The comparative capacity of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and MMPI-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) validity scales to detect suspected malingering in a disability claimant sample.

The current study expands on past research examining the comparative capacity of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2; Butcher et al., 2001) and MMPI-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF; Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008/2011) overreporting validity scales to detect suspected malingering, as assessed by the Miller Forensic Assessment of Symptoms Test (M-FAST; Miller, 2001), in a sample of public insurance disability claimants (N = 742) who were considered to have potential incentives to malinger. Results provide support for the capacity of both the MMPI-2 and the MMPI-2-RF overreporting validity scales to predict suspected malingering of psychopathology. The MMPI-2-RF overreporting validity scales proved to be modestly better predictors of suspected psychopathology malingering-compared with the MMPI-2 overreporting scales-in dimensional predictive models and categorical classification accuracy analyses. (PsycINFO Database Record

The detection of feigned uncoached and coached posttraumatic stress disorder with the MMPI-2 in a sample of workplace accident victims.

In this study research participants completed the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) under standard instructions and then were asked to fake posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) when completing the MMPI-2 for a 2nd time in 1 of 4 conditions with different instructions on how to fake PTSD: (a) uncoached, (b) coached about PTSD symptom information, (c) coached about MMPI-2 validity scales, or (d) coached about both symptoms and validity scales. These MMPI-2 protocols were then compared with protocols of claimants with workplace accident-related PTSD. Participants given information about the validity scales were the most successful in avoiding detection as faking. The family of F scales (i.e., F, FB, FP), particularly FP, produced consistently high rates of positive and negative predictive power.

The predictive capacity of the MMPI-2 and PAI validity scales and indexes to detect coached and uncoached feigning.

The objective of this study was to examine the relative effectiveness of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) validity scales and indexes to detect malingering. Research participants were either informed (coached) or not informed (uncoached) about the presence and operating characteristics of the validity scales and instructed to fake bad on both the MMPI-2 and PAI. The validity scale and index scores produced by these research participants were then compared to those scores from a bona fide sample of psychiatric patients (n = 75). Coaching had no effect on the ability of the research participants to feign more successfully than those participants who received no coaching. For the MMPI-2, the Psychopathology F scale, or F(p), proved to be the best at distinguishing psychiatric patients from research participants instructed to malinger, although the other F scales (i.e., F and Fb) were also effective. For the PAI, the Rogers Discriminant Function index (RDF) was clearly superior to the other PAI fake-bad validity indicators; neither the Negative Impression Management scale nor Malingering Index were effective at detecting malingered profiles in this study. Overall, RDF proved to be marginally superior to F and F(p) in distinguishing MMPI-2 and PAI protocols produced by research participants asked to malinger and psychiatric patients. Both the RDF and the F and F(p) scales, however, were able to increase the predictive capability of one another.