No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
In this article, we examine 5 criticisms of Tellegen, Ben-Porath, and Sellbom (2009/this issue) about our study demonstrating the redundant relationships of the Restructured Clinical (RC) scales with extant MMPI–2 scales. We discuss differences in univariate versus multivariate comparisons of the RC scales and our “proxy” scales using their data. We show that (a) both the RC and extant proxy scales identified in our analyses account for most of the variance in the Clinical scales; (b) the proxy scales are redundant with the RC scales; (c) the proxy scales matched the 6 RC scales in accounting for variance in the Clinical scales exactly in three cases, differed by ≤.02 in 2 cases, and reached a maximum of .11 in one case; (d) the item overlap between RC1 and HEA is not at issue but rather their correlation with Scale 1; and (e) the evidence for the construct validity of the RC scales is weak using findings on the incremental validity of RC4 as illustrative.
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 13 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.