PPT 5

Question 1

Analysis Strategy

Answer 1

Validity - consider validity scales

Distress (F, 2, 7) and Disturbance (2, 6, 8, 9, 7)

Look for code type to capture the dominant message of this profile

Look at the code type

Note the flavor that Harris-Lingoes, Content Scales, and valid supplementary scales provide (help us fine tune what we find in the code type)

Consider the Critical items in fine tuning your understanding

Organize material into selected topics and paint a cohesive picture that describes a real person

Question 2

Step 1: Create a Hierarchy

Answer 2

Validity
Distress
Disturbance

Question 3

Step 2: Organize Themes

Answer 3

Major Symptoms - organize into themes

Question 4

Next Steps

Answer 4

Underlying Personality

Behavior in Relationship

Implications for Treatment

Dx Impressions

Recommendations

Write Report

Question 5

Why Restructure the Clinical Scales?

Answer 5

“While they contain compelling informative items, it has long been recognized that as aggregate measures the Clinical Scales are not psychometrically optimal”

• Higher than expected intercorrelations
• Substantial item overlap
• Heterogeneous, over-inclusive item content

Question 6

The Restructured Clinical Scales

Answer 6

Tellegen, Ben-Porath, McNulty, Arbisi, Graham & Kaemmer (2003)
- Removed the pervasive negative emotionality from the clinical scales in order to get cleaner scales

The expectation was that the restructured clinical scales would be more clinically distinct than the original Clinical Scales

Answer 7

RCD - “Demoralization” factor (Negative Emotionality)
RC1 - Somatic Complaints
RC2 - Low Positive Emotions
RC3 - Cynicism
RC4 - Antisocial Behavior
RC5A - *Aesthetic/Literary Interests
RC5M - *Mechanical/Physical Interests
RC6 - Ideas of Malevolence
RC7 - Dysfunctional Negative Emotions
RC8 - Aberrant Experiences
RC9 - Hypomanic Activation

No restructured scale for Si - because it was not as permeated with demoralization factor

Question 8

MMPI-2 RC Scales: Psychometrics

Answer 8

Tellegen et al. (2003) present data from several clinical samples documenting that in comparison with their Clinical Scale counterparts, 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