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 1.9 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Psychological Services Pub 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) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20749,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Services","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-24","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":"","PubModel":"","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) 2025 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
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. What do primary care clinicians and patients think about internet-based computerized cognitive behavioral therapy for depression? A qualitative study from the Veterans Health Administration. Community-driven strategies for implementing suicide prevention education in jails. Mental health services in jail: Identifying and quantifying barriers to implementation. Role of psychologists in enhancing care quality for individuals with serious mental illnesses: Introduction to a special section.
×
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:481959085
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