Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2

Where can I find information about the content validity, construct validity, and criterion validity of the MMPI-2 instrument?

Several of the MMPI-2 reference books have this information including John Graham's MMPI-2: Assessing Personality and Psychopathology (Oxford Press) and James Butcher and Carolyn Williams’s Essentials of MMPI-2 and MMPI-A Interpretation (University of Minnesota Press).

Are different norms used for different age groups and settings?

There are different norms for the MMPI-2 and MMPI-A tests. The normative sample of the MMPI-2 instrument consists of 2,600 individuals, age 18 or older, who were selected as a representative sample of the US population. The MMPI-A norms that are used for adolescents were obtained on a national sample of adolescents between 14 and 18 years of age. There were 805 boys and 815 girls from 8 regions of the United States.

The three Minnesota Reports for adults (Adult Clinical System, Forensic, and Personnel System) use the same normative sample. However, in some settings data on specific personnel applications are also provided. In all settings, specific frequency data aid in the interpretation of the report by providing an empirical perspective with which to compare profiles.

Are non-gendered norms available for all MMPI-2 scales?

Yes.

Why were the non-gendered T scores revised?

A complete set of non-gendered T scores for all MMPI-2 scales is provided in a test monograph by Yossef S. Ben-Porath and Johnathan D. Forbey titled "Non-Gendered Norms for the MMPI-2," published by the University of Minnesota Press (2003). The monograph documents the rationale for, as well as the development and use of, non-gendered norms for the MMPI-2. Provisional non-gendered norms for a subset of the MMPI-2 scales were included in earlier versions of the Minnesota Reports. The non-gendered T scores reported in all current MMPI-2 products and in the monograph by Ben-Porath and Forbey (2003) differ minimally from the provisional non-gendered T scores because of slight changes in the composition of the non-gendered normative sample.

Where can I find more information on the non-gendered norms?

The rationale, development, and use of non-gendered norms for the MMPI-2 test are documented in a test monograph authored by Yossef S. Ben-Porath and Johnathan D. Forbey and published by the University of Minnesota Press (2003). This document also contains tables for converting raw scores to non-gendered T scores for all MMPI-2 scales. This test monograph is available from Pearson (product # 29453).

Which MMPI-2 reports contain non-gendered norms?

Non-gendered T scores appear in the Revised Personnel System, 3rd Edition reports, the Reports for Forensic settings, and the Extended Score Report. It is possible to suppress the non-gendered T scores in printing these reports. A test monograph covering the development and use of the non-gendered norms is available from Pearson.

Are the non-gendered T scores K-corrected?

In the Extended Score Report, both K-corrected and non-K-corrected T scores may be printed. Users may suppress printing of the non-gendered and non-K-corrected T scores if they choose.

Which MMPI-2 reports contain non-K-corrected T Scores?

An optional profile of the Validity and Clinical Scales incorporating non-K-corrected T scores appears in the Extended Score Report. This profile may be printed in addition to the standard Validity and Clinical Scales Profile. Although non-K-corrected T scores are available in the Extended Score Report only, Appendix A of the revised MMPI-2 Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation (product # 24027) provides both K- and non-K-corrected T scores, and a hand-scoring Validity and Clinical Scales Profile form for K- and non-K-corrected norms is available (product # 24006).

If I don't want to use the non-gendered T scores, can they be suppressed?

Yes. The ability to suppress the non-gendered T scores is a print report option for the Personnel Interpretive, Personnel Adjustment Rating, Reports for Forensic Settings, and Extended Score reports.

If I don't want to use the non-K-corrected T scores, can they be suppressed?

Yes, the ability to suppress the non-K-corrected T scores is a print report option for the Extended Score Report. 

Why were non-K-corrected T scores re-introduced in the Extended Score Report? 

Research indicates that the K correction does not enhance validity and that in some cases validity is actually attenuated by the K correction. Non-K-corrected T scores allow interpreters to examine the relative contributions of the clinical scale raw score and the K correction to K-corrected Clinical Scale T scores. This information may be particularly helpful when the K score deviates substantially from the average T-score range (<40 or >65). Because all other MMPI-2 scores that aid in the interpretation of the Clinical Scales (the Harris-Lingoes Subscales, Restructured Clinical Scales, Content and Content Component Scales, PSY-5 Scales, and Supplementary Scales) are not K-corrected, they can be compared most directly with non-K-corrected T scores. 

Are there tables in the MMPI-2 manual with conversion data for item order from MMPI items to MMPI-2 items?

Yes, in Appendix H of the revised MMPI-2 Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation (2001).

Does the MMPI-2 instrument measure PTSD?

Yes, the MMPI-2 instrument has a PTSD measure, the PK scale (normed on veterans).

What are the differences between the MMPI-2 manual and the user's guides?

The manual contains basic information about administering, scoring, and interpreting the test and should be purchased with every first-time MMPI-2 order. The user's guides document the development of a given interpretive report and describe its contents. A report user's guide should be purchased with each first-time order of an MMPI-2 interpretive report.

Can adolescents take the MMPI-2 assessment and produce valid results?

We recommend using the MMPI-A or MMPI-A-RF assessment with adolescents. A cautionary statement will be generated for MMPI-2 test takers under 18 because no adolescents were included in the normative sample.

Is the MMPI-2 instrument able to discriminate between neuropsychological disorders and conversion disorders/somatization disorders?

We will not be able to give a definitive answer until research has been done in this area.

Are all MMPI-2 scales copyrighted?

Yes.

Is the MMPI-2 instrument appropriate for use with chronic pain patients?

Yes, see the Keller and Butcher book, Assessment of Chronic Pain Patients With the MMPI-2 (University of Minnesota Press).  

What does the chronic pain classification 1,2,3,4,0 mean?

1=Type P, 2=Type A, 3=Type I, 4=Type N, Type 0=does not fit any typology. See Costello, R. M., Hulsey, T. L., Schoenfeld, L. S., & Ramamurthy, S. (1987). P-A-I-N: A four-cluster MMPI typology for chronic pain. Pain, 30, 199–209.

Type P: This appears to be the most pathological of the four types. Most of the scales will be significantly elevated. Type P patients are usually the least educated and most often unemployed. They have the lowest monthly income compared to the other types. Type P patients make extreme claims about physical, psychological, and social distress.

Type A: This type is uniquely characterized by a "conversion V" on the Hs, D, and Hy scales. Type A does not have any significant demographic correlates.

Type I: This type has significant elevations only on scales Hs, D, and Hy. Type I patients seem to have chronic medical histories (i.e., multiple surgeries or hospitalizations). Type I patients may not improve physically with treatment, but they appear to experience some degree of psychological benefit.

Type N: This type has normal-range profiles. The only exception may be an elevated K. Type N patients tend to be more moderate in their health claims. Also, Type N patients tend to be employed, better educated, and more responsive to treatment than other types.

Should I use the MMPI-2 instrument in light of the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) and the Civil Rights Act?

Pearson cannot offer legal advice and we recommend that you seek the opinion of competent employment counsel to ensure that the most appropriate advice can be provided for your individual circumstances. However, the ADA's apparent impact on the use of the MMPI-2 instrument relates to the timing of the administration. The MMPI-2 instrument appears to be classified as a medical examination under the ADA, and hence must be administered subsequent to a conditional offer of employment being tendered by an employer. The Civil Rights Act of 1991 ("CRA"), appears to impact the use of the MMPI-2 instrument with respect to the use of norms. Under the CRA it is inappropriate to use either race or sex norms when utilizing tests in the employment domain.

Can I still use the administrations I have for the MMPI-2 Extended Score PLUS Report (product code 51439)?

No, the MMPI-2 Extended Score PLUS Report (product code 51439) was discontinued and subsequently removed from the software. If you believe you have unused administrations for this report and would like to exchange them for the MMPI-2 Extended Score Report (product code 51438), you will need to return your report counter to Pearson. Call 800-627-7271 to arrange for a return and exchange. The Extended Score PLUS Report (51439) was discontinued because it contained information pertaining to the original MMPI test, which was discontinued by the University of Minnesota Press on September 1, 1999. Unused Extended Score PLUS Report (51439) usages will not carry over to your inventory. In addition, you will not be able to order any usages for this report. The Extended Score PLUS Report (51439) will not appear as a Print Report option. Test data from an MMPI-2 test scored as an Extended Score PLUS Report (51439) will transfer but will not have any report history. You can print an Extended Score Report (51438) from the converted data, but this will require a usage.

My VRIN and TRIN answer keys don't match-up with the answer sheets. Why not?

Scales VRIN and TRIN are hand-scored differently from all other MMPI-2 scales. The four answer keys for these scales are designed to line-up with a special VRIN and TRIN recording grid, rather than with the answer sheet. The test-taker's responses to the 49 VRIN item pairs and the 20 TRIN item pairs must be transferred to the recording grid. The VRIN and TRIN answer keys are placed over the recording grid for scoring. Complete instructions for hand-scoring these scales are listed on the recording grid. A set of 50 VRIN and TRIN recording grids is packaged with every set of 50 Validity and Clinical Scales profile forms. If you are missing recording grids, please call us to request a replacement set of VRIN and TRIN recording grids at no charge.

What is the difference between the Depression scale in the Clinical Scales and the Depression scale in the Content Scales?

The Depression scale in the Clinical Scales is a heterogeneous measure of depression (it measures more than one facet of depression). This scale was developed on psychiatric patients with various forms of symptomatic depression. The Depression scale in the Clinical Scales measures discomfort and dissatisfaction with life, characterized by poor morale, lack of hope in the future, denial of happiness and self-worth, withdrawal, psychomotor retardation, and other facets of symptomatic depression.

The Depression scale in the Content Scales measures only one facet of depression, self-reported depressive thoughts.

What is the difference between the MAC-R scale and the Addiction Potential Scale?

The MAC-R scale has 49 items. The newer Addiction Potential Scale has 39 items. Many of the items on the two scales are different. MacAndrew developed the MAC-R scale by comparing men in treatment for alcoholism with male psychiatric patients whose primary problem was not alcoholism. However, the MAC-R does not contain content obviously related to alcohol use. High scores are associated with, among other things, social extraverted, risk taking, and aggressive tendencies. The Addiction Potential Scale items concern personality characteristics and life situations more generally associated with substance abuse. Its heterogeneous item content suggests extraverted and risk-taking characteristics as well as self-doubt and cynical attitudes. The Addiction Potential Scale is commonly used in conjunction with the Addiction Admission Scale.

What are the PSY-5 scales and where can I find information about them?

Harkness and McNulty developed a model for assessing psychopathology based on the "Big Five" model of personality. They selected items from the MMPI-2 item pool that matched their model and developed five scales: Aggressiveness (AGGR), Psychoticism (PSYC), Disconstraint (DISC), Negative Emotionality/Neuroticism (NEGE), and Introversion/Low Positive Emotionality (INTR). The Personality Psychopathology Five Scales (PSY-5) were introduced in 2001 and are available on the Extended Score Report, the Minnesota Reports, and in the hand-scoring Supplementary Scales materials. Additional information about the PSY-5 Scales can be found in the revised MMPI-2 Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation (2001) or the PSY-5 Scales – Test Monograph (University of Minnesota Press and Pearson).

Why were the validity scales re-ordered?

The revised ordering of the validity scales follows the recommended sequence for developing an interpretation of the scales: measures of inconsistent responding (VRIN, TRIN), measures of infrequent responding (F, F_B, F_P), and measures of defensive responding (L, K, S).

Why were the supplementary scales revised and re-ordered?

The Supplementary Scales Profile was revised by the addition of the MMPI-2 version of the Cook/Medley Hostility scale (Ho) and the deletion of the Schlenger Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder scale (PS) and the Social Introversion Subscales (Si). The PS scale is no longer offered. The Si Subscales are available with the Harris-Lingoes Subscales but are not profiled. The Supplementary Scales were re-ordered to enhance interpretability: A, R, Es, Do, Re (scales representing or related to familiar normal-range personality constructs); Mt, PK, MDS (indicators of generalized emotional distress with a clinical emphasis); Ho, O-H, MAC-R, AAS, APS (indicators of behavioral dyscontrol, the last three focusing on substance abuse); and GM, GF (gender-role scales).

Do the RC Scales replace the Clinical Scales?

The RC Scales do not replace the Clinical Scales. They each measure a major distinctive component of one of the Clinical Scales. The RC Scales can serve as an aid in the interpretation of the Clinical, Content, and Supplementary Scales. 

Are the Clinical Scales less valid than the RC Scales?

Research has established that in comparison with the Clinical Scales, the RC Scales have comparable to improved convergent validity and substantially improved discriminant validity.

How should I incorporate the RC Scales into my evaluations?

The RC Scales can serve to aid interpretation of the MMPI-2 by measuring a major distinctive component of each of the Clinical Scales. They can aid interpretation of the Clinical Scales, code types, Clinical Subscales (Harris-Lingoes), Content Scales, and certain Supplementary Scales.

How do I explain discrepancies between what the Clinical Scales and the RC Scales report?

When differences occur, they are not “discrepancies” but, rather, represent a clarification provided by the RC Scales as a result, for example, of excluding from these scales non-specific Demoralization, K-correction, and “subtle item” variance.  If a Clinical Scale is elevated and its RC Scale counterpart is not, the correlates associated with the former should not be emphasized in the interpretation (unless indicated by other MMPI-2 scale scores). If an RC Scale is elevated and its Clinical Scale counterpart is not, the correlates associated with the RC Scale should be incorporated in the interpretation.

What kind of documentation is available for the RC Scales?

A test monograph by Tellegen, Ben-Porath, McNulty, Arbisi, Graham, & Kaemmer (2003), titled The MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales: Development, Validation, and Interpretation, includes: an introduction providing the rationale for creating the RC Scales, information about how the scales were developed, detailed psychometric information on the reliability and validity of the RC Scales, recommendations for interpreting the RC Scales, case examples illustrating RC Scale interpretation, and a discussion of future directions in RC Scale research and application. This document also includes detailed appendixes specifying the item composition of the scales and raw-to-uniform T-score conversion tables. (Available from Pearson, Product # 29433.) See also the MMPI-2-RF Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation for an extensive discussion of the scales. Numerous publications on the RC Scales have appeared in the journal and book literature, including the text by Yossef S. Ben-Porath, Interpreting the MMPI-2-RF (2012), available from the University of Minnesota Press.

What is the research base for the RC Scales?

The development and validation of the scales is documented in the first chapter of a test monograph by Tellegen, Ben-Porath, McNulty, Arbisi, Graham, & Kaemmer (2003), titled The MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales: Development, Validation, and Interpretation. (2003), available from Pearson,(Product # 29433) and in the text by Yossef S. Ben-Porath, Interpreting the MMPI-2-RF (2012), available from the University of Minnesota Press.

How were the RC Scales developed?

The development of the scales is documented in the first chapter of a test monograph by Tellegen, Ben-Porath, McNulty, Arbisi, Graham, & Kaemmer (2003), titled The MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales: Development, Validation, and Interpretation, available from Pearson (Product # 29433), and in the text by Yossef S. Ben-Porath, Interpreting the MMPI-2-RF (2012), available from the University of Minnesota Press.

The author of the scales, Auke Tellegen, first isolated the general distress or  “demoralization” component of the existing Clinical Scales. He then identified major distinctive and maximally demoralization-free components of the ten scales and constructed a set of new scales measuring these components for eight of the scales (not for Scales 5 and 0).

Do the RC scales contain the same items as the Clinical Scales? Which items were dropped, were there new items included?

Each of the RC Scales includes items that also appear on the Clinical Scales and others that do not. The item composition of the RC scales is reported in Appendix A of a test monograph by Tellegen, Ben-Porath, McNulty, Arbisi, Graham, & Kaemmer (2003), titled The MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales: Development, Validation, and Interpretation, available from Pearson (Product # 29433), and in the MMPI-2-RF Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation.

Do the RC Scales overlap?

No, they do not. It was the intent of the scales’ developer, Auke Tellegen, to construct scales that would each measure a major distinctive dimension currently embedded in the Clinical scales.

What are the intercorrelations of the RC Scales, and, in comparison, of the Clinical Scales?

Intercorrelations of both sets of scales on several samples are reported in Tables 4-6 through 4-12 of a test monograph by Tellegen, Ben-Porath, McNulty, Arbisi, Graham, & Kaemmer (2003), titled The MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales: Development, Validation, and Interpretation,available from Pearson (Product # 29433). As expected, the RC Scales are considerably less strongly intercorrelated (considerably more distinctive) than are the Clinical Scales.

What are the test-retest reliabilities of the RC Scales?

This information is provided in Tables 4-4 and 4-5 of a test monograph by Tellegen, Ben-Porath, McNulty, Arbisi, Graham, & Kaemmer (2003), titled The MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales: Development, Validation, and Interpretation, available from Pearson (Product # 29433).  See also the MMPI-2-RF Technical Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation.

What are the internal consistencies of the RC Scales?

This information is provided in Tables 4-4 and 4-5 of a Test Monograph by Tellegen, Ben-Porath, McNulty, Arbisi, Graham. & Kaemmer (2003), titled The MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales: Development, Validation, and Interpretation, available from Pearson (Product # 29433).  See also the MMPI-2-RF Technical Manual.

Why don't Scales 5 and 0 have corresponding RC Scales?

The RC Scales were designed to assess psychopathology. Scale 5 does not assess a currently recognized clinical disorder, and Scale 0 measures a normal–range personality trait. The MMPI-2-RF, anchored by the RC Scales, includes scales that assess constructs associated with Clinical Scales 5 and 0.

Can I apply existing Clinical Scale code-type research to the RC Scales?

Existing MMPI-2 code-type research findings are not usable with the RC Scales. However, the RC Scales were developed to address more directly than previously the interpretive challenges that led to the development of the code-type interpretation approach. Detailed discussion of this subject is provided in a test monograph by Tellegen, Ben-Porath, McNulty, Arbisi, Graham, & Kaemmer (2003), titled The MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales: Development, Validation, and Interpretation, available from Pearson (Product # 29433), and in the text by Yossef  S. Ben-Porath, Interpreting the MMPI-2-RF (2012), available from the University of Minnesota Press.

What is the Demoralization Scale?

The Demoralization Scale provides an appraisal of the test-taker’s current overall sense of well-being. As such, it can serve as the starting point for the RC Scale interpretation process. It was constructed by extracting to the extent possible from the Clinical Scales the general distress component present in all the Clinical Scales as well as in most other MMPI-2 scales.

Do I use the traditional cut-offs to evaluate elevations on the RC Scales?

Yes, with the same precautions one should observe for employing any recommended cut-offs, namely that they be considered guidelines identifying points at which the interpretive focus should shift, rather than as fixed points demarcating qualitative change.

Are the RC Scales K-corrected? Why not?

The RC Scales are not K-corrected. Research indicates that the K correction either does not affect the validity of the Clinical Scales (in clinical settings) or significantly attenuates the validity of the scales. A K correction is not applied to the RC Scales.

Clinical Scale 3 and RC3 don’t measure the same thing and are not highly correlated. Why is that?

Clinical Scale 3 is a markedly heterogeneous measure. It includes several distinctive components. The primary component is somatic complaints, which are assessed by RC1. Among the smaller components is disavowal of cynicism, which is assessed by RC3. However, because disavowal of cynicism is negatively correlated with psychopathology, the scoring for the scale was reversed, and RC3 was, accordingly, labeled Cynicism. Somatic preoccupation coupled with naiveté, likely reflected in a highly elevated score on Scale 3, would appear as a combination of an elevated score on RC1 and a low score (below T score 39) on RC3.

The RC Scales seem to overlap with the Content Scales. What are the differences between the RC Scales and the Content Scales?

Although some of the labels are similar, there is relatively limited overlap between the RC Scales and the Content Scales. Among the primary differences between the two sets of scales: several Content Scales are highly saturated with Demoralization (Anxiety, Depression, Low Self- Esteem, Work Interference, and Negative Treatment Indicators), and some Content Scales combine distinctive elements assessed separately by the RC Scales. For example, the Content Scale Anti-social Practices lumps characteristics assessed by RC3 and RC4, and the Content Scale Bizarre Mentation characteristics assessed by RC6 and RC8.

What Is the difference between Content Scale Cynicism and RC3?

The Content Scale Cynicism (CYN) is broader in scope. RC3 focuses exclusively on non-self-referential beliefs in human badness, while CYN also includes self-referential beliefs, which are assessed by RC6. Therefore, the RC Scales allow for a differentiation between negative self-referential and non-self-referential views of others, whereas these two components are not distinguished by the Content Scale CYN.

Are the RC Scales useful with non-clinical populations that typically produce within-normal-limits profiles, like personnel/employee testing and child custody evaluations?

The RC Scales can also be effective with non-clinical populations. In some cases, the absence of demoralization in individuals assessed in non-clinical settings results in artifactual lowering of scores on the Clinical Scales. By contrast, because they are less saturated with demoralization, this artifact is less likely to occur with the RC Scales, and existing specific problems (e.g., antisocial behavior) are more likely to be identified. Corey and Ben-Porath (MMPI-2-RF User’s Guide for the Police Candidate Interpretive Report [PCIR] ) review studies that support and guide use of the RC Scales in pre-employment assessments of police officer candidates. This body of research indicates a need to use lower (than the traditional T score 65) cut-offs in assessments of risk for negative outcomes in police candidates. Table 4-6 includes recommended cut-offs for the RC Scales.

How do the Clinical Scales and the RC Scales differ in how they assess psychopathology?

Multiple elevations on the Clinical Scales may reflect comorbidity and/or demoralization, making it difficult to accurately determine the presence of actually comorbid and complex syndromes. The relatively low demoralization saturation of the RC Scales and their improved discriminant properties enable users to more accurately identify the necessary elements of a syndrome and the occurrence of comorbidity.

What is a well-defined code type (for the Clinical Scales)?

In a well-defined code type, the T scores of the scales comprising the code type reach an elevation of 65 or higher, and are five or more T-score points higher than the T scores on the remaining Clinical Scales.

How do I interpret an MMPI-2 with a well-defined and elevated code type in the absence of elevations on the RC Scales? Should I rely on the code type?

A profile with a well-defined Clinical Scale code type without any elevation on the RC Scales will most likely occur when the K correction adds significant variance to the Clinical Scale scores. The non-K-corrected profile will likely not be elevated. Research indicates that in such cases the non-elevated RC Scales and non-K-corrected Clinical Scales provide a more accurate indication of the test-taker’s functioning.

How do I interpret an elevation on one or more RC Scales in the absence of any elevations on the Clinical Scales?

Elevation on an RC Scale in the absence of elevation on its Clinical Scale counterpart is most likely to occur when the absence of demoralization, a low score on K, or few endorsed subtle items artifactually attenuate the score on the Clinical Scale. The elevated score on the RC Scale will provide a more accurate indication of the individual’s functioning and should be incorporated in the interpretation.

What are the demographic default values (initial settings) for an MMPI-2 administration?

Note: The Forensic Setting does not have a default value. If Forensic Setting is not indicated, an invalid report will be generated.

Test Date, Birth Date, ID Number, and Gender must be filled in. The software will not print any report without this information. Age is calculated from the Test Date and Birth Date. If the client is younger than 18, no report will be printed.

My Extended Score Report is invalid, but it doesn't say that on the report. Why not?

The Extended Score Report provides profiles and scores for the MMPI-2 scales, but does not provide an interpretation. Traditional invalidity rules are not applicable to the Extended Score Report. This enables clinicians to receive all of the scale scores. When using this report, interpretation is the responsibility of the clinician. The clinician is responsible for addressing profile invalidity in his or her interpretation. 

How does the Minnesota Report deal with invalid records?

The Minnesota Reports are designed to interpret only protocols that meet well-established validity criteria. Invalid protocols are dealt with in two ways: Extremely elevated and clearly invalid records are not interpreted but the record is provided along with graphs that are clearly marked INVALID. Protocols that are possibly invalid (e.g., overly defensive or exaggerated) are discussed in a section in the report called VALIDITY CONSIDERATIONS. The utility of the particular evaluation is described and estimated contingent upon the level of performance on all the validity scales. The cut-offs for different settings will vary depending upon the research available.

Why were the Wiener-Harmon Subtle-Obvious Subscales removed from the Extended Score Report?

The University of Minnesota Press and Pearson discontinued offering the Wiener-Harmon Subtle-Obvious Subscales in all MMPI® products. The subscales were retained in the MMPI-2 instrument to encourage further research in the hope that additional data would answer questions about their utility. It is the opinion of the Press's consultants that data collected subsequent to the publication of the MMPI-2 instrument in 1989 and reported in journal articles, as well as earlier studies, indicate that these subscales should no longer be offered. A majority of surveyed MMPI-2 clinician-researchers expressed the same opinion.

The decision reflects the lack of empirical evidence supporting the validity of the subtle-obvious distinction as implemented in the Subtle-Obvious Subscales. There is no good evidence that the Subtle Subscales indicate psychopathology more validly than the Obvious Subscales when respondents fake bad or good or over- or underreport their psychological difficulties.

Lack of supporting evidence and concern about the potential misuse of the Subtle-Obvious Subscales in clinical, forensic, and other applied settings have become compelling reasons for removing these subscales from the list of standard MMPI offerings.

Why is the Schlenger PTSD scale (PS) no longer available on the MMPI-2 test?

Although both scales were normed on veterans, the Keane scale (PK) was developed to differentiate PTSD patients from other psychiatric patients. The Schlenger scale (PS) was developed to separate normals from PTSD patients. Research conducted to date shows that the Keane scale (PK) is a stronger, more useful measure for classifying patients with PTSD.

Why was the occupation “Air Traffic Controller” discontinued in the Personnel Reports?

Air Traffic Controller was discontinued because the sample size was considered too small for base rate calculation. You may still process prior reports which indicate this occupation; however, the occupation will default to “other.”

Important information regarding the discontinuation of The Minnesota Report: Alcohol and Drug Treatment System (product code 51443).

The Minnesota Report: Alcohol and Drug Treatment System has been revised and incorporated into the recently updated Adult Clinical System—Revised, 4th Edition. Look for this newly added setting (setting 8) in The Minnesota Report: Adult Clinical System—Revised, 4th Edition. With the introduction of this setting in the Adult Clinical System—Revised, 4th Edition, we have discontinued the prior version of The Minnesota Report: Alcohol and Drug Treatment System. Listed below is some important discontinuation information for the users of The Minnesota Report: Alcohol and Drug Treatment System.

With the discontinuation of the Alcohol/Drug Treatment System, what happens to my unused reports?

When Q Local software, version 1.2 is opened, any unused reports for the Alcohol and Drug Treatment System (product code 51443) will be converted to reports for the Adult Clinical System–Revised, 4th Edition (product code 51487).

With the discontinuation of the Alcohol and Drug Treatment System, how do I reprint these reports?

To reprint an Alcohol and Drug Treatment System report, highlight the assessment record and go into Edit. Enter 8 (Alcohol/Drug Treatment) for the clinical setting in the Edit Assessment Record window, then click Save Changes. With the assessment record still highlighted, go into Score and Report. Choose the Adult Clinical System–Revised, 4th Edition report in the Score and Report window, then click Continue. A report usage will not be required or subtracted to reprint this report.

What is the Minnesota Report?

The Minnesota Report is a computer-based interpretation system for the MMPI-2 and MMPI-A instruments for psychologists. The Minnesota Report is essentially an "electronic textbook" or resource guide that provides the most likely test interpretations for a particular set of MMPI-2 or MMPI-A scores in a particular setting.

Why are there different settings for the Minnesota Report? Do the reports differ for the various settings? What information is used to develop different personality interpretations?

There are setting-specific versions of the Minnesota Report for several reasons:

1. The nature and goals of a psychological evaluation differ according to the reason for referral. For example, in clinical settings clinical diagnosis and treatment potential are important considerations while these are not goals in personnel or forensic settings.
2. The client is likely to approach the assessment task very differently in each of these settings. Thus, the assessment of protocol validity differs according to setting.
3. The typical performance on the scales and indices of the MMPI-2/MMPI-A instruments differs somewhat by type of application. Therefore, the base rates of scores vary according to setting. More specifically, interpretations can be made for MMPI scores if the frequency of typical performance is included in the analysis. For example, in correctional facilities there is a high rate of Pd scale elevations and in medical settings Hs and Hy are more prominent.
4. The reports will vary in terms of information provided, relative performance on the different indices, and research information available for each setting. In addition, different scale-behavioral correlates can be found in different settings. For example, the association between the Pd and Sc scales and aggressive acting-out behavior are more prominent in correctional settings than in medical settings.

Can the Minnesota Report computer printout serve as a complete and independent psychological report on a client?

No, as noted on each report, the statements contained in the narrative represent a professional-to-professional consultation and do not serve as an independent or "stand-alone" report. The statements represent a "best estimate" or the most likely write-up for a given profile pattern. The information provided in the Report is analogous to an "electronic textbook."

The narrative report is based on objectively derived scale indices and scale interpretations that have been developed in diverse groups of patients. The computer simply references the extensive research literature on the MMPI-2 scores and indexes, evaluates the particular pattern of scores that a client produces, and locates in the database the most pertinent personality and symptomatic information from the research literature. This MMPI-2 interpretation can serve as a useful source of hypotheses about clients.

Where can I find information about the mean profiles that are provided in the Personnel System, 3rd Edition reports?

Occupation-specific mean profiles were added to the Personnel Interpretive Report (product code 51442) and the Personnel Adjustment Rating Report (product code 51441) in 2001. The updated Revised Personnel System, 3rd Edition User's Guide (2001) provides information on the occupation-specific mean profiles.

Where can I find further information about the Minnesota Report?

The User's Guides for the Minnesota Report are available from Pearson.

Butcher, J. N. (2005). MMPI-2 User's guide. The Minnesota Report: Adult clinical System—Revised, 4th Edition. Minneapolis, MN: Pearson Assessments.

Butcher, J. N. (2002). MMPI-2 User's guide. The Minnesota Report: Personnel System—Revised, 3rd Edition. Minneapolis, MN: Pearson Assessments.

Butcher, et al. (1997). MMPI-2 User's guide. The Minnesota Report: Reports for Forensic Settings. Minneapolis, MN: Pearson Assessments.

Butcher, J. N., & Williams, C. L. (2007). MMPI-A User's guide for The Minnesota Report: Adolescent Interpretive System, Second Edition. Minneapolis, MN: Pearson Assessments.