Abstract
The MMPI and MMPI-2 validity scales have long been accepted as standard tools in the assessment of feigned mental disorders (FMD) based on their extensive empirical validation. Studies are now examining MMPI-2-RF with modified validity scales plus the new Infrequent Somatic Responses Scale (FS) and the recently-adapted Response Bias Scale (RBS). The current investigation used a known-groups design to examine the effectiveness of the MMPI-2-RF for differentiating FMD and feigned cognitive impairment (FCI) from patients with genuine disorders for a large civil forensic sample. Criterion measures included the Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms-2 (SIRS-2) for the FMD group, and below-chance performances on the Victoria Symptom Validity Test (VSVT) and the Test of Memory Malingering (TOMM) for the FCI group. For FMD, both F-r and FP-r produced very large effect sizes (ds > 2.00). Moreover, the absence of severe elevations (≥80 T) on F-r proved effective at ruling-out most FMD. For the current study, a FP-r cut score ≥90 T for FMD produced virtually no false-positives (0.01) and only a moderate level of false-alarms. As predicted by its detection strategies, most MMPI-2-RF validity scales have limited effectiveness with the FCI group. However, FBS-r and RBS may be useful in conjunction with other clinical data for ruling out FCI for genuine neuropsychological consults. An entirely separate concern is whether certain diagnostic groups, such as major depression, will have marked elevations on MMPI-2-RF scales thereby increasing the likelihood of false-positives. On this point, FP-r performed exceptionally well with unelevated scores (Ms < 55 T) consistently across diagnostic categories.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Of interest to current research, Jackson (1970, p. 64) noted that “response styles often will determine major portions of the variance.” Therefore, his model proposes that test items be systematically screened for social desirability before their inclusion; this key step was omitted from the MMPI-2-RF.
Following Rogers and Bender (2003), we use feigned or feigning (i.e., gross exaggeration or fabrication of psychological symptoms or cognitive deficits) rather than over-reporting or malingering. Over-reporting lacks precision and could be applied to minor embellishments, whereas malingering requires the individualized determination of motivation.
We follow the recommendation of Rogers (2008a) for the classification of effect sizes: moderate (≥.75), large (≥1.25), and very large (≥1.50).
We adopted the following convention for describing MMPI-2-RF elevations: moderate (65–79 T), severe (80–89 T), extreme (90–99 T), very extreme (≥100 T).
References
APA. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Tellegen, A. (2008). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF): Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Berry, D. T. R., Baer, R. A., & Harris, M. J. (1991). Detection of malingering on the MMPI: a meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review, 11, 585–598.
Gervais, R., Ben-Porath, Y., Wygant, D., & Green, P. (2007). Development and validation of a response bias scale (RBS) for the MMPI-2. Assessment, 14(2), 196–208. doi:10.1177/1073191106295861.
Gervais, R., Ben-Porath, Y., Wygant, D., & Sellbom, M. (2010). Incremental validity of the MMPI-2-RF over-reporting scales and RBS in assessing the veracity of memory complaints. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. doi:10.1093/arclin/acq018. Advance online publication.
Greene, R. L. (2000). The MMPI-2: An interpretive manual (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Greene, R. L. (2008). Malingering and defensiveness on the MMPI-2. In R. Rogers (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed., pp. 159–181). New York: Guilford.
Greiffenstein, M. F., Fox, D., & Lees-Haley, P. R. (2007). The MMPI-2 Fake Bad scale in the detection of noncredible brain injury claims. In K. B. Boone (Ed.), Assessment of feigned cognitive impairment (pp. 210–235). New York: Guilford.
Jackson, D. N. (1970). A sequential system for personality scale development. In C. D. Spielberger (Ed.), Current topics in clinical and community psychology (Vol. 2; pp. 60–96). New York: Academic Press.
Larrabee, G. J. (2008). Aggregation across multiple indicators improves the detection of malingering: relationship to likelihood ratios. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 22, 666–679.
Morey, L. C. (2007). The Personality Assessment Inventory professional manual (2nd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
Nelson, L. D. (1995). Use of the MMPI and MMPI-2 in forensic neuropsychological evaluations. In Y. S. Ben-Porath, J. R. Graham, G. C. N. Hall, R. D. Hirschman, & M. S. Zaragoza (Eds.), Forensic applications of the MMPI-2 (pp. 202–221). Newbury Park: Sage.
Rogers, R. (2008a). Detection strategies for malingering and defensiveness. In R. Rogers (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed., pp. 14–35). New York: Guilford.
Rogers, R. (2008b). Structured interviews and dissimulation. In R. Rogers (Ed.), Clinical assessment of malingering and deception (3rd ed., pp. 301–322). New York: Guilford.
Rogers, R., & Bender, S. D. (2003). Evaluation of malingering and deception. In A. M. Goldstein (Ed.), Handbook of psychology: Forensic psychology ((pp, Vol. 11, pp. 109–129). Hoboken: Wiley.
Rogers, R., Bagby, R. M., & Dickens, S. E. (1992). Structured Interview of Reported Symptoms (SIRS) and professional manual. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., & Salekin, R. T. (1994). A meta-analysis of malingering on the MMPI-2. Assessment, 1, 227–237.
Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., Martin, M. A., & Vitacco, M. J. (2003). Detection of feigned mental disorders: a meta-analysis of the MMPI-2 and malingering. Assessment, 10, 160–177.
Rogers, R., Payne, J. W., Berry, D. T. R., & Granacher, R. P., Jr. (2009a). Use of the SIRS in compensation cases: an examination of its validity and generalizability. Law and Human Behavior, 33, 213–224.
Rogers, R., Payne, J. W., Correa, A. A., Gillard, N. D., & Ross, C. A. (2009b). A study of the SIRS with severely traumatized patients. Journal of Psychological Assessment.
Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., & Gillard, N. D. (2010). Structured interview of reported symptoms, Second Edition, Test Manual. Lutz: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Sellbom, M., & Bagby, R. (2010). Detection of overreported psychopathology with the MMPI-2 RF form validity scales. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 22(4), 757–767. doi:10.1037/a0020825
Sellbom, M., Ben-Porath, Y., Graham, J., Arbisi, P., & Bagby, R. (2005). Susceptibility of the MMPI-2 clinical, restructured clinical (RC), and content scales to overreporting and underreporting. Assessment, 12(1), 79–85. doi:10.1177/1073191104273515.
Sellbom, M., Toomey, J., Wygant, D., Kucharski, L., & Duncan, S. (2010). Utility of the MMPI–2-RF (restructured form) validity scales in detecting malingering in a criminal forensic setting: a known-groups design. Psychological Assessment, 22(1), 22–31. doi:10.1037/a0018222.
Slick, D., Hopp, G., Strauss, E., & Thompson, G. B. (1997). Victoria symptom validity test. Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.
Slick, D. J., Sherman, E. M. S., & Iverson, G. L. (1999). Diagnostic criteria for malingered neurocognitive dysfunction: proposed standards for clinical practice and research. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 13, 345–561.
Smith, S., Gorske, T., Wiggins, C., & Little, J. (2010). Personality assessment use by clinical neuropsychologists. International Journal of Testing, 10(1), 6–20. doi:10.1080/15305050903534787.
Tellegen, A., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2008). Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory-2 restructured form (MMPI-2-RF): Technical manual. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Thompson, G. B. (2002). The Victoria symptom validity test: an enhanced test of symptom validity. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 2(3–4), 43–67.
Tombaugh, T. N. (1996). Test of memory malingering: TOMM. North Towanda: Multi-Health Systems.
Tombaugh, T. N. (2002). The test of memory malingering (TOMM) in forensic psychology. Journal of Forensic Neuropsychology, 2(3–4), 69–96.
Wygant, D. B., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Arbisi, P. A. (2004). Development and initial validation of a scale to detect infrequent somatic complaints. Poster presented at the 39th Annual Symposium on Recent Developments of the MMPI-2/MMPI-A, Minneapolis, MN.
Wygant, D. B., Sellbom, M., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Stafford, K. P., Freeman, D. B., & Heilbronner, R. L. (2007). The relation between symptom validity testing and MMPI-2 scores as a function of forensic evaluation context. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 22, 489–499.
Wygant, D. B., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Arbisi, P. A., Berry, D. T. R., Freeman, D. B., & Heilbronner, R. L. (2009). Examination of the MMPI-2 restructured form (MMPI-2-RF) validity scales in civil forensic settings: findings from simulation and known group samples. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology. doi:10.1093/arclin/acp073. Advance online publication.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Rogers, R., Gillard, N.D., Berry, D.T.R. et al. Effectiveness of the MMPI-2-RF Validity Scales for Feigned Mental Disorders and Cognitive Impairment: A Known-Groups Study. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 33, 355–367 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-011-9222-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-011-9222-0