Patterns of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) validity scale elevation across veterans seen in a Veterans Affairs (VA) assessment clinic: The impact of compensation status.

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Psychological Services Pub Date : 2026-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-24 DOI:10.1037/ser0000946
Keegan J Diehl, Paul B Ingram, Louis A Pagano, Hunter J Gideon
{"title":"Patterns of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) validity scale elevation across veterans seen in a Veterans Affairs (VA) assessment clinic: The impact of compensation status.","authors":"Keegan J Diehl, Paul B Ingram, Louis A Pagano, Hunter J Gideon","doi":"10.1037/ser0000946","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The purpose of this investigation is to provide descriptive information on veteran response styles for compensation and pension (C&P) evaluations Veterans Affairs (VA) referral types using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF), which has well-supported embedded validity scales capturing invalid response styles. The total sample included 356 veterans from a single VA psychological testing clinic who were administered the MMPI-2-RF during a broader psychological evaluation, with 201 veterans undergoing C&P evaluations. This study examines frequencies of protocol invalidity based on the MMPI-2-RF's validity scales and provides comprehensive descriptive findings on validity scale scores across appointment types (i.e., C&P and non-C&P). Three distinct trends emerged: (1) Veterans generally produced valid MMPI-2-RF profiles, (2) when more than one elevation emerges, it is likely to be thematically consistent (e.g., overreporting scales), and (3) overreporting generally captured the highest frequency of validity scale elevations relative to underreporting or noncontent-based invalid responding. Implications and limitations for practice and the utility of the MMPI-2-RF within VA testing clinics are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20749,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Services","volume":" ","pages":"307-315"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Services","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/ser0000946","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation is to provide descriptive information on veteran response styles for compensation and pension (C&P) evaluations Veterans Affairs (VA) referral types using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF), which has well-supported embedded validity scales capturing invalid response styles. The total sample included 356 veterans from a single VA psychological testing clinic who were administered the MMPI-2-RF during a broader psychological evaluation, with 201 veterans undergoing C&P evaluations. This study examines frequencies of protocol invalidity based on the MMPI-2-RF's validity scales and provides comprehensive descriptive findings on validity scale scores across appointment types (i.e., C&P and non-C&P). Three distinct trends emerged: (1) Veterans generally produced valid MMPI-2-RF profiles, (2) when more than one elevation emerges, it is likely to be thematically consistent (e.g., overreporting scales), and (3) overreporting generally captured the highest frequency of validity scale elevations relative to underreporting or noncontent-based invalid responding. Implications and limitations for practice and the utility of the MMPI-2-RF within VA testing clinics are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
退伍军人事务评估诊所退伍军人明尼苏达多相人格量表-2-重构表(MMPI-2-RF)效度量表提升模式:薪酬状况的影响
摘要本研究的目的是利用明尼苏达多相人格量表-2-重构表(MMPI-2-RF)提供退伍军人在补偿和养老金(C&P)评估中的反应类型的描述性信息,该量表具有良好支持的嵌入效度量表,可获取无效的反应类型。总样本包括来自单一VA心理测试诊所的356名退伍军人,他们在更广泛的心理评估中接受了MMPI-2-RF, 201名退伍军人接受了C&P评估。本研究基于MMPI-2-RF的效度量表检查了协议无效的频率,并提供了跨预约类型(即C&P和非C&P)的效度量表得分的综合描述性发现。出现了三个明显的趋势:(1)退伍军人通常产生有效的MMPI-2-RF概况;(2)当多个提升出现时,可能在主题上是一致的(例如,多报量表);(3)相对于少报或基于非内容的无效反应,多报通常捕获了效度量表提升的最高频率。讨论了在VA测试诊所中使用MMPI-2-RF的实践意义和局限性。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological Services
Psychological Services PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
13.00%
发文量
216
期刊介绍: Psychological Services publishes high-quality data-based articles on the broad range of psychological services. While the Division"s focus is on psychologists in "public service," usually defined as being employed by a governmental agency, Psychological Services covers the full range of psychological services provided in any service delivery setting. Psychological Services encourages submission of papers that focus on broad issues related to psychotherapy outcomes, evaluations of psychological service programs and systems, and public policy analyses.
期刊最新文献
Patterns of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) validity scale elevation across veterans seen in a Veterans Affairs (VA) assessment clinic: The impact of compensation status. The impact of patient barriers and organizational factors on treatment dropout in posttraumatic stress disorder specialty care. Examining why therapists add sessions to the written exposure therapy protocol and whether it improves treatment outcome: A mixed-methods analysis. Goldilocks disclosures: A qualitative exploration of when therapist self-disclosure of lived experience is "just right". Psychosocial needs of incarcerated veterans with other than honorable discharge characterizations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1