The Predictive Capacity of the MMPI-2 and PAI Validity Scales and Indexes to Detect Coached and Uncoached Feigning

Robert Michael Bagby · Jason R. Bacchiochi · Andrew G. Ryder · Alison S. Bury

114 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Personality Assessment

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Psychological Testing and Assessment Psychometric Methodologies and Testing Deception detection and forensic psychology

Abstract

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.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 114 citations exist upstream.

References

1990MMPI-2: assessing personality and psychopathology 1995An MMPI-2 infrequent response scale for use with psychopathological populations: The Infrequency-Psychopathology Scale, F(p).1992MMPI-2 random responding indices: Validation using a self-report methodology.1996Detection of Feigned Mental Disorders on the Personality Assessment Inventory: A Discriminant Analysis 1991Detecting Fake-Good and Fake-Bad MMPI-2 Profiles 1994A Meta-Analysis of Malingering on the MMPI-2 1996The MMPI, MMPI-2 & MMPI-A in Court: A Practical Guide for Expert Witnesses and Attorneys 1995Providing information to clients about psychological tests: A survey of attorneys' and law students' attitudes.

Cited by

2003Personality Traits 2003Detection of Feigned Mental Disorders 2009Detection of overreporting of psychopathology on the Personality Assessment Inventory: A meta-analytic review.2003Personality across the life span 2002The detection of feigned uncoached and coached posttraumatic stress disorder with the MMPI-2 in a sample of workplace accident victims.

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.