Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 25, 2026

Multimedia Battery for Assessment of Cognitive and Basic Skills in Mathematics (BM-PROMA)
Published on: August 28, 2021
MMPI-2 profile code types and measurement error
Patrick H Munley1, Jean M Germain, Darrick Tovar-Murray
1Department of Counselor Education and Counseling Psychology, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, MI 49008-5195, USA. patrick.munley@wmich.edu
Abstract:
We studied simulated MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) code type stability and change expected with measurement error for 12 MMPI-2 well-defined mean code type profiles. Profile scores for the 2 scales defining the code type were systematically varied to represent target code type profiles at 9 different levels of T-score profile definition. We randomly generated samples of 50 simulated, estimated true score profiles at each level of profile definition for each code type around the estimated true scores for each scale at each level of profile definition. Two sets of simulated profiles were developed. The first simulation was based on the reported means, test-retest reliabilities, and the standard errors of measurement for the MMPI-2 normative group. The second simulation was based on the means, standard deviations, and estimated retest stability for a clinical group of psychiatric patients. We calculated frequencies and percentages of simulated profiles with the highest estimated true scores on the same 2 scales as the original code type profile. Percentages of simulated profiles with the same 2 highest scales as the original code type profiles increased from 27% to 37% for the 3-point level of definition, 37% to 49% for the 5-point definition, 46% to 61% for 7-point definition, 63% to 78% for 10-point definition, 78% to 89% for 13-point definition, 83% to 93% for 15-point definition, and greater than 90% for profile definition greater than 15 points.
Related Concept Videos
Self-Report Tests of Personality
Accuracy and Errors in Hypothesis Testing
In hypothesis testing, the probability of making a Type I error, denoted as α, is commonly set at 0.05. This significance level indicates a 5% chance...
Strategies of Self-Presentation III: Self-Monitoring
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Random and Systematic Errors
Random and Systematic Errors
