Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Experiment Videos

Diagnostic validity statistics and the MCMI-III.

Louis M Hsu1

  • 1School of Psychology, Fairleigh Dickinson University, 1000 River Road, Teaneck, New Jersey 07666, USA. lhsu@fdu.edu

Psychological Assessment
|December 28, 2002
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Some properties of r equivalent: a simple effect size indicator.

Psychological methods·2006
Same author

Biases of success rate differences shown in binomial effect size displays.

Psychological methods·2004
See all related articles
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

This study examined diagnostic validity statistics (DVSs) for the Million Multiaxial Clinical Inventory III. Results from 1997 showed significantly higher DVSs than 1994, suggesting potential over or underestimation in validity assessments.

Area of Science:

  • Psychological assessment
  • Clinical psychology
  • Psychometrics

Background:

  • Diagnostic validity statistics (DVSs) are crucial for evaluating psychological tests.
  • The Million Multiaxial Clinical Inventory III (MCMI-III) is a widely used personality assessment tool.
  • Previous validity studies of the MCMI-III have yielded varying results.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To describe and illustrate five key DVSs: incremental validities, Cohen's kappas, Cohen's effect sizes, and areas under receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves.
  • To determine the values of these DVSs for 24 MCMI-III scales using data from 1994 and 1997 validity studies.
  • To compare the DVSs obtained from the two study periods.

Main Methods:

  • Calculation of five diagnostic validity statistics (DVSs) for 24 MCMI-III scales.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Analysis of data from previously published MCMI-III validity studies conducted in 1994 and 1997.
  • Comparative analysis of DVS values between the two study periods.

    • Main Results:

    • Diagnostic validity statistics for the 1997 MCMI-III study were substantially larger (over 3 times) than those from the 1994 study.
    • Significant differences were observed across all five types of DVSs examined.
    • The findings highlight variability in the reported validity of MCMI-III scales over time.

    Conclusions:

    • The considerable differences in DVSs between the 1994 and 1997 studies warrant careful consideration.
    • These discrepancies may reflect methodological differences or biases in the validity studies.
    • Further research is needed to understand the factors influencing these variations in MCMI-III diagnostic validity.