9/13/2017
1
THE MMPI‐2‐RF
Psychometrics,
Psychopathological Convergence,
and
Setting‐Specific Utility
1
Agenda
Introduction and Overview of the MMPI-2-RF
Examination of psychometric properties
Mapping the MMPI-2-RF onto pathological models
Setting-specific utility
2
Overview of the MMPI-2-RF3
Overview of the MMPI-2-RF
338-item restructured version of MMPI-2 Published in 2008 Subset of MMPI-2 item pool
Approximately 6th grade reading level Majority of the MMPI-2-RF items fall between the 5th and 7th
grades Per reported data (Dahlstrom et al., 1994)
Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level = 4.5 PAI = ~ 4.3 Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level
Additional problems with likert-type responding (“Sometimes I …”)
MCMI-III = ~ 5.6 Flesch-Kincaid Reading Level 73% of items have a reading level of 7th grade or above (Akeson &
Mattson, in process)
Norms based on MMPI-2 sample MMPI-3?
4
9/13/2017
2
Overview of the MMPI-2-RF
35-50 minutes for booklet administration Less time needed for computer administration Audio Administration (Computer or CD)
No K correction offered Lack of empirical support
Only uses NON-GENDERED scores Why?
Linear T Scores Validity Scales and the 2 Interest Scales
Uniform T Scores All other substantive scales
8
9 10
Psychometric Rationale & Properties12
9/13/2017
3
Why Restructure the Clinical Scales?
Although it has long been recognized that the Clinical Scales (CSs) contain compelling and interpretively meaningful information, they are not psychometrically optimal when used as aggregate measures of psychopathology. (Ben-Porath, 2012)
Why? Higher than expected intercorrelations
Substantial item overlap between scales
Heterogeneous item content
13
Why Restructure the Clinical Scales?
Intercorrelations Clinical Scale (CS) 7, a measure of emotional dysfunction,
and CS 8 (disordered thinking) correlate, on average, around .90 While these two constructs DO co-occur – they do not, and should
not, do so at this rate
Item Overlap CS 7 and CS 8 share 17 items MMPI-2 Item 31 is keyed “True” on five of the eight original
CSs Heterogeneous Item Content
Ambiguous scale interpretation The problem of the subtle items … AND criterion keying
14
Development of the RC Scales(Ben-Porath, 2012)
Capture Demoralization Demoralization is characterized by an unhappy,
dysphoric mood, a sense of helplessness and inability to cope with one’s current circumstances, and general dissatisfaction with one’s condition (Sellbom et al., 2008)
Isolate the construct and measure once A demoralization-like construct had previously been thought
to be the elusive “MMPI 1st Factor”
Thought to be the cause of the intercorrelations between the CSs
15
Tellegen (1985) – Affective Circumplex16
Development of the RC Scales(Ben-Porath, 2012)
Factor Analyze MMPI-2 Clinical Scales Identify distinctive “core components” In general, the RC Scales directly relate to the
corresponding Clinical Scales; however, this is not always the case
Construct “Seed Scales” for each core component Based on factor analytic and correlational data
Deriving Final RC Scales Entire MMPI-2 item pool utilized, internal reliability
examined, aimed at providing non-overlapping items
17
Internal Consistency of the Clinical and Restructured Clinical Scales of the MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF (Normative Sample) (Graham, 2012)
Internal Consistency Coefficients (Alpha)
Scale Men Women
MMPI-2(n = 82)
MMPI-2-RF(n = 1138)
MMPI-2(n = 111)
MMPI-2-RF(n = 1462)
--- / RCd (dem) -- .87 -- .89
Hs / RC1 (som) .77 .73 .81 .78
D / RC2 (lpe) .59 .68 .64 .62
Hy / RC3 (cyn) .58 .80 .56 .79
Pd / RC4 (asb) .60 .76 .62 .74
Mf / --- .58 -- .37 --
Pa / RC6 (per) .34 .63 .39 .65
Pt / RC7 (dne) .85 .81 .87 .83
Sc / RC8 (abx) .85 .70 .86 .71
Ma / RC9 (hpm) .58 .79 .61 .76
Si / --- .82 .84
18
9/13/2017
4
Reliability and Validity
Comparisons between several varying clinical samples provide data that the RC Scales show: Comparable or improved reliability Substantially reduced saturation with Demoralization Substantially reduced inter-correlations Comparable or improved convergent validity Substantially improved discriminant validity
19
Reliability and Validity
Subsequent studies have provided additional evidence supporting the use of the RC Scales Replicated in: College counseling settings (Sellbom, Ben-Porath, & Graham, 2006)
Community-dwelling veterans (Simms et al., 2005)
Outpatient sample (Wallace, A., & Liljequist, L., 2005)
Private practice (Sellbom, Graham, & Schenck, 2006)
Substance abuse treatment patients (Forbey & Ben-Porath, 2007)
Bariatric surgery candidates (Wygant et al., 2007)
Inpatients (Handel & Archer, 2008)
College students (Osberg et al., 2008)
20
Hierarchical Structure of the RF
51 Scales 9 Validity Scales
3 Higher-Order Scales (H-O)
9 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales Foundational Basis
23 Specific Problems (SP) Scales 5 Somatic/Cognitive
9 Internalizing
4 Externalizing
5 Interpersonal
2 Interest Scales
5 PSY-5 Scales
22
MMPI-2-RF: Validity Scales
VRIN-r: Variable Response Inconsistency – Random responding TRIN-r: True Response Inconsistency – Fixed responding F-r: Infrequent Responses – Responses infrequent in the general
populationFp-r: Infrequent Psychopathology Responses – Responses infrequent in
psychiatric populations Fs: Infrequent Somatic Responses – Somatic complaints infrequent in
medical patient populationsFBS-r: Symptom Validity – Somatic and cognitive complaints associated at
high levels with over-reportingRBS: Response Bias Scale – Exaggerated memory complaintsL-r: Uncommon Virtues – Rarely claimed moral attributes or activitiesK-r: Adjustment Validity – Avowals of good psychological adjustment
associated at high levels with under-reporting
MMPI-2-RF: Higher-Order Scales
EID – Emotional/Internalizing Dysfunction –Problems associated with mood and affect
THD – Thought Dysfunction – Problems associated with disordered thinking
BXD – Behavioral/Externalizing Dysfunction –Problems associated with under-controlled behavior
9/13/2017
5
Identical to MMPI-2 RC Scales
RCd: Demoralization – General unhappiness and dissatisfaction
RC1: Somatic Complaints – Diffuse physical health complaints
RC2: Low Positive Emotions – Lack of positive emotional responsiveness
RC3: Cynicism – Non-self-referential beliefs expressing distrust and a generally low opinion of others
RC4: Antisocial Behavior – Rule breaking and irresponsible behavior
MMPI-2-RF: RC Scales
RC6: Ideas of Persecution – Self-referential beliefs that others pose a threat
RC7: Dysfunctional Negative Emotions – Maladaptive anxiety, anger, irritability
RC8: Aberrant Experiences – Unusual perceptions or thoughts
RC9: Hypomanic Activation – Over-Activation, aggression, impulsivity, and grandiosity
MMPI-2-RF: RC Scales
Somatic/Cognitive
MLS: Malaise – Overall sense of physical debilitation, poor health
GIC: Gastrointestinal Complaints – Nausea, recurring upset stomach, and poor appetite
HPC: Head Pain Complaints – Head and neck pain
NUC: Neurological Complaints – Dizziness, weakness, paralysis, loss of balance, etc.
COG: Cognitive Complaints – Memory problems, difficulties concentrating
Specific Problems (SP) Scales
Internalizing (RCd Facets):
SUI: Suicidal/Death Ideation – Direct reports of suicidal ideation and recent attempts
HLP: Helplessness/Hopelessness – Belief that goals cannot be reached or problems solved
SFD: Self-Doubt -- Lack of self-confidence, feelings of uselessness
NFC: Inefficacy – Belief that one is indecisive and inefficacious
Specific Problems (SP) Scales
Specific Problems (SP) Scales
Internalizing (RC7 Facets):
STW: Stress/Worry -- Preoccupation with disappointments, difficulty with time pressure
AXY: Anxiety – Pervasive anxiety, frights, frequent nightmares
ANP: Anger Proneness -- Becoming easily angered, impatient with others
BRF: Behavior-Restricting Fears -- Fears that significantly inhibit normal behavior
MSF: Multiple Specific Fears -- Fears of blood, fire, thunder, etc.
Specific Problems (SP) Scales
Externalizing:RC4 Facets
JCP: Juvenile Conduct Problems – Difficulties at school and at home, stealing
SUB: Substance Abuse – Current and past misuse of alcohol and drugs
RC9 Facets
AGG: Aggression – Physically aggressive, violent behavior
ACT: Activation – Heightened excitation and energy level
9/13/2017
6
Specific Problems (SP) Scales
Interpersonal: FML: Family Problems – Conflictual family
relationships
IPP: Interpersonal Passivity – Being unassertive and submissive
SAV: Social Avoidance – Avoiding or not enjoying social events
SHY: Shyness – Bashful, prone to feel inhibited and anxious around others
DSF: Disaffiliativeness – Disliking people and being around them
AES: Aesthetic-Literary Interests – Literature, music, the theater
MEC: Mechanical-Physical Interests – Fixing and building things, the outdoors, sports
MMPI-2-RF: Interest Scales
MMPI-2-RF: PSY-5 Scales
Revised versions of dimensional model of personality pathology developed by Allan Harkness and John McNulty:
AGGR-r: Aggressiveness-Revised – Instrumental, goal-directed aggression
PSYC-r: Psychoticism-Revised – Disconnection from reality
DISC-r: Disconstraint-Revised – Under-controlled behavior
NEGE-r: Negative Emotionality/Neuroticism-Revised –Anxiety, insecurity, worry, and fear
INTR-r: Introversion/Low Positive Emotionality-Revised – Social disengagement and anhedonia
Diagnostic Construct Validity 34
Protected, Unpublished Data
35
Mapping the MMPI-2-RF36
9/13/2017
7
Psychopathological Convergence37
Studies show the MMPI-2-RF scales: Map onto normal personality models MPQ (Sellbom & Ben-Porath, 2005)
NEO-PI-R (Sellbom, Ben-Porath, & Bagby, 2008)
As well as current models of psychopathology Sellbom, Ben-Porath, & Bagby (2008) Sellbom, Ben-Porath, Lilienfeld, Patrick, & Graham (2005) Sellbom, Ben-Porath, & Stafford (2007) Quilty, Sellbom, Tackett, & Bagby (2009) Watson (2005) Wolf, Miller, Orazem, Weierich, Castillo, Milford, Kaloupek, Keane (2008)
Good predictors of future problematic behavior in law enforcement candidates (Sellbom, Fischler, & Ben-Porath, 2007)
And failure to complete substance abuse tx (Mattson, Powers, Halfaker, Akeson, & Ben-Porath, 2012)
Equally valid for African Americans and Caucasians (Castro et al., 2008)
Empirical Model (Watson, 2005)
38
Internalizing Convergence39
InternalizingInternalizing
DistressDistressMajor DepressiveMajor Depressive
Dysthymic DisorderDysthymic Disorder
Generalized AnxietyGeneralized Anxiety
Post-Traumatic StressPost-Traumatic Stress
FearFear
Social PhobiaSocial Phobia
Specific PhobiaSpecific Phobia
AgoraphobiaAgoraphobia
Panic DisorderPanic Disorder
Obsessive CompulsiveObsessive Compulsive
InternalizingDisorders
Diagram adapted from Krueger (1999) and Watson (2005)
InternalizingInternalizing
Distress(RCd)
Distress(RCd) Major DepressiveMajor Depressive
Dysthymic DisorderDysthymic Disorder
Generalized AnxietyGeneralized Anxiety
Post-Traumatic StressPost-Traumatic Stress
Fear(RC7)Fear(RC7)
Social PhobiaSocial Phobia
Specific PhobiaSpecific Phobia
AgoraphobiaAgoraphobia
Panic DisorderPanic Disorder
Obsessive CompulsiveObsessive Compulsive
Associations withDemoralization
(Sellbom, Ben-Porath, & Bagby, 2008)
InternalizingInternalizing
Distress(RCd)
Distress(RCd) Major DepressiveMajor Depressive
Dysthymic DisorderDysthymic Disorder
Generalized AnxietyGeneralized Anxiety
Post-Traumatic StressPost-Traumatic Stress
Fear(RC7)Fear(RC7)
Social PhobiaSocial Phobia
Specific PhobiaSpecific Phobia
AgoraphobiaAgoraphobia
Panic DisorderPanic Disorder
Obsessive CompulsiveObsessive Compulsive
Associations withNegative Activation
(Clark, 2005; Sellbom et al., 2008; Watson, 2005)
9/13/2017
8
InternalizingInternalizing
DistressDistressMajor DepressiveMajor Depressive
Dysthymic DisorderDysthymic Disorder
Generalized AnxietyGeneralized Anxiety
Post-Traumatic StressPost-Traumatic Stress
FearFear
Social PhobiaSocial Phobia
Specific PhobiaSpecific Phobia
AgoraphobiaAgoraphobia
Panic DisorderPanic Disorder
Obsessive CompulsiveObsessive Compulsive
Associations withPositive Activation
(Clark, 2005; Sellbom et al., 2008; Watson, 2005)
Externalizing Convergence44
45
Externalizing
Substance Abuse
Alcohol Dependence
Drug
Dependence
Aggression,
Callousness,
Excitement-Seeking
Antisocial
Behavior
Conduct
Disorder
Constraint
(reversed)
ExternalizingDisorders
(Krueger et al., 2002; Krueger et al., 2007)
Externalizing Convergence46
Sellbom, Ben-Porath, & Stafford (2009 SPA Presentation)
Using samples of: 21,836 men in correctional settings 1,065 men and women in forensic contexts 402 male and female college students
Found: Variance on the externalizing domain corresponds with the
hierarchical framework of the MMPI-2-RF BXD associated with a broad range of externalizing facets
Best marker of general impulsivity/disinhibition RC scales show a more distinct pattern
Specific facet information and specific markers (e.g., RC9 & Narcissism) SP scales show unique differential pattern of associations
JCP – juvenile delinquency; SUB – alcohol and drug dependence; AGG – trait aggression; ACT – trait activation
Interpretive Strategy47
MMPI-2-RF Interpretation
Substantive Scale InterpretationBegin with Higher-Order Scales If only one is elevated, use it as starting point then
interpret all RC, Specific Problems, PSY-5 scales in that area When interpreting RC Scales:
proceed in order of elevation incorporate relevant SP Scales and PSY-5
If more than one H-O Scale is elevated, use highest as starting point, then proceed to next highest
If no H-O Scale is elevated, proceed to RC Scales and interpret by domain, in order of elevation, incorporating relevant SP and PSY-5 scales
9/13/2017
9
MMPI-2-RF Interpretation
Substantive Scale InterpretationOnce all H-O and RC Scales are covered: Interpret any remaining elevated SP Scales
Interpret Interpersonal and Interest scales
If relevant, add diagnostic and treatment considerations along the way
9/13/2017
10
Medical Settings
Setting-Specific Utility55
Medical Settings56
The technical manual (Tellegen & Ben-Porath, 2008) contains: Empirical correlates
Medical comparison groups
In addition, you can select appropriate comparison groups when using the MMPI-2-RF in medical settings Bariatric Surgery Candidates
Spine Surgery/Spinal Cord Stimulator Candidates
Bariatric Surgery Candidates57
Factors associated with poor outcome, including ability to maintain focus on self-care when faced with adversity: Maladaptive (acting out) behavior (BXD, RC4, AGG)
Affective instability (RCd, RC7, SUI, AXY)
Depression (RC2, SFD)
Low Stress tolerance (MLS, STW, AXY, SUB) Increased risk for suicidal ideation/intent and lifetime
substance abuse problems (Tarescavage et al., 2013)
Spine Surgery / Spinal Cord Stimulator58
Risk factors: Pain Sensitivity (RC1, MLS, HPC, NUC)
Depression (RCd, RC2, SUI)
Anxiety (RCd, RC7, STW, AXY)
Anger (RC7, ANP, AGG)
Catastrophizing ([low]K-r, RCd, MLS)
Disability-seeking (Fs, FBS-r, MLS)
Low self-esteem (SFD)
Excessive guardedness (L-r, K-r)
Chronic Pain59
Similar risk factors as the Spinal Surgery group; however: Profiles tend to be more elevated and “chronic”
More likely to be involved in disability claims
Chronic pain samples generally exhibit higher levels of co-elevated internalizing psychopathology scales Chronic pain patients tend to report higher levels of
depression, amotivation, and helplessness
60
V R IN -r T R IN -r F-r Fp -r Fs FBS -r R BS L-r K-r
Mean 55 57 71 53 60 77 67 69 64
Ms. G - Chronic Pain
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
VRIN-r TRIN-r F-r Fp-r Fs FBS-r RBS L-r K-r
MMPI-2-RF Validity Scales
F
9/13/2017
11
61
EID THD BXD RCd RC1 RC2 RC3 RC4 R C6 R C7 R C8 RC9
EID THD BXD RCd RC1 RC2 RC3 RC4 RC6 RC7 RC8 RC9
Mean 74 40 50 71 84 70 65 51 60 68 39 45
Ms. G - Chronic Pain
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
EID THD BXD RCd RC1 RC2 RC3 RC4 RC6 RC7 RC8 RC9
MMPI-2-RF Higher-Order (HO) and Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales
62
Ms. G - Chronic Pain
N F C S T W AXY ANP BR F
MLS GIC HPC NUC COG SUI HLP SFD N F C S T W AXY AN P BR F M S F
Mean 80 74 55 60 69 65 74 66 68 61 67 54 56 49
Ms. G - Chronic Pain
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
MLS GIC HPC NUC COG SUI HLP SFD NFC STW AXY ANP BRF MSF
MMPI-2-RF Somatic / Cognitive and Internalizing Scales
63
D S F AE S M E C
JCP S U B AGG ACT FM L IP P S AV S H Y DSF AES MEC
Mean 54 62 52 55 67 50 59 56 56 60 50
Ms. G - Chronic Pain
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
JCP SUB AGG ACT FML IPP SAV SHY DSF AES MEC
MMPI-2-RF Externalizing, Interpersonal, and Interest Scales
64
AGGR -r P S Y C-r D IS C-r N E GE -r IN T R -rAGGR-r PSYC-r DISC-r NEGE-r INTR-r
Mean 47 50 56 71 77
Ms. G - Chronic Pain
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
AGGR-r PSYC-r DISC-r NEGE-r INTR-r
MMPI-2-RF Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5)
Ms. P – Pre-surgical Spine Evaluation65
66
9/13/2017
12
67 68
69 70
71
Ms. F - Somatization72
9/13/2017
13
73 74
75 76
77 78
9/13/2017
14
Ms. KPsychogenic Non-Epileptic Seizures
79
80
81 82
83 84
9/13/2017
15
85
Ms. W - Conversion86
87 88
89 90
9/13/2017
16
91 92
Forensic Settings
Setting-Specific Utility93
Forensic Settings94
Challenges New tests typically provide some material for attorneys
to attack
Admissibility of a test – especially a “new” test
Weight of the evidence/opinion based on the results See Ben-Porath (2012) for responses to specific challenges
based on the MMPI-2-RF
Daubert Criteria95
Has the MMPI-2-RF been tested?
Has it been subjected to peer review?
What is the MMPI-2-RF’s known or potential error rate?
Are there standards for controlling the MMPI-2-RF?
Is the MMPI-2-RF generally accepted?
Has the MMPI-2-RF been tested?96
Empirical data available in the Technical Manual Intercorrelations between the scales Correlations between the RF and the existing MMPI-2 Empirical correlates are available for both criminal and
civil forensic settings Comparison groups to aid in interpretation and report
writing include: Pre-Trial Forensic Disability Claimants Child Custody Parental Fitness Prison Inmates
9/13/2017
17
Has the MMPI-2-RF been peer reviewed?97
There are over 260 peer-reviewed publications on the MMPI-2-RF Topics Include:General Assessment and Diagnostic Utility
Validity
Correctional Settings
Forensic Settings
Mental Health Settings
Medical Settings
Other Non-Clinical Settings
The MMPI-2-RF’s error rate?98
Data on reliability and standard error of measurement (SEM) of MMPI-2-RF scale scores address this question directly Available in Technical Manual Chapter 3 Available for both Normative and Clinical samples
Classification accuracy statistics Sensitivity, Specificity, Positive and Negative Predictive
Powers Available in peer reviewed classification studies (e.g.,
malingering detection research)
Are there standards for controlling the MMPI-2-RF?
99
YES! Standardized administration and scoring guidelines
Standardized interpretive approach Reliability of interpretation between raters is higher
Is the MMPI-2-RF generally accepted?100
Increasingly so … Basis in the Frye StandardMMPI-2-RF is increasingly being used in:
Forensic Contexts
Medical Evaluations
Public Safety (Law Enforcement) Screenings
The MMPI-2-RF has also been included in several recent book publications by experts in personality assessment
Use of the MMPI-2-RF:Forensic and Correctional Contexts
101
Assessment of Psychopathy (Wygant, Applegate, &Wall, 2014)
MMPI-2-RF substantive scales associate with specific indices from the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) BXD Hierarchy
As well as …
STW, BRF, MSF, IPP, SAV, SHY, DSF
Risk Assessments (Wygant, Applegate, &Wall, 2014)
State vs. trait violence proclivities (or both)
Fearlessness, interpersonal dominance, criminal history, severe mental health symptoms, substance abuse
Mr. P
49 year old, single male
Long-standing Dx of Schizophrenia, Paranoid type
Diagnosed late teens; lived with parents throughout adult life
Father passed away when Mr. P was in his 20s; Mother now in her 70s
Received case management services in community
Periodic employment as unskilled laborer
9/13/2017
18
Mr. P
Several weeks prior to hospitalization Mr. P became embroiled in conflict with co-worker
Employment suspended as a consequence of physical altercation
Discontinued medication and decompensated into acute psychotic episode marked by belief that job loss is the result of gov’t conspiracy to take away his disability benefits as well
Mother informed case worker that Mr. P was threatening retaliation against co-worker
Although no history of violent behavior, psychiatrist determined significant risk – referred for evaluation.
9/13/2017
19
Mr. E
28 year old, never married, male
Arrested after assaulting stranger in a bar
Arresting officer noted mumbling incoherently, religiously preoccupied
Taken to crisis united; observed to be intoxicated, but possibly also psychotic
Admitted to psychiatric inpatient unit
Tested after three days
9/13/2017
20
Public Safety Screenings
Setting-Specific Utility115
Public Safety Candidates116
Major Issues: Screening applicants versus Selecting applicants
Profile score evaluation Undesirable characteristics
Screening vs Selection of Candidates117
Screening Typically done after a conditional offer of employment
is given
Selection Cannot involve “medical procedures” that can identify
disabilities (e.g., MMPI/MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF), unless in an exempted setting Impact of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
Evaluation of Profile Scores118
Excessive Guardedness L-r K-r Lack of guardedness is also a red flag How much guardedness is too much?
Psychopathology Problematic or concerning arrangements of substantive scales No adjustments for detecting psychopathology
(T > 65)
Undesirable Characteristics Moderate elevations on certain scales Low scores on other scales
Law Enforcement Outcomes & Correlates
RC3, RC6, & RC8 – best predictors of negative outcomes. RC4 and RC9 are also good predictors
SUBSTANTIALLY increased risk for problematic outcomes at T scores of 60 and 55.
Review of LEO profiles requires consideration of range restriction.
119
Law Enforcement Outcomes & Correlates
EID Problems on probation
Academic/Learning problems on probation
Multi-tasking problems under normal circumstances
Initiative Drive Problems
RCd Navigation problems on probation
Failure to accept feedback on probation
RC1 Academic/Learning problems on probation
Problems learning under normal conditions
120
9/13/2017
21
Law Enforcement Outcomes & Correlates
RC2 Failure to engage subjects on probation
Multi-tasking problems under normal conditions
Problems with initiative and drive
Problems with commitment
Problems with conscientiousness
Lower overall evaluation score
Less likely to get along with fellow employees
RC6 Learning and academic problems
121
Law Enforcement Outcomes & Correlates
RC9 Failure to control conflict on probation
Problems with assertiveness under normal conditions
Multi-tasking under normal conditions
COG Problems with decision-making
Difficulties with assertiveness
Problems with multi-tasking
122
Law Enforcement Outcomes & Correlates
HLP Lack of cooperation with peers on probation
Uncooperative towards supervisors on probation
Difficulties with decision-making and assertiveness
Problems multi-tasking
AGG Failure to accept feedback on probation
Uncooperative with peers
Uncooperative with supervisors
Commitment and Teamwork problems
123
Law Enforcement Outcomes & Correlates
ACT Lower tactical skills under normal conditions
IPP Integrity Violation/Unlawful activity on probation
SAV Failure to engage subjects on Probation
Commitment and Integrity problems
Conscientiousness problems
124
Law Enforcement Outcomes & Correlates
SHY Failure to engage subjects on probation
Commitment and Conscientious problems
DSF Failure to control conflict on probation
Problems engaging subjects on probation
Assertiveness/Control problems under normal conditions
Poor tactical skills
Interpersonal problems
125
Law Enforcement Outcomes & Correlates
PSYC-r Failure to engage subjects on probation
Assertiveness and control problems
Tactical skill problems under stress
INTR-r Academic/Learning problems on probation
Failure to control conflict
Failure to engage subjects on probation
Driving problems
126
9/13/2017
22
Law Enforcement Outcomes & Correlates
Negative outcomes associated with Emotional dysfunction RC2, HLP
Interpersonal dysfunction DSF, INTR-r
Low scores on RC9/ACT
High scores on AGG
Elevations on COG, RC6/PSYC-r
127
128
VRIN-r T RIN-r F-r Fp-r Fs FBS-r RBS L-r K-r
Mr. C 43 50 47 42 50 45 42 52 52
La w Enf. Norm Me a n 41 52 44 44 45 46 45 59 63
MMPI-2-RF Norm Me a n 50 50 50 51 50 48 50 50 50
Mr. C - Law Enforcement Example
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
VRIN-r TRIN-r F-r Fp-r Fs FBS-r RBS L-r K-r
MMPI-2-RF Validity Scales
Mr. C Law Enf. Norm
F
129
EID THD BXD RCd RC1 RC2 RC3 RC4 RC6 RC7 RC8 RC9
EID THD BXD RCd RC1 RC2 RC3 RC4 RC6 RC7 RC8 RC9
Mr. C 43 48 43 46 42 42 57 59 56 46 47 62Law Enf. Norm Mean 36 44 46 40 42 41 44 45 48 46 47 51MMPI-2-RF Norm Mean 49 50 53 49 49 50 51 52 51 48 50 51
Mr. C - Law Enforcement Example
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
EID THD BXD RCd RC1 RC2 RC3 RC4 RC6 RC7 RC8 RC9
MMPI-2-RF Higher-Order (HO) and Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales
Mr. C Law Enf. Norm
130
Law Enforcement Example
NFC ST W AXY ANP BRF
MLS GIC HPC NUC COG SUI HLP SFD NFC ST W AXY AN P BRF MSF
Mr. C 38 46 42 41 40 45 40 42 38 40 39 40 43 42Law Enf. Norm Mean 43 47 44 45 43 45 42 43 41 42 45 41 44 44MMPI-2-RF Norm Mean 50 49 48 50 50 49 50 49 49 49 49 50 48 46
Mr. C - Law Enforcement Example
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
MLS GIC HPC NUC COG SUI HLP SFD NFC STW AXY ANP BRF MSF
MMPI-2-RF Somatic/Cognitive and Internalizing Scales
Mr. C Law Enf. Norm
131
DSF AES MEC
JCP SU B AGG ACT FML IPP SAV SHY DSF AES MEC
Mr. C 50 41 37 69 53 34 43 37 68 39 38Law Enf. Norm Mean 49 45 42 44 43 46 46 42 45 41 57MMPI-2-RF Norm Mean 52 52 51 49 49 49 51 49 51 47 56
Mr. C - Law Enforcement Example
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
JCP SUB AGG ACT FML IPP SAV SHY DSF AES MEC
MMPI-2-RF Externalizing, Interpersonal, and Interest Scales
Mr. C Law Enf. Norm
132
AGGR-r PSYC-r DISC-r NEGE-r INT R-rAGGR-r PSYC-r DISC-r NEGE-r INTR-r
Mr. C 67 52 58 51 40Law Enf. Norm Mean 50 43 51 39 47
MMPI-2-RF Norm Mean 52 50 54 49 51
Mr. C - Law Enforcement Example
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
AGGR-r PSYC-r DISC-r NEGE-r INTR-r
MMPI-2-RF Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5)
Mr. C Law Enf. Norm
Top Related