A limitation of using the Wiener and Harmon obvious and subtle scales to detect faking on the MMPI

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Sep 25, 2026

One Dimensional Turing-Like Handshake Test for Motor Intelligence
14:05

One Dimensional Turing-Like Handshake Test for Motor Intelligence

Published on: December 15, 2010

D Schretlen1

  • 1Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD 21205.

Journal of Clinical Psychology
|November 1, 1990
PubMed

Insights

Detecting response bias on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) using obvious versus subtle items is complicated. Higher clinical scale elevation strongly correlated with obvious minus subtle differences, challenging its use for detecting faking.

Area of Science:

  • Psychological assessment
  • Clinical psychology
  • Psychometrics

Background:

  • The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is a widely used psychological test.
  • Detecting response bias, such as faking, is crucial for accurate MMPI interpretation.
  • A proposed strategy involves comparing endorsement rates of obvious versus subtle test items.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To evaluate the assumption that faking differentially correlates with obvious and subtle MMPI items, while psychopathology does not.
  • To examine the relationship between clinical scale elevation and the difference between obvious and subtle item endorsements.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of MMPI profiles from 375 psychiatric inpatients.
  • Correlation analysis between clinical scale elevation and the difference between obvious and subtle item scores.
  • Assessment of the impact of excluding MMPIs with questionable validity.

Main Results:

  • A strong positive correlation was found between overall profile elevation and the "obvious minus subtle" score difference.
  • This relationship remained significant even after excluding MMPIs of questionable validity.
  • The correlation between clinical scale elevation and obvious minus subtle differences was substantial in valid profiles.

Conclusions:

  • The strategy of using obvious versus subtle item endorsement differences to detect negative response bias on the MMPI is complicated.
  • High clinical scale elevation is strongly associated with greater differences between obvious and subtle item endorsements.
  • This complicates the interpretation of MMPI results when attempting to identify intentional exaggeration of psychopathology.

More Related Videos

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues07:34

Perceptual and Category Processing of the Uncanny Valley Hypothesis' Dimension of Human Likeness: Some Methodological Issues

Published on: June 3, 2013

Holistic Facial Composite Creation and Subsequent Video Line-up Eyewitness Identification Paradigm09:49

Holistic Facial Composite Creation and Subsequent Video Line-up Eyewitness Identification Paradigm

Published on: December 24, 2015

Related Concept Videos

The Scientific Method02:40

The Scientific Method

Research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are observable realities, and opinions are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.
Self-Report Tests of Personality01:22

Self-Report Tests of Personality

Self-report inventories are objective personality assessments that use multiple-choice items or numbered scales, typically ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). They are often called Likert scales after Rensis Likert. These inventories are widely used due to their ease of administration and cost-effectiveness. One of the most prominent examples is the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), initially developed in the 1940s to assess abnormal personality traits.
Strategies of Self-Presentation III: Self-Monitoring01:24

Strategies of Self-Presentation III: Self-Monitoring

Self-monitoring is a central construct in understanding individual differences in self-presentation strategies across social contexts. It refers to how individuals observe, regulate, and control their expressive behavior and self-presentation following situational cues. Self-monitoring reflects a person's sensitivity to social appropriateness and willingness to adapt behavior to fit varying interpersonal demands.High vs. Low Self-Monitoring IndividualsIndividuals high in self-monitoring are...
Understanding Deception01:14

Understanding Deception

Deception is a pervasive aspect of human communication. Empirical studies have shown that most individuals engage in some form of deceit on a daily basis, with approximately 20% of social exchanges involving deceptive elements. Lying follows a developmental trajectory, peaking during adolescence and declining with age, possibly due to the maturation of cognitive control and social accountability.Cognitive and Social Factors in Deception DetectionDespite its prevalence, accurately detecting...