Related Experiment Videos
A comparison of MMPI-2 high-point coding strategies
Robert E McGrath1, Tayyab Rashid, Judy Hayman
1School of Psychology, Fairleigh Dickinson University, Teaneck, NJ 07666, USA. mcgrath@fdu.edu
Journal of Personality Assessment
|November 12, 2002
Summary
This study evaluated strategies for high-point coding of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) profiles. Requiring minimum scale elevation improved clinical utility, while excluding invalid protocols yielded negative results.
Area of Science:
- Psychological assessment
- Personality research
- Clinical psychology
Background:
- High-point coding classifies Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) profiles by most elevated clinical scales.
- Previous reviews noted inconsistencies in MMPI high-point coding rules.
- This study addresses the need for standardized MMPI high-point coding strategies.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the impact of different high-point coding rules on effect sizes and group sizes.
- To determine the clinical utility of various MMPI high-point coding strategies.
- To assess the generalizability of MMPI coding rules across different settings.
Main Methods:
- Compared four distinct rules for MMPI high-point coding.
- Analyzed the effects of minimum elevation, invalid protocol exclusion, well-defined code restriction, and scale replacement strategies.
- Evaluated impact on statistical effect sizes and group sizes.
Main Results:
- Requiring a minimum elevation for MMPI code scales demonstrated clear clinical utility.
- Results for well-defined coding and scale replacement in infrequent codes were equivocal.
- Excluding potentially invalid MMPI protocols showed surprisingly negative utility.
Conclusions:
- Minimum elevation is a beneficial rule for MMPI high-point coding.
- The utility of other coding rules requires further investigation.
- MMPI coding guidelines may not generalize from settings with clear response distortion motives.