Related Experiment Videos
Relative user ratings of MMPI-2 computer-based test interpretations
John E Williams1, Nathan C Weed
1Department of Psychology, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, IA 50614, USA. john.williams@uni.edu.
Assessment
|October 16, 2004
Summary
Clinicians preferred authentic Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) computer-based test interpretations (CBTIs) over generic ones. Automated Assessment Associates
Area of Science:
- Psychological assessment
- Clinical psychology
- Psychometrics
Background:
- Limited empirical evaluation exists for the eight commercial computer-based test interpretations (CBTIs) of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2).
- Clinicians lack scientific data to guide their selection of MMPI-2 CBTIs.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the quality and utility of eight commercially available MMPI-2 CBTIs.
- To provide empirical data to aid clinicians in selecting appropriate MMPI-2 interpretation software.
Main Methods:
- Forty-one clinicians rated 257 MMPI-2 CBTI reports.
- Reports were either authentic client reports or generated from a modal profile.
- Ratings were collected on 10 dimensions, including perceived accuracy and opinion confirmation.
Main Results:
- Authentic MMPI-2 CBTI reports received significantly higher ratings than modal reports.
- Perceived accuracy and opinion confirmation best distinguished between authentic and modal reports.
- Automated Assessment Associates' report achieved the highest overall ratings, with Western Psychological Services, Pearson Assessments, and the Caldwell Report also performing well.
Conclusions:
- Clinician preference favors authentic MMPI-2 CBTI reports over generic ones.
- Specific MMPI-2 CBTI programs demonstrate varying levels of quality and utility.
- Empirical evaluation is crucial for guiding the selection of psychological assessment tools.