The MMPI in Differentiating Early Multiple Sclerosis and Conversion Hysteria

Dodge, Gordon R.; Kolstoe, Ralph H.

doi:10.2466/pr0.1971.29.1.155

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As noted by Watson (1984), this scale has been cross-validated more than 10 times in studies with inpatient populations. Similarly, the P-N scale, which had been twice cross-validated (Dodge & Kolstoe, 1971; Schwartz & Brown, 1973), failed to differentiate significantly the somatoform group from the brain-damaged group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Examination of the relationship between the Sc-0 scale and a host of demographic variables, particularly age, would be interesting. Similarly, because all previously published successful cross-validations of the P-N scale used multiple sclerosis groups (Dodge & Kolstoe, 1971; Schwartz & Brown, 1973), it would be important to explore whether the P-N scale is successful only when it is differentiating a multiple sclerosis group from a somatoform group. Finally, it would be appropriate to include both valid and invalid MMPI profiles per the issues discussed earlier.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The P-N scale was developed to differentiate patients who presented with neurological complaints, but did not have brain damage from those who also presented with neurological complaints and had verifiable brain damage. Two studies (Dodge & Kolstoe, 1971;Schwartz & Brown, 1973) successfully cross-validated the P-N Scale. Golden, Sweet, and Osmon (1979), Sillitti (1982), and Graca, Hutzell, Gaffney, and Whiddon (1984) have examined these three scales in the task of differentiating braindamaged from schizophrenic groups of inpatients.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Relative efficacy of the SC-O, P-O, P-N, and SC MMPI scales in differentiating brain-damaged, brain-damaged schizophrenic, schizophrenic, and somatoform disorders in an outpatient setting

1989

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examined the efficacy of the Schizophrenic‐Organicity (SC‐O), Psychiatric‐Organic (P‐O), the Pseudo‐Neurological (P‐N), and the Schizophrenia (SC) MMPI subscales in differentiating the following four groups of outpatients: brain‐damaged (n = 35, brain‐damaged schizophrenics (n = 10), non‐brain‐damaged schizophrenics (n = 15), and somatoform disorders (n = 45). Both unmatched and matched samples were used in the analysis, and cut‐off scores were obtained. In an unmatched sample, results suggested that the SC scale was useful in differentiating braindamaged schizophrenics from brain‐damaged and somatoform disorders. With matched samples, the SC differentiated brain‐damaged schizophrenics well from other clinical groups, while the P‐O scale differentiated the nonbrain‐damaged schizophrenics from brain‐damaged and somatoform disorders. Furthermore, the P‐N scale discriminated brain‐damaged schizophrenics from non‐brain‐damaged schizophrenics, while the SC‐O scale was no longer significant. Results suggest that caution should be used in generalizing from previous studies (which used inpatient samples) to outpatient populations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Relative efficacy of the SC-O, P-O, P-N, and SC MMPI scales in differentiating brain-damaged, brain-damaged schizophrenic, schizophrenic, and somatoform disorders in an outpatient setting

1989

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some researchers have conducted studies using these correction factors and, in general, have supported their use for persons with MS (Dodge & Kolstoe, 1971;Marsh et al, 1982;Nelson et al, 2003;Schwartz & Brown, 1973). For example, in the Nelson et al (2003) study (the only one to use the MMPI-2), Elder's (1999) MS neurocorrection factor was used for 70 persons with MS and 70 controls.…”

Section: Correction Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In particular, persons with MS may endorse these questions on the basis of symptoms that are a result of their medical illness, rather than psychiatric conditions, as was the original intent of the questions. Because of the questions that overlap physical and psychiatric symptoms, populations with neurological disorders have consistently been shown to have elevations on certain scales (Dodge & Kolstoe, 1971;Wilson, Olson, Gascon, & Brumback, 1982). However, persons with MS are not immune to psychiatric difficulties, and in cases of scale elevations, it is difficult to know if scores are elevated because of a true psychopathology or whether they are elevated because of the physical disease of MS.…”

Section: The Mmpi-2 and Msmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory‐2 With Persons Diagnosed With Multiple Sclerosis

Hayes¹,

Granello

2009

Jour of Counseling & Develop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Counselors who assess persons with multiple sclerosis (MS) using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory‐2 (MMPI‐2; T. N. Butcher, W. G. Dahlstrom, J. R. Graham, A. Tellegen, & B. Kaemmer, 1989) may find scale elevations on Scales 1, 2, 3, and 8. These elevations may be due, at least in part, to specific questions on the MMPI‐2 that assess physiological or neurological symptoms that are common in MS. Researchers have identified specific questions that have overlap between psychological and physiological symptoms and created neurocorrections that can be used, along with a thorough clinical interview, to more accurately assess persons with MS.

show abstract

MMPI differentiation of multiple sclerosis vs. Pseudoneurologic patients

Schwartz

Brown

1973

J. Clin. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PROBLEMTo distinguish patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) from those with nonorganic pseudoneurologic (P) disorders, two PIIMP1 indices-the 17-item pseudoneurologic (PsN) scale'', ') and the 7-item complex of Hovey(2. 3)-have been used. Based on our experience with 70 patients with multiple sclerosis and 61 patients with pseudoneurologic disorders, this paper evaluates the usefulness of these two indices.Shaw and Matthews ( 7 ) and Shaw@) reported that the 17-item pseudoneurologic scale differentiated pseudoneurologic and neurologic groups of disorders. By a pseudoneurologic disorder, these authors meant a disorder with symptoms that suggested organic brain dysfunction but with a final diagnosis of psychiatric condition. Shaw and J . l a t t h e w~(~) identified 81% of such patients; they had only 25% false positives, and in a cross-validation that used the same cut-off point of 7 or more items, they identified 67% of the patients with pseudoneurologic disorders and 22% false positives.Dodge and Kolstoe('), who used the same cut-off score of 7 or more scorable items, reported that the PsN scale identified 10 of 14 patients with early multiple sclerosis and 11 of 13 patients with conversion hysteria.Hovey(20 3 , reported on five and then an additional two items. These items differentiated in repeated samples, first between patients with central nervous system disease and those without central nervous system disease and second, between patients with and without R4S. Dodge and Kolstoe'l) reported that the original five items were not useful to differentiate early RIS and conversion hysteria. Their study, however, had four limitations: the small sample of 14 MS and 13 conversion hysteria patients; the lack of data with regard t o the disability ratings; the mixing of sexes in the analysis; and the variability of age. The latter two criticisms are a direct result of limited sample size. A fifth limitation is the omission of the additional two items reported by Hovey C3) as assisting in differentiation.The present research has these advantages: increased sample size of both MS and P patients, which makes possible sex and age evaluation; the incorporation of the additional two Hovey items; the use of a widely accepted neurologic disability rating scale for MS patients; and information on the duration of symptoms. METHODSDiagnostic Categories: Multiple Sclerosis. The 70 patients with MS included 28 men and 42 women. Table 1 provides data of ratings for disability (10-point scale; 0-9) and age means. These Ss were rated for disability according t o the system of K~r t z k e (~8 5 ) . Of the 70 patients, 30 were given a rating of 1; 13 were rated 2; 8 were rated 3; 6 were rated 4; 4 were rated 6; 8 were rated 7; 1 patient was rated 0 (normal neurologic examination) ; and there were no patients with ratings of 5, 8, and 9.Pseudoneurologic Disorder. The 61 patients in the P group included 25 men and 36 women. This group comprised patients who were referred for neurologic examination, but in whom no neurologic and usually ...

show abstract

The MMPI in Differentiating Early Multiple Sclerosis and Conversion Hysteria

Cited by 11 publications

References 8 publications

Relative efficacy of the SC-O, P-O, P-N, and SC MMPI scales in differentiating brain-damaged, brain-damaged schizophrenic, schizophrenic, and somatoform disorders in an outpatient setting

Relative efficacy of the SC-O, P-O, P-N, and SC MMPI scales in differentiating brain-damaged, brain-damaged schizophrenic, schizophrenic, and somatoform disorders in an outpatient setting

Use of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory‐2 With Persons Diagnosed With Multiple Sclerosis

MMPI differentiation of multiple sclerosis vs. Pseudoneurologic patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About