The detection of malingering and deception with A short form of the MMPI-2 based on the L, F, and K scales

Abstract

This project examined the use of a short inventory based on the validity subscales from the MMPI‐2. In Study 1, 69 subjects responded to the extracted L, F, and K items and to those items when embedded in the complete MMPI‐2. Correlations between administrations were equivalent to the original test‐retest reliabilities for these scales. In Study 2, 60 subjects responded to the short‐form with instructions to be honest, fake good, or fake bad. The correct classification rate was 77% using the standard MMPI‐2 rules of L > 70T for faking good and F > 70T for faking bad. Taken together, these findings suggest that the short‐form may be useful alone or when combined with other questionnaires to identify potential problems in self‐report.

A case report of 5 yr old boy with malingering in Wesley Guild Hospital, Ilesa, Nigeria

“…There are was no recognized protocol to manage malingering if suspected. Each case is unique and will require an approach peculiar for the specific symptomatology, educational, and cultural background of the client and the secondary gain associated 23. Malingering must be differentiated from factitious and dissociative disorders as well as pseudoseizure.…”

“…Malingering may occur in circumstances where the person wishes to avoid responsibilities or obtain compensation in situations where benefits might be given 1. Motives of malingering in children vary from amusement, avoidance of physical and psychological discomfort, and material gain 234. These clinical manifestations also often lead to a diagnostic dilemma as it is usually confused with factitious or dissociative disorders 5.…”

“…A wrong diagnosis of malingering may unjustly stigmatize a client and deny him needed care, so proper and detailed evaluation is necessary. Psychiatric illnesses are attractive to malingers over their perception that such illnesses are easy to duplicate 234…”

Recording of dissimulation and denial in the context of the psychosomatic evaluation at living kidney transplantation using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI)

“…In such a context, the validity scales of the MMPI or the openness scale of the Freiburg Personality Inventory (FPI) may prove useful as screening methods. Cassisi und Workman [40] demonstrate that the abbreviated form of the MMPI exclusively containing the items of the validity scales are as efficient in identifying a defensive response style of the patient as the use of the full version of the MMPI. Building on that, it would be conceivable to integrate the items of the validity scales in an inventory that focuses specifically on problems connected with transplantation.…”

The effects of description clarity and disorder type on MMPI-2 fake-bad validity indices

“…These three new scales plus the three still intact from the MMPI (i.e., F, F-K, and 0-S) offer six scales to detect faking bad in an MMPI-2 profile. Cassisi and Workman (1992) found that the F scale correctly identified more fakebad profiles (95% correct) than both the L and K scales (only 10% correct). Whereas Austin (1992) reported that the F, K, F-K, and 0 -S scales outperformed the L scale, Timbrook, Graham, Keiller, and Watts (1993) have indicated that the 0-S scale is no more useful than either F and L in the recognition of fake-bad profiles.…”