As reported in previous studies (Espelage et al, 2003;Spaans et al, 2009;Suen, 2013), no prototypic personality profile was found. Consistent with Suen (2013), the mean scores for the full sample, higher for Compulsive and Narcissistic subscales (BR > 60), were not fully consistent with personality disorders usually related to violent behavior (i.e., antisocial, paranoid, narcissistic, borderline, and avoidant;Fountoulakis, Leucht, & Kaprinis, 2008;Nestor, 2002;Stone, 2007).…”

“…This group exhibited the highest scores on all personality subscales, except for Histrionic, Narcissistic, and Compulsive subscales, as well as on all syndrome subscales (p < .001); although no distinguishable personality profile was found among this group of sexual offenders, nor mean BR scores higher than 75. Studies indicating only two separate clusters raise doubt about the suitability of using the MCMI-III for classifying sexual offenders in forensic settings (Spaans et al, 2009). Furthermore, the two resulting clusters in this study were not associated with different types of sexual offenders, in the sense of different concrete MCMI-III prototypical profiles (e.g., aggressive-sadistic, avoidant, …), but only varied in the degree of general psychopathology (Espelage et al, 2003;Spaans et al, 2009).…”

“…The number of clusters found in several studies ranged between two (i.e., one cluster indicating no psychopathology and the other reflecting serious psychopathology) and ten, separating more predatory offenders from those likely to have also been victimized (the so-called Megargee System; Megargee, Carbonell, Bohn, & Sliger, 2001). Despite this, no study has found qualitatively distinct personality profiles in sex offenders' samples (Espelage et al, 2003;Spaans et al, 2009). On the other hand, studies using the PAI (Morey, 1991) to assess sexual offenders point towards some potential predictive ability of this tool (especially the antisocial scale) for recidivism outcomes among sex offenders (Boccaccini, Murrie, Hawes, Simpler, & Johnson, 2010;Jung et al, 2018); although it did not improve the validity of tailored measures for sexual recidivism risk assessment (Jung et al, 2018).…”

“…The MMPI has shown moderate to large effect sizes when distinguishing between sex offender and non sex offender groups; however, Davis and Archer (2010) suggest that those results may be reflective of general antisocial behavior rather than any more specific personality profiles in sexual offenders. Furthermore, other studies attempting to classify offenders by cluster analysis procedures with the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) raise doubts about the suitability and usefulness of this instrument for classification in forensic settings (Espelage et al, 2003;Spaans et al, 2009). The number of clusters found in several studies ranged between two (i.e., one cluster indicating no psychopathology and the other reflecting serious psychopathology) and ten, separating more predatory offenders from those likely to have also been victimized (the so-called Megargee System; Megargee, Carbonell, Bohn, & Sliger, 2001).…”

An Examination of Mental Health, Hostility, and Typology in Homicide Offenders

“…The 4-6-8 and 4-8-9 profile types were particularly prone to violent behavior. In an effort to replicate Megargee and Bohn (1979) on a sample of 247 pre-trial offenders using the MMPI-2, Spaans et al (2009) found only two clusters in their dataset: a disordered profile (with highest elevations on 4-6-8) and a nondisordered profile. They concluded that the MMPI-2 may not be useful in distinguishing between offender types.…”