I have done quite a bit of research on the MMPI 2 used by psychological testing.  Here's the first 75 out of 567 questions.  I could give out rest of them & how some of them are interpeted by psychologists for advice on admitting past history on the psych & medical tests.  See my post on "Help with Admissions for Psych & Medial"

MMPI 2 TEST QUESTIONS IN ORDER
TRUE OR FALSE (567 QUESTIONS)

1.I like mechanics magazines
2.I have a good appetite
3.I wake up fresh & rested most mornings
4.I think I would like the work of a librarian
5.I am easily awakened by noise
6.I like to read newspaper articles on crime
7.My hands and feet are usually warm enough
8.My daily life is full of things that keep me interested
9.I am about as able to work as I ever was
10.There seems to be a lump in my throat much of the time
11.A person should try to understand his dreams and be guided by or take warning from them
12.I enjoy detective or mystery stories
13.I work under a great deal of tension
14.I have diarrhea once a month or more
15.Once in a while I think of things too bad to talk about
16.I am sure I get a raw deal from life
17.My father was a good man
18.I am very seldom troubled by constipation
19.When I take a new, I like to be tipped off on whom should be gotten next to
20.My sex life is satisfactory
21.At times I have very much wanted to leave home
22.At times I have fits of laughing & crying that I cannot control
23.I am troubled by attacks of nausea and vomiting
24.No one seems to understand me
25.I would like to be a singer
26.I feel that it is certainly best to keep my mouth shut when I’m in trouble
27.Evil spirits possess me at times
28.When someone does me a wrong I feel I should pay him back if I can, just for the principle of the thing.
29.I am bothered by acid stomach several times a week
30.At times I feel like swearing
31.I have nightmares every few nights
32.I find it hard to keep my mind on a task or job
33.I have had very peculiar and strange experiences
34.I have a cough most of the time
35.If people had not had it in for me I would have been much more successful
36.I seldom worry about my heath
37.I have never been in trouble because of my sex behavior
38.During one period when I was a youngster I engaged in petty thievery
39.At times I feel like smashing things
40.Most any time I would rather sit and daydream than to do anything else
41.I have had periods of days, weeks, or months when I couldn’t take care of things because I couldn’t “get going”
42.My family does not like the work I have chosen ( or the work I intend to choose for my life work)
43.My sleep is fitful and disturbed
44.Much of the time my head seems to hurt all over
45.I do not always tell the truth
46.My judgment is better than it ever was
47.Once a week or oftener I feel suddenly hot all over without apparent cause
48.When I am with people I am bothered by hearing very queer things
49.It would be better if almost all laws were thrown away
50.My soul sometimes leaves my body
51.I am in just as good physical health as most of my friends
52.I prefer to pass by school friends, or people I know but have not seen for a long time, unless they speak to me first
53.A minister can cure disease by praying and putting his hand on your head
54.I am liked by most people who know me
55.I am almost never bothered by pains over the heart or in my chest
56.As a youngster I was suspended from school one or more times for cutting up
57.I am a good mixer
58.Everything is turning out just like the prophets of the Bible said it would
59.I have often had to take orders from someone who did not know as much as I did
60.I do not read every editorial in the newspaper everyday
61.I have not lived the right kind of life
62.Parts of my body often have feeling like burning, tingling, crawling, or like “going to sleep”
63.I have had no difficulty in starting or holding my bowel movement
64.I sometimes keep on at a thing until others lose their patience with me
65.I loved my father
66.I see things or animals or people around me that others do not see
67.I wish I could be as happy as others seem to be
68.I hardly ever feel pain in the back of the neck
69.I am very strongly attracted by members of my own sex
70.I used to like drop-the-handkerchief
71.I think a great many people exaggerate their misfortunes in order to gain the sympathy and help of others
72.I am troubled by discomfort in the pit of my stomach every few days or oftener
73.I am an important person
74.I have often wished I were a girl.  (Or if you are a girl) I have never been sorry that I am a girl
75.I get angry sometimes

Dear thug cop oh my gosh you are a god sent im going to be taking the test (mmpi 2) in 2 weeks and I would appreciate if you could send me the rest of the test and any pointers that you might have.  I bought a book on it and I am studying what they want.  I am taking the test for employment.  I took a polygraph recently and scored a "unconclusive" so I have to take it again in 1 week at a differnt place if you have any info it would be greatly appreciated.  thank god for people like you this is such a process and so much is riding on my results I want to be as prepared as possible.
My EMAIL address is Flux123@hotmail.com
please please please send anything you can.
Thanks again!

I guess I have always wondered if the MMPI and other personality inventory tests can be/have been defended in Court as valid instruments? Anybody have any information on this?

DippityShurff wrote on Aug 14^th, 2006 at 2:48am:

I guess I have always wondered if the MMPI and other personality inventory tests can be/have been defended in Court as valid instruments? Anybody have any information on this?

Perhaps we should all start up an "anti-MMPI.org website?

nonombre wrote on Aug 14^th, 2006 at 5:09am:

Perhaps we should all start up an "anti-MMPI.org website?

maybe, I dunno LOL. I do remember when that bunch of Academe' snoots from FSU were trying to develop something called the LEPI or law enforcement personality inventory. It was a tweaking, supposedly of the MMPI.  Never got off the ground really because they couldn't validate it.  I have seen some pretty good cops who showed up as really weird upon taking that thing.  Most are still employed, except of course for that one guy who the voices told to move to Roswell, NM

Dip

nonombre wrote on Aug 14^th, 2006 at 5:09am:

Perhaps we should all start up an "anti-MMPI.org website?

For one, the MMPI, alone, never sunk anyone's career. Secondly, I trust a 600-question inventory assessment a lot more than I trust a couple of hours strapped to a machine that monitors my heart rate, etc., and purports to be a "lie detector."

raasdo wrote on Aug 16^th, 2006 at 2:30am:

For one, the MMPI, alone, never sunk anyone's career. Secondly, I trust a 600-question inventory assessment a lot more than I trust a couple of hours strapped to a machine that monitors my heart rate, etc., and purports to be a "lie detector."

Are you sure that nobody ever lost out on a law enforcement job because they had the misfortune to "fail" the MMPI?

nonombre wrote on Aug 16^th, 2006 at 3:16am:

Are you sure that nobody ever lost out on a law enforcement job because they had the misfortune to "fail" the MMPI?

Comparing the MMPI to a polygraph is a bit absurd, and the proposition's a red herring not worth pursuing. What I will tell you is that the MMPI is a personality inventory that is just one element, of many, occasionally (and very rarely) used by certain agencies (intelligence agencies, not the FBI nor any other law enforcement agency to my knowledge). You can't do well, you can't do poorly on the MMPI. You're either a strong match, a not so strong match, or a terrible match for the profile they're looking for. A "terrible match" doesn't mean your application is sunk; similarly, a "strong match" doesn't mean you're on the road to a job offer. Moreover, even if you're not a good match, you simply go home realizing hey, perhaps I wasn't qualified (akin to not succeeding in a job interview).

Compare a polygraph: you either pass or you fail. Failure is the end of the line, bar none. Passing means you go on. After "failing" a polygraph, you are deemed a liar, perhaps disloyal, deviant, a druggie, or worse.

Comparing the two is pretty ridiculous.

Rassado,

I respectfully disagree with some of the points you raised.


Quote:

intelligence agencies, not the FBI nor any other law enforcement agency to my knowledge

The MMPI is actually used very widely by law enforcement, at least on the local level. And yes, it is used (in whole or in part) to disqualify candidates.

The biggest difference here is that psycological DQs--like medical DQs--are frequently appealed with success. The same cannot be said for results of a polygraph seance.


Quote:

Compare a polygraph: you either pass or you fail. Failure is the end of the line, bar none. Passing means you go on. After "failing" a polygraph, you are deemed a liar, perhaps disloyal, deviant, a druggie, or worse.

Incorrect. The 'graph jockey can also deem the results of the "test" inconclusive. Regrettably, this is essentially the same as "failing," as many agencies--especially federal ones--will not hire you without a "passing" result.

Rosado:

This "shrink test" is used all the time to "flunk" police applicants.  Many, many times it is also the ONLY tool used to eliminate applicants in a promotion process.

raasdo,
WOW, seriously where have you been?? the mmpi 2 has sunk me as a applicant and i took it again and passed for another agency.  Friend, this test eliminats many applicants!

Hey Thug cop

27-female -california.
IM in background for an agency right now. Id really appreciate it if i could get those questions from you.


to the other guy:

I also passed one and maybe failed another. Dosent make sense. I hate these freakin tests.

Thanks ahead of time.

Dev.
-

http://www.bitching.org/mmpi2/test.php

Just an online version of the MMPI-2 that also scores it.

Dear thug cop I would appreciate if you could send me the rest of the questions of M.M.P.I.2.  I bought a book on it but I am quite comfused.  I am taking the test for employment.  
My EMAIL address is gianzouzou@yahoo.gr
please send anything you can.
Thanks a lot! :)

Hilarious! ;D "Cheating" on an MMPI is rich. Haven't any of you heard of the "lie scale" on the MMPI? It's highly unlikely to consistantly pose as a different person throughout the entire test. Last I checked, they don't let you take the test home----and more importantly, they don't much care for an elevated lie scale on a test which asks questions like fear of water and love of your mama. This thread reminds me of why applicants for law enforcement need to be thoroughly interrogated and thoroughly researched. Cheating on a personality test??????    wow.

How can you call it cheating when MMPI and polygraphy carries no relevance what so ever to how well a person can do his job? Most any given day, some newspaper or TV news across the country has articals about rogue cops. I"m sure they had to pass MMPI and polygraph to get their jobs.

Twoblock wrote on May 23^rd, 2007 at 3:38pm:

How can you call it cheating when MMPI and polygraphy carries no relevance what so ever to how well a person can do his job? Most any given day, some newspaper or TV news across the country has articals about rogue cops. I"m sure they had to pass MMPI and polygraph to get their jobs.

Of course it is relevant. Among other things, the MMPI looks for indicators of a host of ills of personality such as psychopathy, paralyzing phobias, rage isues, certain sexual impulsivenesses, and a host of other very relevant personlal proclivities. I prefer cops to not be "crazy" or horrificly impulsive thank you.


Psychometric tests are immutable---meaning that they only take a snapshot of current psychological issues. Who is to say what kinds of psycho-maladies manifest themselves from the job over time.

p.s. You can't "fail" a personality test. A person might be revealed to be too OCD or what have you, but there is no pass/fail. If a person is shown to be too impulsive mixed with short-fuse angry, than perhaps carrying a gun around in the ghetto with taunts from locals is not the job for them. The posts on this MMPI thread are very similar to the untruths spouted about polygraph. The effort and honesty will win---and if by rare circumstances it doesn't work---then screw them. Being a cop is like being someone's bitch----you don't have a boss, you have a commander.

Hi:

If you happen to get a copy of the MMPI could you please email me a copy. I'm going to be taking the exam for a job and I just want to have some idea about the questions. I am terribly worried about not passing. My email address is: JcoL232213@aol.com.

Thanks,

jack

Hey hows it going guys. Just popped in and started reading this thread. I too failed a psych eval. Its true - life ain't fair. I agree with 95% of everything Doc had to say about, basically, wanting to hire the MOST qualified candidate. However, there were some things that I take issue with, being on the other side of the fence. I will address this to the guys like myself who are passionate about getting on to a department.

     1. Fail the MMPI test in California, and, for a lot of departments, its mandatory that you wait 6 months before you can apply to that specific department. I don't know how they do things over on the east coast, but over here, you can be as jolly "go git-em" as you want and it won't do crap for you. They don't care about tenacity. When they fail you on the psych you're looking at a long, long wait no matter how passionate you are. Sorry, thats facts.

     2. The test is subjective. Theres about 1000 questions, however before they administer the test you're told that they REALIZE the test is subjective and that AFTER the test, your particular answers will be gone over in detail and "ironed" out with the psych doctor. In REALITY, all 1000+ answers are fed into a machine. That machine sorts, collates, and correllates your answers to a preset computer model of different personality profiles, and then spits out your results which are, GET THIS: Short paragraphs that are basically a cheat sheet for the psych eval guy to look at and size you up.
     As user after user on this board has pointed out though, the questions which are used to make those paragraphs (which purport to be your "personality-in-a-can") are based on questions, the answers to which are judged on a very subjective basis. I love how some jerks on this board try and tell you to "tell the truth" and it'll all be "ok." Thats unrealistic. The very NATURE of these questions clips off portions and degrees of the truth from your answer.
     For Example: Say I'm asked True or false (and by the way, most of the questions on the test I took were degree based questions, Like: "I like to take charge when others hold back" 1- VERY TRUE 2- STRONG TRUE 3- TRUE 4- NEUTRAL 5- NOT TRUE 6- NOT TRUE AT ALL etc) whether I have committed acts of violence. That for me, and I suspect for everyone else, would be true, with strict reading of interpretation. However, answering True to this question does not go under the "TRUE" category, its computed into the machine after you're done taking the test and is used to build a PSYCH PROFILE of you. Now, this one answer alone would not be enough to sink you. I suspect that the designers of the test were looking for someone trying to fake the test. However, not all of the questions are this easy to read. There are some that make you wonder "Well, yeah, thats true, I have to answer true but gosh, I know the machine isn't going to understand that I was 6 years old when I "stole" my dads car and that everyone laughed, I got spanked after I backed it up all of 5 feet into the street, learned my lesson and never did something like that again- it just asks true or false and unfortunately THATS ALL THE MACHINE KNOWS - I had to put down "T" for multiple "bad" category questions because of one silly incident that happened to me when I was a kid. Heres the killer though - the machine spits out all these small little paragraphs about your personality right? The psych guy comes in (he was late in my case) from the gold course or whereever. He's a white guy, in his sixties probably, I guessing well to-do. He asks his secretary "Are they done yet?" walks into his office with the results of the test which are the little paragraphs. He walks back out of his office, tells me to take off my tie and my jacket and sit down with him. Now, before I took the test I thought this would be the easiest part to pass. However, when he looked me in the eyes and told me "Well it appears to me you have control issues Mr. X." I knew it was going to be rocky. This guy, (his name is Doctor Wolfe, with an "E" I think, he runs a consulting firm out of Napa california) never went back and looked at how I actually answered all 1000 questions and why I answered them the way I did. The reason why I had scored so high on the "control issues" section (I can't remember the technical term for the section) was due to how I was taught to view a leader takes responsibilty for his actions and the actions of those in his unit. I was coming from a military background (1st Battalion 5th Marine Regiment, 1st Marine Division, C Company Wpns Platoon) where I had served 3 combat tours in the infantry in Iraq. I remember well, one of the questions was basically : "I engage in small talk on the job." Where I come from, "small talk on the job" means talking on post, or sending or recieving or talking about non-mission related things. Where I come from, that will get your killed, court-martialed or even worse, one of your buddies killed or court martialed. YOU JUST DONT DO IT. So I answered, very strongly, with a 1 or 5 whichever it was, that NO I do not engage in small talk on the job. LOL! Bad move on my part brothers! The test results actually SCOLDED ME for my "anti-social" behavior in the "work-place." I was taken aback, especially when the psych eval guy announced to me that he was done with the interview after only about 15 minutes. He was CONVINCED based on my test results that I was not fit to serve as a deputy sheriff for the Contra Costa County Sheriff's department. I was not allowed to explain myself, and he evaded my attempts to be "tenacious" and show him that I wanted the job and was misunderstood by telling me that I would have made a better lawyer than a sheriff's deputy. I understand that it wasn't him. Its the system of testing that they use. The psych eval guys are not "bad guys." They're just doing their jobs. They're just as lazy, and focused on getting back out to the golf course as all of us are (I hate golf but you get my drift).

The only thing I can really tell you in conclusion is tell the truth to the best of your ability and BE A MAN. I spent about 1000 dollars driving back and forth from Orange county where I live to Contra Costa County trying to get that stupid job. Sometimes things just dont work out. Don't get discouraged, its NOT YOUR FAULT! Just move on. I would like to note however, to all my fellow brother Marines and fellow infantry guys in the Army that CCC Sheriffs Department is probably not the best spot for us. They were pretty hostile to me because of my being in the Marines and I picked up a lot of strong hostility from the psych guy as well. I highly recommend the LAPD or the LA County Sheriff's Department. They're good people and they have more Marines and Soilders protecting and serving than just about anyone else (with the exception of Dallas PD, which are hiring by the way, in a big way). Remember, BE A MAN take your lumps and move on. If they don't like you, its better for both of you guys that you part ways. And for the love of god, you younger guys, DONT CHEAT! You erase ANY sympathy any senior or elder guy has for you if you start cheating or trying to "one up" the system by building up some fake profile.

God bless you guys and I wish all of you good luck in your endeavors!

P.S.- To the guy who posted these questions on here, I hope you realize you're helping young guys build up a phony profile that will probably get them DQ'ed right? Think before you post this stuff. Let them make their own mistakes. Don't baby them or hold their hand. Tell em what they need to know to take the test but don't tempt them with cheating. The test is designed to detect that. You're only teaching them bad habits and how to lie.

Dear Thug Cop

I would like to ask if yiou could send me the whole MMPI-2 questions and any tips or answers to the test. I am due to be retest in the near future as apparently I was too defensive the last time I did.
Any help would be appreciated. My email address is ccamp72@yahoo.com.au

Cheers

Off topic replies have been moved to This Thread

Thanks for the help!!!! Could you please help me find the rest of the questions? I have written this once and they will not give me any answers about this test.

Anyway you can display the rest of those test questions. I failed it two weeks ago. Its frustrating. I wish I can find the test questions on the CPI too.

Scott

Hello:

I've taken the MMPI before to reinstate a CPRP and DoD Secret clearance required for me to resume work in a Surety Facility operated by a government contractor.  This occurred during and after a nasty divorce and I understand and agree with the reasons for my temporary removal.

Though I am a bit of an oddball, I was reinstated after 9 months.  This was largely because allies in my corner needed my skills.

The MMPI and psych evaluations are quite curious creatures as well.  The Director of Neuropsychology at Michael Reese Hospital who performed the tests did make numerous false observations and these led him to false conclusions.  I could not correct his false ideations and turned to the Illinois Department of Professional Regulation.  Yep, he was canned by the hospital risk management.

The MMPI attempts to use statistics to draw behavioral projections.  When one has unusual life experiences these can often be false.  The MMPI I deem another load of crap like polygraphy.

Good luck with your test.  If you’re an ‘average Joe’ you might pass.

Lloyd Ploense

MMPI-2 questions removed at request of copyright holder -- AntiPolygraph.org Administrator

MMPI-2 questions removed at request of copyright holder -- AntiPolygraph.org Administrator

MMPI-2 questions removed at request of copyright holder -- AntiPolygraph.org Administrator

MMPI-2 questions removed at request of copyright holder -- AntiPolygraph.org Administrator

MMPI-2 questions removed at request of copyright holder -- AntiPolygraph.org Administrator

MMPI-2 questions removed at request of copyright holder -- AntiPolygraph.org Administrator

The questions are published in these books:

Development and Use of the Mmpi-2 Content Scales
Authors: James N. Butcher, John R. Graham
ISBN: 0816618178

MMPI-2. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2: Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation
Authors:  John R. Graham, Yossef S. Ben-Porath, Auke Tellegen, Grant Dahlstrom, Beverly Kaemmer James N. Butcher


The scales (needed for scroring) are in these books:

MMPI-2: Assessing Personality and Psychopathology
Author: John R. Graham
ISBN:  0195060687 (1st edition), 0195079221 (2nd edition), 0195114817 (3rd edition), 0195168062 (4th edition)


MMPI-2. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2: Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation
Authors:  John R. Graham, Yossef S. Ben-Porath, Auke Tellegen, Grant Dahlstrom, Beverly Kaemmer James N. Butcher
(Same as above, has questions and scales - can be hard to find and expensive!)

----

The questions are posted here, so all you need to undersand the MMPI-2 is the "MMPI-2: Assessing Personality and Psychopathology" book.  The older editions can be found for under $25.

First you want to try and beat a polygraph.  Now you want to beat a personality test - WTF?  That just scares the hell out of me.  BTW doesn't that material have a copywrite?  I guess that wouldn't matter anyway since you probably don't know which personality typed it!  dumb azz!   ::)

Anyone who tries to cheat on a personality test indicates a level of psycopathy that can't be hidden for long Dragon Lady. His lie scales and all other MMPI "built-ins" will reveal this character's.....well, character. He/She would be better off taking the damn test and marking positively on the questions like---"do you think you deserve special treatment due to your depth of intellect?"--and other similar narcissistic indicators. All cops get a "10% discount" regarding the laws that they themselves enforce----where as this cat, according to his goals of circumnavigating a personality test, reveals him/her to be one who will take a 90% discount. Those types of cops get fired within 5 years for rape, stealing, falsifying records, DUI----you name it, they F up and F up big time. Fortunately, attempting to cheat on the MMPI is a great comedy of errors, and poster named "MMPI" is the big clown on the little stage.

Dear thug cop,

I would appreciate if you could send me the rest of the test. I will take the test for next month and I want prepare me for that.

My email address is patita82@gmail.com
please!!!
Thanks a lot!




ThugCop wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2005 at 3:29am:

I have done quite a bit of research on the MMPI 2 used by psychological testing.  Here's the first 75 out of 567 questions.  I could give out rest of them & how some of them are interpeted by psychologists for advice on admitting past history on the psych & medical tests.  See my post on "Help with Admissions for Psych & Medial" MMPI 2 TEST QUESTIONS IN ORDER TRUE OR FALSE (567 QUESTIONS) 1.I like mechanics magazines 2.I have a good appetite 3.I wake up fresh & rested most mornings 4.I think I would like the work of a librarian 5.I am easily awakened by noise 6.I like to read newspaper articles on crime 7.My hands and feet are usually warm enough 8.My daily life is full of things that keep me interested 9.I am about as able to work as I ever was 10.There seems to be a lump in my throat much of the time 11.A person should try to understand his dreams and be guided by or take warning from them 12.I enjoy detective or mystery stories 13.I work under a great deal of tension 14.I have diarrhea once a month or more 15.Once in a while I think of things too bad to talk about 16.I am sure I get a raw deal from life 17.My father was a good man 18.I am very seldom troubled by constipation 19.When I take a new, I like to be tipped off on whom should be gotten next to 20.My sex life is satisfactory 21.At times I have very much wanted to leave home 22.At times I have fits of laughing & crying that I cannot control 23.I am troubled by attacks of nausea and vomiting 24.No one seems to understand me 25.I would like to be a singer 26.I feel that it is certainly best to keep my mouth shut when I’m in trouble 27.Evil spirits possess me at times 28.When someone does me a wrong I feel I should pay him back if I can, just for the principle of the thing. 29.I am bothered by acid stomach several times a week 30.At times I feel like swearing 31.I have nightmares every few nights 32.I find it hard to keep my mind on a task or job 33.I have had very peculiar and strange experiences 34.I have a cough most of the time 35.If people had not had it in for me I would have been much more successful 36.I seldom worry about my heath 37.I have never been in trouble because of my sex behavior 38.During one period when I was a youngster I engaged in petty thievery 39.At times I feel like smashing things 40.Most any time I would rather sit and daydream than to do anything else 41.I have had periods of days, weeks, or months when I couldn’t take care of things because I couldn’t “get going” 42.My family does not like the work I have chosen ( or the work I intend to choose for my life work) 43.My sleep is fitful and disturbed 44.Much of the time my head seems to hurt all over 45.I do not always tell the truth 46.My judgment is better than it ever was 47.Once a week or oftener I feel suddenly hot all over without apparent cause 48.When I am with people I am bothered by hearing very queer things 49.It would be better if almost all laws were thrown away 50.My soul sometimes leaves my body 51.I am in just as good physical health as most of my friends 52.I prefer to pass by school friends, or people I know but have not seen for a long time, unless they speak to me first 53.A minister can cure disease by praying and putting his hand on your head 54.I am liked by most people who know me 55.I am almost never bothered by pains over the heart or in my chest 56.As a youngster I was suspended from school one or more times for cutting up 57.I am a good mixer 58.Everything is turning out just like the prophets of the Bible said it would 59.I have often had to take orders from someone who did not know as much as I did 60.I do not read every editorial in the newspaper everyday 61.I have not lived the right kind of life 62.Parts of my body often have feeling like burning, tingling, crawling, or like “going to sleep” 63.I have had no difficulty in starting or holding my bowel movement 64.I sometimes keep on at a thing until others lose their patience with me 65.I loved my father 66.I see things or animals or people around me that others do not see 67.I wish I could be as happy as others seem to be 68.I hardly ever feel pain in the back of the neck 69.I am very strongly attracted by members of my own sex 70.I used to like drop-the-handkerchief 71.I think a great many people exaggerate their misfortunes in order to gain the sympathy and help of others 72.I am troubled by discomfort in the pit of my stomach every few days or oftener 73.I am an important person 74.I have often wished I were a girl.  (Or if you are a girl) I have never been sorry that I am a girl 75.I get angry sometimes

would i be able get the rest of these questions?

Online MMPI-2

All of the the questions and scoring (using JavaScript in the browser).

Online MMPI-2 (fixed link)

GREAT!  But what am I suppose to answer?  

sackett wrote on May 12^th, 2008 at 9:07pm:

GREAT!  But what am I suppose to answer?

The voices in your head tell you what to do, obviously.

MMPI -What happened to the online MMPI-2 test? My screen comes up blank. It was a good program.

The MMPI-2 is a copyrighted instrument of both Pearson and The University of Minnesota Press.  

psych1 wrote on May 25^th, 2008 at 9:14am:

The MMPI-2 is a copyrighted instrument of both Pearson and The University of Minnesota Press.

Anyone know where I can get the questions to th Millon Clinical Multiaxial inventory?

I am curious why so many people think that they have so much to hide, or are so pathological, that they would need to purposefully attempt to distort results.  I am also curious how they think this will go undetected by the examiner.  

psych1 wrote on May 30^th, 2008 at 3:38am:

I am curious why so many people think that they have so much to hide, or are so pathological, that they would need to purposefully attempt to distort results.  I am also curious how they think this will go undetected by the examiner.

psych1,

because this site, it's promoters and supporters have no belief in any testing or process that is not scientifically supported by the entire related community, to be absolutely factual and accurate, based on deeply researched and peer reviewed studies which allow for no mistakes, no distortions or any possible contamination and most of all no potential for false results in any way shape or form at any level of finding.

I think that leaves mathematics!  All else, they feel cheating is the only way to succeed.

Sackett

"no distortions or any possible contamination and most of all no potential for false results in any way shape or form at any level of finding."


Lol...well I am aware of nothing except a standard ruler or yard stick that can reach that scientific standard. Statistically, that criteria is just unrealistic. If someone can propose a statistically stronger model for assessment or prediction, Id be happy to hear it.

This posting regards the MMPI-2 for assessment of psychological functioning.  Not use of polygraph which is a different issue.

The MMPI-2's psychometric properties, utility in assessing psychopathology, as well as its ability to discriminate genuine vs feigned psychological impairment (or normality) is well supported by many scientific and peer reviewed academic articles over a 50 year period. I am curious how one "cheats" on the MMPI? Hence, why the literature on analogue and "coached" faking of MMPI profiles would suggest that this is quite the futile effort. And actually, the MMPI-2 is very much grounded in mathematics and statistics, but is never interpreted blindly, without taking into consideration the factors of the individual through an interview.

I think what people are not understanding is that the base rate occurrence of "false-positive" scale elevation of any significant magnitude on the MMPI is so small to begin with. It takes an aggregate amount of deviant responses throughout the test to elevate scales to an alarming level. In other words, statistics are really working against the notion of the random chance of false-positive, and should calm in undue paranoia people have about this. This is why people shouldn't complain about the length of the test. It works to your advantage in terms of potential for "false-positive" or "false-negative" scale elevation.  The more items, the less amount of random error variance introduced into the equation. I guess I'm just not understanding what the objection is here, unless one is pathologically paranoid or has something to hide?

I would emplore anyone to be honest when taking the MMPI-2. Please think about this from the clinician's (psychologist's) perspective. A slight elevation on many of the clinical scales are not necessarily a contraindication for the job. The MMPI measures many constructs.  I really don't care if you happen to be a bit hypochondriacal, or have dysphoric tendencies. Even mild anxiety disorders. If the problem is well controlled, or mild, and/or unlikely to affect job performance, it not a big deal. However, when they see elevated validity scales that demonstrate attempts to underreport or "fake-good," at the very least, it suggests deceitful behavior and a standard of ethics that is contraindicated in a law enforcement officer. Further, it opens up the window of suspicion on what factors might underly the motivation to deceive. Paranoia? Significant Psych issues/history? What else might the candidate be lying about or covering up?  

Quote:

I would emplore anyone to be honest and natural when taking the MPPI-2. Please think about this from the clinician's (psychologist's) perspective. A slight elevation on many of the clinical scales are not necessarily a contraindication for the job. The MMPI measures many constructs.  I really don't care if you happen to be a bit hypochondriacal, or have dysphoric tendencies. Even mild anxiety disorders. If the problem is well controlled, or mild, and/or unlikely to affect job performance, it not a big deal. However, when they see elevated validity scales that demonstrate attempts to underreport or "fake-good," at the very least, it suggests deceitful behavior and a standard of ethics that is contraindicated in a law enforcement officer. Further, it opens up the window of suspicion on what factors might underly the motivation to deceive. Paranoia? Significant Psych issues/history? What else might the candidate be lying about or covering up?

Gee whiz professor, can it tell if I'm having "naughty" thoughts, or have been playing with my "privates"?   :-X

TC

P.S.  I don't care what you say, repeated F3 reactions to a question does not necessarily indicate "deception", it just indicates persistent "reactions".  Or as the NAS report stated, these reactions are not uniquely related to "deception".  Or as Phil Zimbardo has said, "there is no direct and unequivocal connection between lying and these physiological states of arousal...".  Cloak your theory in all the fancy scientific mumbo-jumbo you want, you will never get around that fact.

sackett wrote on May 30^th, 2008 at 4:05am:

psych1, because this site, it's promoters and supporters have no belief in any testing or process that is not scientifically supported by the entire related community, to be absolutely factual and accurate, based on deeply researched and peer reviewed studies which allow for no mistakes, no distortions or any possible contamination and most of all no potential for false results in any way shape or form at any level of finding. I think that leaves mathematics!  All else, they feel cheating is the only way to succeed. Sackett

Do you really feel it is appropriate to speak to what is on the mind of this site's promoters and supporters?

Do you really feel the need to denigrate anyone possessing an opinion with which you disagree?

Sergeant1107 wrote on May 30^th, 2008 at 10:19am:

sackett wrote on May 30th, 2008 at 4:05am: psych1, because this site, it's promoters and supporters have no belief in any testing or process that is not scientifically supported by the entire related community, to be absolutely factual and accurate, based on deeply researched and peer reviewed studies which allow for no mistakes, no distortions or any possible contamination and most of all no potential for false results in any way shape or form at any level of finding. I think that leaves mathematics!  All else, they feel cheating is the only way to succeed. Sackett Do you really feel it is appropriate to speak to what is on the mind of this site's promoters and supporters? Do you really feel the need to denigrate anyone possessing an opinion with which you disagree?

He does, because he knows he is loosing his battle.

Sergeant1107 wrote on May 30^th, 2008 at 10:19am:

sackett wrote on May 30th, 2008 at 4:05am: psych1, because this site, it's promoters and supporters have no belief in any testing or process that is not scientifically supported by the entire related community, to be absolutely factual and accurate, based on deeply researched and peer reviewed studies which allow for no mistakes, no distortions or any possible contamination and most of all no potential for false results in any way shape or form at any level of finding. I think that leaves mathematics!  All else, they feel cheating is the only way to succeed. Sackett Do you really feel it is appropriate to speak to what is on the mind of this site's promoters and supporters? Do you really feel the need to denigrate anyone possessing an opinion with which you disagree?

Sarge,

the evidence of my statements come from the postings on this board, not a simpleminded opinion, based on minimal actual knowledge, as does some of those who post on this board.  

As for the term denigration.  I believe that act would would require a specific target and proof that anyone was actually harmed as a result of my statement.  Your accusations fail to rise to that standard of proof.

Sackett

n.p.c.  whose really losing the battle? Polygraph is stable and growing in use around the world, standardizing its procedures and processes as we speak and as strong as it ever was and more so.  If you wish to deceive yourself and those on this board, feel free to continue.

T.M. Cullen wrote on May 30^th, 2008 at 8:09am:

Quote: I would emplore anyone to be honest and natural when taking the MPPI-2. Please think about this from the clinician's (psychologist's) perspective. A slight elevation on many of the clinical scales are not necessarily a contraindication for the job. The MMPI measures many constructs.  I really don't care if you happen to be a bit hypochondriacal, or have dysphoric tendencies. Even mild anxiety disorders. If the problem is well controlled, or mild, and/or unlikely to affect job performance, it not a big deal. However, when they see elevated validity scales that demonstrate attempts to underreport or "fake-good," at the very least, it suggests deceitful behavior and a standard of ethics that is contraindicated in a law enforcement officer. Further, it opens up the window of suspicion on what factors might underly the motivation to deceive. Paranoia? Significant Psych issues/history? What else might the candidate be lying about or covering up? Gee whiz professor, can it tell if I'm having "naughty" thoughts, or have been playing with my "privates"?   :-X TC P.S.  I don't care what you say, repeated F3 reactions to a question does not necessarily indicate "deception", it just indicates persistent "reactions".  Or as the NAS report stated, these reactions are not uniquely related to "deception".  Or as Phil Zimbardo has said, "there is no direct and unequivocal connection between lying and these physiological states of arousal...".  Cloak your theory in all the fancy scientific mumbo-jumbo you want, you will never get around that fact.

You have commented on the wrong instrument and the wrong topic. Dr. Zimardo is referring to a polygraph machine and the methodology used within it.  I am not knowledgeable in that matter and was not the topic of this thread. (Although I do know the F3 reaction is a Galvanic Skin response paradigm implored in psychophysiological research and in the polygraph screening). I was referring to the MMPI-2 which is the topic of this thread. The two have nothing in common, and are totally different measures, looking at very different constructs, using different methods for arriving at conclusions. The MMPI-2 is paper and pencil questionnaire that measures personality constructs and levels of psychopathology. There are no machines and no measures of physiological arousal on the MMPI-2. The validity scales are not polygraphs or "lie detectors," but do use statistics to look for signs of overreporting or underreporting of symptomotology. When the scales are raised high enough, they suggest that the chances of elevation to that point by chance alone is so low that conscious intent to distort is the only viable explanation.  With regard to the validity of Polygraph, I am not jumping into that debate, although I will say I would warn you not to put all your eggs in one basket (i.e., Zimbardo). Statistically, you are likely to find many outliers. Only searching and/or evaluating evidence that confirms preexisting beliefs is not a very scientific way to address a debate, and of course leads to confirmation bias, illusory correlations, and a whole host of other logical fallacies that we are prone to.  I am only here to comment on the validity of the MMPI-2 in assessing psychological functioning and it added benefit of being able to discriminate feigned vs true psychological impairment (or normality), not the validity of polygraph or "lie detector" instruments.

Lastly, I would argue that intellectual debate between parties is both a healthy and a rather fun activity. I guess there aren't many lawyers in here..lol What a boring world it would be if everyone agreed with us all the time, right?

sackett wrote on May 30^th, 2008 at 2:47pm:

Sarge, the evidence of my statements come from the postings on this board, not a simpleminded opinion, based on minimal actual knowledge, as does some of those who post on this board.   As for the term denigration.  I believe that act would would require a specific target and proof that anyone was actually harmed as a result of my statement.  Your accusations fail to rise to that standard of proof. Sackett

Perhaps you have a different definition of "denigrate" than the rest of us.  The word means "to criticize in a deragotory manner."  

I don't see the following run-on sentence fragment, authored by you, could reasonably be characterized as anything else: "because this site, it's promoters and supporters have no belief in any testing or process that is not scientifically supported by the entire related community, to be absolutely factual and accurate, based on deeply researched and peer reviewed studies which allow for no mistakes, no distortions or any possible contamination and most of all no potential for false results in any way shape or form at any level of finding."

It is hardly an "accusation" to recognize something for what it is and identify it as such.

psych1

If you are in search of a healthy fun intellectual debate, oh boy, did you ever come to the wrong board.

Quote:

The MMPI-2 is paper and pencil questionnaire that measures personality constructs and levels of psychopathology. There are no machines and no measures of physiological arousal on the MMPI-2.

Okay, I stand corrected.

I had to take a test similar to that at the NSA during the psych screening.  The lady just kept shaking her head after scoring my test and showed me the way back to the lobby with a really disgusted look on her face.  Bitch!

TC

Sergeant1107 wrote on May 30^th, 2008 at 9:18pm:

sackett wrote on May 30th, 2008 at 2:47pm: Sarge, the evidence of my statements come from the postings on this board, not a simpleminded opinion, based on minimal actual knowledge, as does some of those who post on this board.   As for the term denigration.  I believe that act would would require a specific target and proof that anyone was actually harmed as a result of my statement.  Your accusations fail to rise to that standard of proof. Sackett Perhaps you have a different definition of "denigrate" than the rest of us.  The word means "to criticize in a deragotory manner."   I don't see the following run-on sentence fragment, authored by you, could reasonably be characterized as anything else: "because this site, it's promoters and supporters have no belief in any testing or process that is not scientifically supported by the entire related community, to be absolutely factual and accurate, based on deeply researched and peer reviewed studies which allow for no mistakes, no distortions or any possible contamination and most of all no potential for false results in any way shape or form at any level of finding." It is hardly an "accusation" to recognize something for what it is and identify it as such.

Thanks Sarge,

I'll take you last statement as an endorsement of my run-on sentence.

Sackett

T.M. Cullen wrote on May 31^st, 2008 at 12:36am:

Quote: The MMPI-2 is paper and pencil questionnaire that measures personality constructs and levels of psychopathology. There are no machines and no measures of physiological arousal on the MMPI-2. Okay, I stand corrected. I had to take a test similar to that at the NSA during the psych screening.  The lady just kept shaking her head after scoring my test and showed me the way back to the lobby with a really disgusted look on her face.  Bitch! TC

Maybe it was your "fake-good" tendancies... ;D

I was wondering if you would be able to send me all the questions for the MMPI-2 test. I have to take it and would like an opportunity to study it first.

Thank you  :)

What exactly would you study?

If you need to cheat on the MMPI-2 in order for you to become a police officer. Then please sit down think, and do everyone else a favor and find another profession. MMPI-2 is an accurate assesment, no pass or fail, you have a 1on1 interview afterwards. I dont want to be working with officers that has psychotic tendencies, so I believe in this test. I just took one with no problem, yea my hand hurts, and it took about 3 1/2 hours. Be who you are, dont pretend to be someone else. Remember INTEGRITY is very important quality for a law enforcement officer.

wrote on Jun 28^th, 2008 at 12:54am:

If you need to cheat on the MMPI-2 in order for you to become a police officer. Then please sit down think, and do everyone else a favor and find another profession. MMPI-2 is an accurate assesment, no pass or fail, you have a 1on1 interview afterwards. I dont want to be working with officers that has psychotic tendencies, so I believe in this test. I just took one with no problem, yea my hand hurts, and it took about 3 1/2 hours. Be who you are, dont pretend to be someone else. Remember INTEGRITY is very important quality for a law enforcement officer.

The MMPI can be manipulated very easily.  In fact, my undergraduate degree is in psychology, and in my abnormal psychology class, we studied the MMPI, seeing how the questions fit together, and how easliy it is manipulated.  

I say don't throw it out completely, but certainly, do not use it at the exclusion of other factors.

nopolycop wrote on Jul 3^rd, 2008 at 2:48pm:

wrote on Jun 28th, 2008 at 12:54am: If you need to cheat on the MMPI-2 in order for you to become a police officer. Then please sit down think, and do everyone else a favor and find another profession. MMPI-2 is an accurate assesment, no pass or fail, you have a 1on1 interview afterwards. I dont want to be working with officers that has psychotic tendencies, so I believe in this test. I just took one with no problem, yea my hand hurts, and it took about 3 1/2 hours. Be who you are, dont pretend to be someone else. Remember INTEGRITY is very important quality for a law enforcement officer. The MMPI can be manipulated very easily.  In fact, my undergraduate degree is in psychology, and in my abnormal psychology class, we studied the MMPI, seeing how the questions fit together, and how easliy it is manipulated.   I say don't throw it out completely, but certainly, do not use it at the exclusion of other factors.

The published literature on analogue/coached malingering would disagree with you there. Although it can be done, it is very hard (not easy) to do without raising alarm bells on the validity scales, particularly the supplemental validity scales that have been developed in the past decade that are more focused on individuals who try to fake or underreported specific phenomenology, and especially sensitive to those who have been "coached." Both the sensitivity and specificity are high for these scales, albeit not generally as high as the standard validity scales. (i.e., K, F, L). They do meet the Daubert criteria for admissibility in court however. Although the Fb scale has been controversial in several high profile cases in Florida, so I'm not sure if it still would or not. I would also add that an undergrad class in abnormal psych does not provide the time nor the depth necessary to fully understand the psychometric properties, statistics, and the empirical keying (rather than theoretical) method underlying the test.

Hey i dont know who was asking about weather the test holds up in a criminal court, im a student of criminology and tecnically it does hold up as a 'reference' however it cannot be used to say point blank if a person is sane or insane because it doesnt work in that method. as with alot of personality tests it doesnt say wrong/right it merly states how many attributes of a certain personality type a person taking the test appears to have.

famously karla homolka took the test after her husband was arrested and the test was given by a Dr. Ardnt, who actually found that her test result didnt appear to be anything like her!

However, when working on a case such as this (im sing this as an example, im sure there are other better examples of its criminal use) it was already apparent that she had some physchological damage and unusual behaviour. (look up karla homolka and paul bernardo if you wish to know more) The test was given to homolka and at the end of it was a good explination of her behaviour that was seen as 'put of character.

As with most personality test they can be slightly vague and used to explain almost everything, but this one is extremly accurate.

However as she was never put on trial these where never shown.

I hope that helps, any other examples i would be very interested to find out about!

Also would say that it is the type of test thats almost 'unbeatable' there are only two answers to each question, and alot of the questions influence each other, for example:

the difference in a person that 'reads articles about crime' harmless in itself, but when paired with 'finds it hard to control anger' becomes a slightly different statement.

psych1 wrote on Jul 4^th, 2008 at 1:16am:

I would also add that an undergrad class in abnormal psych does not provide the time nor the depth necessary to fully understand the psychometric properties, statistics, and the empirical keying (rather than theoretical) method underlying the test.

Okay, how about taking the educaiton and adding in a few actual test procedures, where I new about the outcome of the test based on my own knowledge of how I answered the questions, and the result the testor gave me.  Does that add any to my credibility to state that the test can be easily manipulated?

nopolycop wrote on Jul 5^th, 2008 at 9:12pm:

psych1 wrote on Jul 4th, 2008 at 1:16am: I would also add that an undergrad class in abnormal psych does not provide the time nor the depth necessary to fully understand the psychometric properties, statistics, and the empirical keying (rather than theoretical) method underlying the test. Okay, how about taking the educaiton and adding in a few actual test procedures, where I new about the outcome of the test based on my own knowledge of how I answered the questions, and the result the testor gave me.  Does that add any to my credibility to state that the test can be easily manipulated?

I would argue that real world practice of instruments/knowledge that you do not fully understand the underlying theory of is of marginal benefit.  And a N=1 case study (your experience) does not carry as much generalizablity as the hundreds of published studies of the instrument. I think my last question would be what is your definition of "successfully manipulated"? Did you mean alter the profile only? Or did you mean alter the profile and have it not come across as invalidated or suspicious to a trained psychologist? What were your validity scale T scores? Who evaluated your results?  You would have had to have your profile evaluated by an independent outside psychologist to make a valid claim of successful manipulation. In other words, who did you fool?

Regardless, if the psychologists came back and told you that you seemed extraordinarily depressed, when in fact that you were not and this was the phenomenology you set out to fake, my money would be on that you had a bum psychologists.  However, in the case that they were fully competent, I would argue that you accomplished a feat that most others can not (according to the empirical literature to date) and therefore your accomplishment is far from "easy." Again I would go back to the argument that an N=1 case example carries less external validity for the general population than multitudes of studies involving thousands over the course of decades. If you can do it and the empirical literature demonstrates that most others can not, I do not think this qualifies as "easy", would you agree? Remeber, "easy" is a subjective experience.  What is easy for one person, may not be easy for the next person.

Psych1:

You seem to have assumed that I manipulated the test.  Go back and read again, and when you answer my question directly, I will be happy to continue our little discussion.

nopolycop wrote on Jul 5^th, 2008 at 9:12pm:

psych1 wrote on Jul 4th, 2008 at 1:16am: I would also add that an undergrad class in abnormal psych does not provide the time nor the depth necessary to fully understand the psychometric properties, statistics, and the empirical keying (rather than theoretical) method underlying the test. Okay, how about taking the educaiton and adding in a few actual test procedures, where I new about the outcome of the test based on my own knowledge of how I answered the questions, and the result the testor gave me.  Does that add any to my credibility to state that the test can be easily manipulated?

Ok. The short answer to your question would be no. So what evidence are you citing that shows the test is "easy" to manipulate? I have never seen a review, meta-analysis, or empirical study that supports this claim and could not find evidence of this doing a lit search just now.

psych1 wrote on Jul 6^th, 2008 at 4:54am:

nopolycop wrote on Jul 5th, 2008 at 9:12pm: psych1 wrote on Jul 4th, 2008 at 1:16am: I would also add that an undergrad class in abnormal psych does not provide the time nor the depth necessary to fully understand the psychometric properties, statistics, and the empirical keying (rather than theoretical) method underlying the test. Okay, how about taking the educaiton and adding in a few actual test procedures, where I new about the outcome of the test based on my own knowledge of how I answered the questions, and the result the testor gave me.  Does that add any to my credibility to state that the test can be easily manipulated? Ok. The short answer to your question would be no. So what evidence are you citing that shows the test is "easy" to manipulate? I have never seen a review, meta-analysis, or empirical study that supports this claim and could not find evidence of this doing a lit search just now.

When you did your lit search, did you discover any studies that attempted to prove or disprove the theory that the MMPI can be manipulated?

Assuming the answer is no, then lack of finding any studies which indicate the MMPI can be manipulated is no evidence at all of my belief that the test can be manipulated.

Shesh.  My experience is limited to an undergrad course about 28 years ago, I took my last MMPI about 8 years ago.  When I took it then, I was able to pick out the questions that had to do with abnormal behavior, and I thought to myself "boy, a person really would have to be a dunce to answer this one TRUE".  If one can figure out how the test "tests" certain psychological traits, then it can be manipulated.  I hadn't thought about it for over a decade and a half and it was no chore to figure out what was going on with it.  A person who actually might want to manipulate it, and did some serious study, would have no problem massaging the results.

The shrink told me in the post test interview that my results were the most "normal" he has ever seen.  Accross the board, middle of the road.  That is because I answered the questions they way I knew they wanted them to be answered.  If I was applying for a job as a sociopath, I could have answered the questions to get that job too.

I am glad to hear that everything worked out well for you in your eval for whatever position. However, I would give yourself more credit, and your method, alot less.  I would suggest that you actually accomplished very little in your method. Or at least you weren't really doing what you think you were doing. Let me explain:

You seem to be running on the premise that the questions are face vaild indicators of the construct they are measuring. They are not. The questions that seem like they belong to one type of disorder scale, often do not.  Assignment of questions to a particular scale (Depression, Schizophrenia, Hypochondriasis, etc) was done after the list of questions were normed on clinical samples during its original construction.  The "deviant response" is indicated by  individuals already known to have the disorder who endorse an item at a frequency that enables it to be a statistically reliable discriminator of that population from "normal" populations and other clinical populations (i.e.,empirical keying method), not by a clinical rationale of "this seems crazy" or "this seems like something someone with this disorder would endorse." It doesn't matter what the content of the question was, as long as the question happens to be statically discriminant among normal vs clinical populations. An example would be that, the question (regardless of its content) is endorsed by the depressed normative group so much more over any other group that it becomes a statistically reliable discriminator of that group, and hence, the construct of "depression." Assuming of course it wasn't also highly endorsed in the "normative" control sample. If it wasn't, it indicates this item is endorsed significantly more by the depressed group than both "normals" and those with other disorders. Therefore, it is viewed as a pure (nonoverlapping) indicator of depression. Endorsement of the item in the deviant direction identifies the test taker as responding in the same way as the depressed norm group did.  Item endorsement is aggregate, and after so many deviant endorsements consistent with that group, your T-score is raised on that scale. Remember, this is solely based on whether the question discriminates reliably between groups. It doesn't matter what the content of the question was. If it discriminates, it discriminates. Period. Certainly some of the questions are face valid, but the majority actually are not. Trust me, the questions that seem like they belong to one type of disorder scale, often do not, and the normative sample didn't always endorse or deny in the way you think they would have for particular questions. (i.e., questions do not always measure what you think they do). "I tortured animals as a child" was actually endorsed in only one particular disorder, and it it was NOT psychopaths.  It was found to be a discriminant question in another disorder and got coded on its scale instead. Hence, why I made the comment that an undergrad class in abnormal psych provides neither the time nor depth to fully understand the construction of the test and its subcales. I would not assume anything about the test until you you are formally educated on the method of construction and how exactly it does what it does. Psychologists are tricky fellows. One of the biggest reasons why the MMPI-2 is so loved by the field and has lasted so long (it was renormed in 1989 though) is there has been so much research done on the instrument on both its validity and its validity scales.  It's not an easy instrument to manipulate for the lay person, without it being picked up on.

Lastly, you seem to not know or at least not understand the validity scales built into the instrument. Do you know what they are, their purpose, and the statics behind them? I doubt you would have discussed them in your undergrad class. Again, don't assume you understand how something works just because you have taken it. Obviously, we wouldn't want every person who takes it to be able to figure it out just by looking and thinking about it, right?

"When you did your lit search, did you discover any studies that attempted to prove or disprove the theory that the MMPI can be manipulated?"

Well it's not really "theory," its statistics. And yes there are hundreds of pubished studies on these issues dating back to the test's development. Meehl  (1948) was the first to report on the suppressor variable in psychological sophisticated malingerers, which lead to the development of the K scale. F and L were developed during initially norming. Actually the majority of the research on the MMPI-2 examines profile validity and manipulation issues. A Psychinfo search using Key words of "MMPI-2" and "malingering" yielded 188 published studies in in this area in just the past 3 years. A Pubmed search using the same key words reveals 166 studies. Because of my training and clinical practice I am already familiar with this literature. Overall, studies indicate the test has both high sensitivity and high specificity in identifying symptom exaggeration and/or manipulation in clinical samples, forensic samples, as well as those who were "coached" to simulate a particular disorder ("analogue" malingering studies).  Overall, coaching studies  demonstrate the ability of coached participants to suppress some the older standard validity scales fairly succesfully, but have typically been caught using the newer developed ones (eg.,FBS, Fp, Superlative Scale).  

Okay then, I will admit perhaps my limited knowledge is less than sufficient to criticize the MMPI is such a fashion.  Taking that into consideration then, are you saying that the MMPI is then a very accurate asessment of a person's psychological make-up?  Do wacko's pass the test, and normal people fail it?  If so, by what percentage does the MMPI fail to deliver?

nopolycop wrote on Jul 9^th, 2008 at 2:02pm:

Okay then, I will admit perhaps my limited knowledge is less than sufficient to criticize the MMPI is such a fashion.  Taking that into consideration then, are you saying that the MMPI is then a very accurate asessment of a person's psychological make-up?  Do wacko's pass the test, and normal people fail it?  If so, by what percentage does the MMPI fail to deliver?

Yes, the research literature does indeed show that the MMPI-2 is a good measure for assessment of psychopathology. It is the most widely used personality/psychopathology screening in the Western world for this very reason. However, the test should not be interpreted blindly and the results should always be supplemented by other clinical information (such as an thorough clinical interview before hand) if diagnostic decisions are going to made. For example, If a cleint is in the midst of messy divorce and the partner is using every method possible to get child custody and take all of his financial assets, I would certainly expect some elevation of paranoia above the norm. In the context of this situational variable it is quite understandable, and I would explain this in the report so no one gets the wrong idea by just looking at the numerical score.

I mentioned in my last post that both the sensitivity (proportion of actual positives which are correctly identified) and specificity (proportion of negatives which are correctly identified) of the individual subscales is very high. I do not have the sensitivity and specificity averages for each scale in front of me at the moment.  It varies by study and the population in question, but its in the very high 90% range. Perfectly acceptable for clinical use. I do not do these screens for enforcement agencies as part of my practice, but I see no reason why people should be paranoid about this issue.

Hi!
Sorry for interrapting your discussing and for grammar mistakes =)
My name is Victor Audren and I'm from Russia. All you discuss is not so bad compared with what we have in Russia =)
We use MMPI-1 and how we use it? Somebody does, somebody does not. Interpretation? Oh, com'n man interpret yourself =)
I'm working on adaptation of MMPI-2 in Russia and computerizing it. But the problem is we have no books you've listed. I would be very gratefull to you all if you send me on this e-mail (au-v@mail.ru) questions and some interpretation of MMPI-2. I'm a student psychologist and I have some skills in translation, so I would translate to my scientific advisor professor who has lots of skills in interpretation and make normal test for using. This will be the first MMPI-2 in Russia!!!

Hi,
I was just reading the sample questions, and I have to take this test for a law suit I am very nervous, is there any way you can send me other questions, and what exactly they are looking for.  I had a bad fall on a cruise ship. and my neurologist wants me to take this test.  My lawyer says if I screw up on this test that could ruin my lawsuit.
Thank you :)

Quote:

I had a bad fall on a cruise ship. and my neurologist wants me to take this test.  My lawyer says if I screw up on this test that could ruin my lawsuit

.

Since it is a lawsuit, maybe you should do what your lawyer advises.

TC

If you still have all of the questions.. I would love to get them.  Thanks.

wrote on Jul 21^st, 2008 at 1:44pm:

Hi, I was just reading the sample questions, and I have to take this test for a law suit I am very nervous, is there any way you can send me other questions, and what exactly they are looking for.  I had a bad fall on a cruise ship. and my neurologist wants me to take this test.  My lawyer says if I screw up on this test that could ruin my lawsuit. Thank you :)

If this is in the course of litigation, the test will be used to screen for and rule out premorbid psychopathology and personality characteristics that could be contributing to your current symptom presentation. I would assume they are also looking for signs that you are exaggerating current symptomatology. You should not be nervous and simply answer honestly.  Attempts to exaggerate or feign deficits would be the thing that will shed doubt on your claims. The test is copyrighted by both the University of Minnesota Press and Pearson Assessment Resources, and is not in the public domain. Looking at the questions provides little assistance or help in skewing a profile while still keeping it valid or without raising red flags.  See my posts above for why this is.

Does anybody know how many people receive negative results from taking the mmpi and do not get the jobs they had to take it for. After everything I have read, it hardly seems like the most effective tool for a psych evaluation.

wrote on Jul 23^rd, 2008 at 2:04am:

Does anybody know how many people receive negative results from taking the mmpi and do not get the jobs they had to take it for. After everything I have read, it hardly seems like the most effective tool for a psych evaluation.

It's not a medical test, where there is an identifiable physically pathology to use as a metric for comparison. No measure of a psychological construct will reach absolute 100% specificity.  Few medical tests can reach this threshold even. For example, the blood test for HIV is 97.9% accurate in most instances. However, bottom line is that if you are psychological healthy, the test will show this. I have discussed the statistical logic behind this in previous posts on page 4 and 5. Please feel free to read them. I mentioned in my last post that both the sensitivity (proportion of actual positives which are correctly identified) and specificity (proportion of negatives which are correctly identified) of the individual subscales is very high when they were normed on clinical samples of patients already known to have the disorder. Sensitivity and specificity both in the upper 90 percent range on average. Continued research using varying populations, (i.e., normal, clinical, and forensic) have consistently shown high levels of sensitivity and specificity across populations. If you can cite peer reviewed literature to the contrary, I would be happy to hear it. "Fitness for duty" as defined by individual departments is the subjective element here. The psychologist is working as a consultant for them.  The ultimate decision rests on departmental guidelines/policy, with the input from the psychologist. I mentioned before that they are looking for personality traits and/or pathology that is contraindicated for being a law enforcement officer.  I would really not care if you were a little anxious or hypochondriacal, as this has few ramifications for you performing your duties as an officer. Things like this will be overlooked.

So what have you read about the MMPI to lead you to that conclusion? What specifically is not acceptable about the instrument?  What instrument would you suggest we use in its place?

Psych1- Is the dissimulation scale ever used in forensic settings? Is it ever used for fake-good in forensic settings? Is the cutoff for fake-good -13 in forensic settings?  If not, what is it?    

wrote on Jul 23^rd, 2008 at 2:56am:

Psych1- Is the dissimulation scale ever used in forensic settings? Is it ever used for fake-good in forensic settings? Is the cutoff for fake-good -13 in forensic settings?  If not, what is it?

I do not work in forensic settings anymore. I think stating the cutoffs in a public forum would be over the line in terms of test security and my ethical code. The Gough dissimulation is used rarely anymore in my experience in clinical settings for fake good determinations. That being said, I have seen it used however, but never in isolation without using other validity scales to supplement the clinical picture. It's just not as widespread as it once was in my experience. Other scales with higher sensitivity and specificity have replaced this for the most part.  Also scales like FBS and Fp that look specifically for feigning or exaggeration of specific symptomatology are in wide use in forensic settings.

psych1 wrote on Jul 23^rd, 2008 at 3:03am:

wrote on Jul 23rd, 2008 at 2:56am: Psych1- Is the dissimulation scale ever used in forensic settings? Is it ever used for fake-good in forensic settings? Is the cutoff for fake-good -13 in forensic settings?  If not, what is it?     I think stating the cutoffs in a public forum would be over the line in terms of test security and my ethical code. The Gough dissimulation is used rarely anymore in my experience in clincial settings. That being said, I have seen it used however, but never in isolation without using other validity scales to supplement the clinical picture. It jsut not as widespread as it once was in my experience. Other scales with higher sensitivity and specificity have replaced this for the most part.  Also scales like FBS and Fp that look specifically for feigning or exaggeration of specific symptomatology.

Thanks

I know that the mmpi is not the only measure used to evaluate someone's ability to perform a job and that there are many other factors involved when being considered for a position. After reading some of the sample questions, I think it would be hard to answer a simple yes or no. Knowing that they expect you to answer yes or no or true or false seems interesting  but then when your results come in they say you have black or white thinking. They only offer black or white answers. Also, while many of the doctors administering these tests are I'm sure very experienced doesn't it seem a little unreasonable of them to write a full report on someone, when they might have only spoke to them for five minutes. I think if they are really going to uphold these methods, they should at least have the doctors spend more time with people.

wrote on Jul 27^th, 2008 at 10:01pm:

I know that the mmpi is not the only measure used to evaluate someone's ability to perform a job and that there are many other factors involved when being considered for a position. After reading some of the sample questions, I think it would be hard to answer a simple yes or no. Knowing that they expect you to answer yes or no or true or false seems interesting but then when your results come in they say you have black or white thinking. They only offer black or white answers. Also, while many of the doctors administering these tests are I'm sure very experienced doesn't it seem a little unreasonable of them to write a full report on someone, when they might have only spoke to them for five minutes. I think if they are really going to uphold these methods, they should at least have the doctors spend more time with people.

I am not really sure what you mean by this, or what you are basing this on. Who told you this?  Psychologists do not make comments on flexibility of thought based on the MMPI.  Abstract reasoning, set shifting, and cognitive flexibility are measured using other tests (if this is what you meant by this statement).  I suppose that this could be inferred if the subject answered true to all the questions that were absolutes (e.g., "People always"). Maybe this is what you meant?

The forced choice format of the MMPI is a result of the way the test was normed. Again, the aim of the test was create an empirical way of classifying groups using the presence or absence of an endorsement as the statical discriminator between groups.  Likert scales (e.g., somewhat agree, agree, neutral, etc) are not amenable to this statistical procedure.  Although the forced choice format may presents as frustrating at times for the test taker, correlations between the MMPI and a common personality test that uses a Likert scale are high. Thus demonstrating that the use of a forced choice paradigm does not artificially influence clinical findings.

I whole heartedly agree that a thorough clinical interview is very important to compiling an accurate picture.  The test should never be interpret blindly.

I am in a messy child custody case and I guess this MPPI will be administered to the father and I as part of our psychological evaluation... Does anyone know if they will evaluate his wife as well? Or maybe his mother who watches my son when he is in his father's care... Does anyone know where to find the rest of the list of questions? I read the first 75 and they seem pretty random, I don't even know how I'd answer several of them because they don't even apply?? I am very lost and just love my son and want him with me if anyone has any more info on this process or anything else that might be of help please let me know... Thank you

sarah X wrote on Aug 26^th, 2008 at 1:44am:

I am in a messy child custody case and I guess this MPPI will be administered to the father and I as part of our psychological evaluation... Does anyone know if they will evaluate his wife as well? Or maybe his mother who watches my son when he is in his father's care... Does anyone know where to find the rest of the list of questions? I read the first 75 and they seem pretty random, I don't even know how I'd answer several of them because they don't even apply?? I am very lost and just love my son and want him with me if anyone has any more info on this process or anything else that might be of help please let me know... Thank you

The MMPI-2 is copyrighted by both the University of Minnesota Press and Pearson Assessment Resources, and is not in the public domain. Looking at the questions provides little assistance or help in skewing a profile while still keeping it valid or without raising red flags.  Please review my previous posts on this thread for why this is, and for how the test is scored, interpreted, etc.

In a custody case the only people who are evaluated formally are the parties involved in the tort (i.e., the parties who will be awarded custody).  However, this does NOT mean that the extended home environment (e.g., other part-time caregivers) will not be asked about or taken into consideration during the psychologists' interviews with each party. The MMPI-2 is a frequently used measure in custody evals, however, it is by no means the only measure used during the evaluation. There will be several others assessment measures, along with a clinical interview performed by the psychologist.

I caught my Ex with another man, yet the test showed that he was not gay. He has also been drugging my todler son yet he pass the test as someone passive and not dangerus. He is a research/programmer. this test is only as good as the cheater taking it!!!!!!!!!!

wrote on Aug 29^th, 2008 at 10:45pm:

I caught my Ex with another man, yet the test showed that he was not gay. He has also been drugging my todler son yet he pass the test as someone passive and not dangerus. He is a research/programmer. this test is only as good as the cheater taking it!!!!!!!!!!

I would counter that the mmpi-2 is not diagnostic for homosexuality. Scale 5 (feminine vs masculine traits) simply assesses for how much the person identifies with the traditional gender role, not sexual orientation.  The psychometric properties of this particular subscale are indeed weak and not very clinically useful. Obviously, not all homosexual men necessarily endorse feminine characteristics. Additionally, just because a male endorses items consistent with a feminine gender role, this is in no way diagnostic of homosexuality. It could be a stay-at-home dad who has little interest in sports.  See what I mean? Moreover, bisexuality can not be determined via this scale either.  

If your husband has indeed been abusing your son, this is a matter for the authorities, not a psychologist. The MMPI-2 is not designed as a measure of criminal behavior, or for the assessment of violent risk potential. There are other instruments designed for this. Engaging in criminal behavior does not automatically equal psychopathology, which is what the MMPI-2 is designed tio assess.

I don't understand why someone would spend time trying to help people pass a psychological test.  A psychological test whether it is the MMPI or some other tool is designed to ensure the individual is qualified and capable to do that job.  Would you feel comfortable if your efforts here helped an unqualified individual to become an airline pilot or a police officer etc.  I hope I am not on that plane when one of these folks makes some type of catastrophic mistake.  If you were the only one on that plane it would not bother me.  I believe the work you are doing here is reckless and irresponsible.  Please find something more constructive to do with your life.

Well, lets look at the first 75. Now, a person came up w/ each question, and even though they are scored to several profiles, let's look at what some on was thinking when they added the question;



1.I like mechanics magazines Don't understand people, have to revert to machines. Psychopath
2.I have a good appetite Depressed?
3.I wake up fresh & rested most mornings Depressed?
4.I think I would like the work of a librarian introvert
5.I am easily awakened by noiseNeurotic?
6.I like to read newspaper articles on crime neurotic?
7.My hands and feet are usually warm enough I guess they would be
8.My daily life is full of things that keep me interested For most people
9.I am about as able to work as I ever was Look 4 it asked differently later
10.There seems to be a lump in my throat much of the time most peoples throats R OK ...
11.A person should try to understand his dreams and be guided by or take warning from them Kids understand Dreams are Dreams ... You, being 34 think there is enough significance to ...
12.I enjoy detective or mystery stories Dunno
13.I work under a great deal of tension people find tension where they want. Look for it to be repeated
14.I have diarrhea once a month or more most non-neurotics don't
15.Once in a while I think of things too bad to talk about Now's the time to make yourself look good ...
16.I am sure I get a raw deal from life If you don't get this ...
17.My father was a good man
18.I am very seldom troubled by constipation
19.When I take a new, I like to be tipped off on whom should be gotten next to
20.My sex life is satisfactory
21.At times I have very much wanted to leave home
22.At times I have fits of laughing & crying that I cannot control
23.I am troubled by attacks of nausea and vomiting
24.No one seems to understand me
25.I would like to be a singer
26.I feel that it is certainly best to keep my mouth shut when I’m in trouble
27.Evil spirits possess me at times
28.When someone does me a wrong I feel I should pay him back if I can, just for the principle of the thing.
29.I am bothered by acid stomach several times a week
30.At times I feel like swearing
31.I have nightmares every few nights
32.I find it hard to keep my mind on a task or job
33.I have had very peculiar and strange experiences
34.I have a cough most of the time
35.If people had not had it in for me I would have been much more successful
36.I seldom worry about my heath
37.I have never been in trouble because of my sex behavior
38.During one period when I was a youngster I engaged in petty thievery
39.At times I feel like smashing things
40.Most any time I would rather sit and daydream than to do anything else
41.I have had periods of days, weeks, or months when I couldn’t take care of things because I couldn’t “get going”
42.My family does not like the work I have chosen ( or the work I intend to choose for my life work)
43.My sleep is fitful and disturbed
44.Much of the time my head seems to hurt all over
45.I do not always tell the truth
46.My judgment is better than it ever was
47.Once a week or oftener I feel suddenly hot all over without apparent cause
48.When I am with people I am bothered by hearing very queer things
49.It would be better if almost all laws were thrown away
50.My soul sometimes leaves my body
51.I am in just as good physical health as most of my friends
52.I prefer to pass by school friends, or people I know but have not seen for a long time, unless they speak to me first
53.A minister can cure disease by praying and putting his hand on your head
54.I am liked by most people who know me
55.I am almost never bothered by pains over the heart or in my chest
56.As a youngster I was suspended from school one or more times for cutting up
57.I am a good mixer
58.Everything is turning out just like the prophets of the Bible said it would
59.I have often had to take orders from someone who did not know as much as I did
60.I do not read every editorial in the newspaper everyday
61.I have not lived the right kind of life
62.Parts of my body often have feeling like burning, tingling, crawling, or like “going to sleep”
63.I have had no difficulty in starting or holding my bowel movement
64.I sometimes keep on at a thing until others lose their patience with me
65.I loved my father
66.I see things or animals or people around me that others do not see
67.I wish I could be as happy as others seem to be
68.I hardly ever feel pain in the back of the neck
69.I am very strongly attracted by members of my own sex
70.I used to like drop-the-handkerchief
71.I think a great many people exaggerate their misfortunes in order to gain the sympathy and help of others
72.I am troubled by discomfort in the pit of my stomach every few days or oftener
73.I am an important person
74.I have often wished I were a girl.  (Or if you are a girl) I have never been sorry that I am a girl
75.I get angry sometimes

Why are you assuming items are face valid indicators of the construct they are measuring?  

This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of how the test was developed.  Please see my post on the previous page (on page 5) on the subject of  "empirical keying" vs "clincial rational" for the construction of the item pool of the MMPI

I am taking the test and was wanting a copy of it to look and see all the questions. Can you email me a copy please. What is the percent of people that fail it and what would make you fail?

The MMPI-2 is copyrighted by both the University of Minnesota Press and Pearson Assessment Resources, and is not in the public domain. It is not a pass/fail.  

MMPI doesn't destinguish between gay or straight, doesn't destinguish between this and that, doesn't tell you this or that. All posted on this thread. What the hell good is it? It's described with $100 words but with nickel meanings. It's not a pass or fail but a instrument, just like the polyhraph, where the operator holds a person's livelyhood in his unqualified opinion. Put all psychocologist together and you might have enough intelligence to score 45 on an IQ test. Also, just like the polygraph, MMPI is an instrument by which a lot of people make money. Also, just like the polygraph, it doens't have the usefulness of a Sears catalog or a corn cobb in an outhouse. All four will burn your ass.

This demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of psychometric assessment.  Assessment instruments do not diagnose, nor were they meant to.  The MMPI-2 was designed as an objective (not projective like Rorschach's ink blots) measure to assist the clinician in the psychodiagnsotic process. If you are confused about the rationale behind the empirical development of the MMPI-2, I would suggest reading my post on page 5 regarding how the items assess psychological constructs utilizing an "empirical keying" approach.

This is an interesting take.  If you would be so kind to cite some research to back up your opinion about the MMPI?  Additionally, if 6 years of intensive doctoral training do NOT make a qualified psychologist (in your opinion), perhaps you would like to propose an alternative training model so our opinions can become "qualified"?

The empirical data on which you base your conclusions is biased by the limited scope of subjects whos responses form your baseline. Example: conclusions as simplistic as the following statement;
"Every murderer that I have questioned drinks milk."
"You drink milk."
"Therefore you are a murderer".

For MMPI results to be truely meaningful, everyone would have to be tested and the data tabulated taking into consideration almost countless variables.

Twoblock wrote on Sep 6^th, 2008 at 3:53am:

The empirical data on which you base your In conclusions is biased by the limited scope of subjects whos responses form your baseline. Example: conclusions as simplistic as the following statement; "Every murderer that I have questioned drinks milk." "You drink milk." "Therefore you are a murderer". For MMPI results to be truely meaningful, everyone would have to be tested and the data tabulated taking into consideration almost countless variables.

I am not sure I follow? Do you mean you think the normative control group used as the baseline is biased or somehow not representative of the normal population? You realize the data was derived via statistical comparison between criterion groups (those known to have the disorder of a particular subscale) AND a "normative" control group (normal individuals to used as a baseline for statistical comparison), right? The data is not restricted to just a clinical sample. If it was, how would we know what the deviant (scored) response should be? We have to know that a normal population would consistently endorse the item differently in order to establish what the normal response would be. If the norm group didn't endorse the item different than the criterion group at a high rate, then the item is worthless. The developers threw these items out. The ones that make up the test are the ones that show statistically significant differences between norm group and criterion group. It allows us to see the true differences between the groups (normal vs psychiatric). It's NOT an absolute conclusion (as you stated), it is a "degree of probability" (the degree of probability depends on how many standard deviations the T score is elevated above the norm), because the test is using items that have extemely high statistical differentiation properties.  Your "milk" example would be an example of an item that would have been tossed out during the test's development because its ability to differentiate is highly flawed. If we take a sample of milk drinkers and run this same statistical procedure that MMPI-2 used for its development, we would see the true statistical trend. (i.e., there is no true correlation between the 2 when we do an empirical test of this hypothesis). We find out that most milk drinkers are not murders, and thus we realize your item example is a statistically weak discriminator. Items with weak statistical properties like this did not make it into the test. This prevents the occurrence of this logic leap error you are referring to. We don't use items like that. Only ones with high statistical reliability for true group differentiation. However, more importantly, you are not taking into account the real issue of the  statistical logic at work here. Its the aggregate sum of many endorsements consistent with the criterion group that raises the red flags.  Not just one endorsement, as in your example. We do not make snap judgments based on one item, or even several items.  That's why the test has so many items, 567 to be exact. You've heard the old saying "One swallow doesn't make a summer", right? Well, we have too.  

Your second paragraph demonstrates a poor understanding of multivariate statistics, and again, misconstrues the purpose of psychometric assessment. The reason we have statistics is because what you proposed is obviously impossible. Statistics are powerful estimators of group trends.  Multiple Regression, linear regression, and structural equation modeling procedures are well validated, scientifically accepted procedures for quantification of the frequency of a event or trait in a large data sample. If you have a problem with these procedures and methods, then you should have a problem with ALL of science and modern day medicine! Guess how risk factors for disease are calculated? They certianly don't survey everyone, right? Keep in mind the MMPI-2 is based on statistical base rates and likelihood of item endorsement consistent with a criterion group over a certain threshold. The threshold is set very very high (i.e., 4, or 5 endorsements consistent with the criterion group is statistically meaningless. It takes 15, sometimes 20 endorsements consistent with a criterion group to raise the T score above "normal"). When you have an subscale elevated above the designated T score, the statistics of the test tell us that this elevation being the result of chance alone (i.e., error) are very very small. This tells us that you are indeed endorsing items consistent with those with the disorder at a very very high rate with a very very small  likelihood that this could have happened by chance alone. In other words, you end up "looking like" (on paper) this clinical population. But again, this does NOT equate to diagnosis, nor does this automatically mean you would necessarily meet the clincial threshold for the disorder. You simply have alot of similarities with this particular population, since you have endorsed so many of the same opinions they did. You have alot of traits of that disorder. The clinician delineates whether there is clinically significant meaning behind these elevations after taking into account all the data from the clincial interview and any other tests that have been given. As you can see, the MMPI-2 is a powerful statistical tool, nothing more. It is just one piece of clinical information, but, one that is completely empirical, statistically objective, and highly reliable. It does NOT diagnose, but that in no way means the data derived is "meaningless." Statistically, they are very meaningful. Official diagnoses should indeed be made cautiously, taking into account the many many factors and the numerous environmental and situational variables (as you pointed out) that the clinician obtains during the clincial assessment process.

You are correct. I do have a problem with modern medicine and medical research. There is a cure out there for many types of cancer.

I have four scars on my face where basil cell carcenomas were removed by doctors. Sense then, I have removed three carcenomas and just finished removing a dime size melanoma on the surface that had spread throughout my right temple underneath. I have had 100% success on me and three other people which I told about and showed how to remove skin cancers with this product. Nine cancers total. Not a failure. I have a long time friend that cured lung cancer with this product. He had already lost one lung and later got it in the other. That one he cured himself with this product years ago. He is still alive at 86. I know two other people that cured internal cancer with this product and read numerous accounts of other cures. Most had been sent home (by doctors) to die. The idiots at the
FDA know about this product and are closing down the labs that advertise it cures cancer. They say there is no cure for cancer. That's an idiotic statement. What about the small percentage of cancers the medical profession cures? The real reason for the closures is MONETARY. If this product was widely known, the researchers, doctors and pharmaceutical industries would lose billions. The research grants (a lot of our tax money) would dry up and the pharmaceutical industry couldn't hawk it for 1000% profit because it is already out there.

I won't call the name of the product because this is not a website on which to advertise. Not because I'm afraid of the FDA.

I am sorry to hear of your plight. However, you have meandered way out of my area of expertise and beyond the scope of this thread.  I can not knowledgeably discuss wild notions of amateur oncology research/cures, or the problems associated with the FDA and big pharm. I have simply tried to correct misconceptions regarding the theory, development, validity, and use of the MMPI-2.

You made the statement that I must have a problem with modern day science and medicine. I simply agreed with you and told you why.

What plight. It's a campaign against a corrupt government that's in concert with corrupt corporations.

please help me i have to take a mmpi test
give me some pointers or a sample test????

Pointers for what exactly? Just be honest.  The MMPI-2 is copyrighted by both the University of Minnesota Press and Pearson Assessment Resources, and is not in the public domain.

Hello. Could u send me a copy of MMPI questions, I'm going to take a test on next month for my job. Thank you very much
my email is vofusi@gmail.com

i have the test now, but no time to copyu it, i am taking it for a pain pump for my spine? dont know why but failed first time because i answered questions like they were about pain! not personality so i failed, just remember its about personality! i think the test is a joke, even some questions that start like ......once a week or oftener..... i think it is a 5th grader at best that wrote it. the 2 doctors that came up with test are a BIG JOKE.    

One of my old supervisors was trained by Starke Hathaway at Minnesota. He was highly regarded, and my supervisor always found him to be an extemely gifted clinician and an outstanding empirically minded researcher.   :)

tracy

You didn't say why you were taking the test. Is it for employment. If it's for employment, my question is why would you and FreeW want to work for an entity that requires MMPI or polygraph. They are both extremely misleading and are used by employers who lacks the intelligence to ask the right questions or understand the answers in an interview.

In my nearly 40 years in a management position, I have hired many, many people and didn't use either. In that time I did hire a couple of duds but, for the most part, I did pretty good without MMPI or polygraph.

psych 1

The MMPI copyright is useless as tits on a boar hog unless someone is using it for monetary gain and are not paying the required royality to the U. of Minnesota and Pearson who, I am sure, got big grant money to develop the test.  I suspect some, maybe all, was our tax money.

A case in point: I designed and built a machine for my mining operation. Nothing like it in the business. Then a person snuck in to my operation, made a print and built one exactly like for his mining operation and there was nothing that I could do about it except stomp his ass into the muck and destroy his machine. If he ever sells the design, then I got him (legally) by the ying yang.

The costs of norming and restandardization of the MMPI-2 in 1989 were provided up front by Pearson. No grant money. Costs are made up by selling the test to qualified practitioners at an, admittedly, exorbitant price. That why the thing costs so darn much for psychologists.  So, when one bootlegs a copy and possibly spreads it around, they have indeed cheated Pearson.  It cost them alot to collect the norming data, so naturally they want people to buy it, so costs can be made up.

The paradigms used for a polygrah are totally different than the the MMPI-2. They really have nothing in common.  The MMPI's main goal is the assessment of psychopathology. However, it does have the added benefit (due to its statistical properties and empirical keying construction) to detect unusual responding that suggests, the purposeful attempt to distort results. What evidence do you have that the MMPI, if used by a properly trained psychologist, is "misleading"? Or is that just "personal opinion"?

HI
I took this test now a doctor wants to ttalk to me about it ..i must did poorly on it or something.

I had to go through evaluations for custody for a child to be around my boyfriends child.

Is there anyway to to get copy of it or??? study

I already did it and now they want to talk to me about it..

Thank you so much for your help

Tracey Kadner
leopardprintgal1@yahoo.com

tracy

Your doctor is required to tell you how you did on the test. Don't assume that you did badly. psych1 will tell you there is no pass or fail for the mmpi. You should want to know the doctor's evaluation of the test just in case you wanted to sue him in a court of law. Also your doctor wants another consultation fee.

Do you know if you can appeal or fight the results of a psch test? My son just went through the process for the PA . They sent a letter saying that he failed. I know this is my son but he is the most normal person I know. I just feel that this was very unfair. Any info that you could give me would help. My whole family is sick over this.
                                     Thank You,
                                    A VERY SAD MOM

For the ten millionth time, their is no "fail" on a psych test. I don't know what people mean when they say this.

If you feel your son's psych eval was done by an incompetent examiner, you can always get a 2nd opinion. Besides the fact that you dont like the results, what specifically do you fee was done wrong?

Hi,
On the letter he recieved it stated that  "you fail to meet the psychological requirement which are required to perform the essential functions of a port authority officer"  Isn't it possible that sometimes they are just trying to eliminate an over abundance of applicants and that this may not be fair? Where can I get a second opinion? He put a whole year of his life into this process which seemed to be to no avail. Like I said, i know he is my son but he is a good kid who did deserve this job. He is a clean cut kid,  no drugs no alcohol, never in trouble, Graduated college with a BA ,  physicaly fit etc...  They even called him in for the medical part of the test 2 weeks after the psych part.

I have no knowledge and can not comment on the motivation of the port authority or of their hiring practices. I am a psychologist.

As I said, if you disagree with the psychologist interpretation of certain tests, I would contact PA to see what the steps are to appeal and petition for a 2nd opinion. "A good kid who deserves this job" is not very informative, nor persuasive. Most moms think this of their children, right?

Thank you for answering me. He is going to call to see  if there is an appeal process. You are right ,most moms feel that way about their children.

You cannot pass or fail an MMPI. You can only lie or not lie. The only reason companies have you take this test is to make sure you are not a person who may freak out one day and blow up the company. You generally will not fail to be hired because of your score unless you score high as being seriously mentally impaired (schizophrenic, dissociative, etc.). You know, in general, crazy (I apologize to those who are offended by the word).

Jean,

Your son may have placed to high on a certain level, making him too unstable to be a Port Authority Officer. That doesn't mean there's anything wrong with him, but he may have certain views about things that they do not like.  I think that if he is trying out for that kind of job he is probably a very good boy.
However, if it still worries you, you can always tell him it bothers you and you'd like him to talk to someone (even if it is just once) to ease your fears. It may be helpful.

Tell him good luck!

Thank You  (not a member),
 To tell you the truth Iam not worried about my son that way. He is very smart he has strong convictions and alot more common sense than most adults i know. I have 2 sons and i know the difference. They are totally different, if it were the other son, I wouldn't feel this way. How reliable are these tests when they ask things like "do you have a bowel movement once a month" / "do you see animals and people around you when no one else does"!!!!!!  In my heart-i feel that they had to start eliminating kids because they had too many applicants. I know of one kid who "failed" 1 year ago and took it agian and passed, So does that mean that he told the truth the first time, and lied the second. I don't believe so.  I think they use this test as a way to cover themselves when they let these kids go. It just seems soooo unfair
I appreciate you answering me , it does help to talk to other people.THANX

psych1 wrote on Oct 12^th, 2008 at 4:47am:

For the ten millionth time, their is no "fail" on a psych test. I don't know what people mean when they say this. If you feel your son's psych eval was done by an incompetent examiner, you can always get a 2nd opinion. Besides the fact that you dont like the results, what specifically do you fee was done wrong?

fail would be not geting the job, that means do not "pass" go do not collect a check from a job you wanted, simple enough egg head? maybe your the one that needs a test, you really think to deep ino this simplified questions lol

Apparently, you were not picking up the good natured satire. I thought I laid it on pretty thick. But apparently you missed it.

Called the PA -- no one will give me any answers on appeals, they said you have to write a letter.   I called a lawyer (that i got from the Chief  newspaper) He said that the PA does not have an internal appeal process like the FD or PD. It is much harder to appeal. He knew of the Dr. who sent us the letter ( he mentioned her name). He also said that a family had just been in with the same disqualification letter that my son got.  He seemed to be very knowledgable of the whole situation.  If i retain him it is a flat fee of $5,000.00.  No guarentees--- It will go to supreme court.
does anyone have any opinions?

Yea, but how much is the psychologist he retains for consultation on this case gonna cost you? I am assuming you are wanting to challenge the interpretation here, right?  If so, he is gonna have to retain a psychologist.  And, unless he is the nicest lawyer in the history of the world, you will be responsible for the cost.

I suppose this comes down to a cost/benefit analysis for you.  I wish my mom was as willing to get litigious when the Dairy Queen fired me when I was in high school.  It was a total injustice I tell you! ;) By the way, I'm curious to how old your son is and why you are doing all this legwork for him, rather than him for doing it for himself? I get the sense that you want this job for him more than he wants it for himself, given the fact that you were the one who posted on the board expressing frustration with the situation, not him. So, I guess my question is, who is this job really for, you or him?

I find it interesting this problem is being addressed by mom rather than the applicant..this may be an indicator of what disqualified her son

gary

what i dont get is that they ask you if you like achery and stamp collecting, i mean are you for real? if you like to hunt your a nut job? or unfit lol. I know 14 -18 police officer that hunt.. i duuno the test is kind of redundant.

I have discussed the logic behind the MMPI's construction and how items were included several different times already. (please see my posts on page 5 and 7 that discuss rational vs empirical keying approaches to psychometric test construction).

psych1, it would really help some of us if you could give us examples of how you as a psycholigist would interpret some of these questions instead of throwing a bunch of big words and egg head data out here.

why are these quesions relevant to law enforcement

you often check the contents of the toilet after a bowel movement

you want to be a singer?

i mean there are many dumb questions on there, i know there is one that has a fake poets name just to see if your paying attention.

i mean seriously, do you like archery?

yes i love to hunt, but no i dont collect stamps

explain these a bit. IE no psych mumbo jumbo <barny style> if you will lol

This is a complicated issue that requires advanced understanding of multi variate statistics, linear regression, and the nature of psychiatric diagnosis. This is just the nature of the beast. Hence, why the test was developed and is interpreted by psychologists, not the lay public.  

In general, individual items are NOT evaluated or interpreted.  Let me explain why:

As most people understandably do, you seem to be running on the premise that the questions are face valid indicators of the construct they are measuring. That is, if the question asks about feelings of sadness,  they must be tapping into depression. Right? Well, this is NOT how the mmpi was constructed. The questions that seem like they belong to one type of disorder scale, often do not.  Assignment of questions to a particular scale (Depression, Schizophrenia, Hypochondriasis, etc) was done after the list of questions were normed on clinical groups (idividuals with a particular disorder) and norma groups. The "deviant response" is indicated by individuals already known to have the disorder (the clinical group) who endorsed an item so much more often than a normal population that the item becomes a statistically reliable discriminator of that clinical population from "normal" populations  (i.e.,empirical keying method). It doesn't matter what the content of the question was.[/b] This is why questions with weird content are part of the MMPI. It doesn't really matter what the content of the question was. If it discriminates between groups, it discriminates between groups. Period. That's all we need to know. The item is there because it s a powerful discriminator between groups. Period. Endorsement of the item in the deviant direction identifies the test taker as responding in the "same way" as the a particular clinical criterion group did. In other words, you are taking th test like a person with the disorder. It is not diagnostic in and of itself, but it means you present like that group, and certainly have alot things in common. Item endorsement is aggregate, and after so many deviant endorsements consistent with that group, your T-score is raised on that scale, to point were is is almost impossible that is was done by chance alone (i.e., random error/chance).

Remember, this is solely based on whether the question discriminates reliably between groups. It doesn't matter what the content of the question was. If it discriminates, it discriminates. Period. Certainly some of the questions are face valid, but the majority actually are not. Trust me, the questions that seem like they belong to one type of disorder scale, often do not, and the normative sample didn't always endorse or deny in the way you think they would have for particular questions. (i.e., questions do not always measure what you think they do). "I tortured animals as a child" was actually endorsed in only one particular disorder, and it it was NOT psychopaths. It was found to be a discriminant question in another disorder and got coded on its scale instead. Since so much of the interpretation of the MMPI is based on statical base rate occurrences, having a thorough clincial interview with the individual before their evaluation is very important.  The clinician needs to take into account many environmental factors that have the potential to raises scores on the mmpi artificially. Hence, the MMPI s never interpreted totally blindly, without knowing about the person, their history, and their current circumstances.

Personalty traits and levels of psychopathology, particular measures of anti-social and psychopathic traits, are extremely important to consider when hiring individual for positions where they have a great deal of authority over others, and where they are responsible for the life and well being of others. I am sure you would agree on this issue, no?

yeah on certain things, did you read my post on the bad scale i put? If THIS  test is so accurate on judging ppl then why do some people pass the test elsewhere when they take it again? I mean there has to be some baseline correct? It seems to be it is very incosistant, if you gotta shitbag examiner, or a good one, or some used car salesman that was the lowest bid but spent 2 years at a shithole college. I mean, reading all these occurences, of ppl passing one and not another or the low bid guy ect ect.. I really wonder how many careers were shot down due to lack of education or the bias judgement of your examiner.

lawlizard wrote on Oct 18^th, 2008 at 7:58pm:

yeah on certain things, did you read my post on the bad scale i put? If THIS  test is so accurate on judging ppl then why do some people pass the test elsewhere when they take it again? I mean there has to be some baseline correct? It seems to be it is very incosistant, if you gotta shitbag examiner, or a good one, or some used car salesman that was the lowest bid but spent 2 years at a shithole college. I mean, reading all these occurrences, of ppl passing "one and not another or the low bid guy ect ect.. I really wonder how many careers were shot down due to lack of education or the bias judgement of your examiner.

There is no "baseline correct."  Uniform T-score transformations are made for each scale, with the mean being 50 and standard deviations being 10.  Therefore, a theoretically "normal profile" then would be a profile where T-scores on each of the 10 clinical scales are between 46 and 64. Within one standard deviation of the overall mean. As you can see, the range is quite large there.  So no, there is no mean, or "average" profile.  Is this what you mean? Also, all individuals who interpret MMPIs are licensed clinical psychologists who hold Ph.Ds.  There are no "used car salesmen" with undergrad degrees in psych doing these evals.

Second, the term "Personality Inventory" in MMPI is somewhat of a misomer.  In reality, we are are examining levels of psychopathology, which can and do change over time. Infact, the  MMPI is frequently given periodically during the course of therapy to see if behavior change and symptom reduction is occurring.

However, what also might be occurring is that the characteristics amenable to one job, may be actually contraindicated in another. Or, one job, or one department is simply more strict about their criteria and judgments about "fitness for duty. " I doubt the actual profile of these individuals is changing all that significantly.

psych1 wrote on Oct 18^th, 2008 at 8:44pm:

In reality, we are are examining levels of psychopathology, which can and do change over time. Infact, theMMPI is frequently given periodically during the course of therapy to see if behavior change and symptom reduction is occurring.

Psych1, I have often wondered how dependant ones responses on MMPI and consequently the interpretation of those responses are dependant on what may be a dynamic or temporary  psychological state?

In other words, I know that some police departments request an MMPI following a traumatic incident in order to have the results compared to the pre-employment MMPI in an attempt to determine if the incident has rendered an officer "Unifit for Duty".  

Are there inherant hazards or probable inaccuracies associated with doing this subsequent test too close in time to the traumatic incident?

Sancho Panza

PSYCH1 i took this test online, i looked at the scores which are below, does the mmpi work with the big 5? well here it is , have a look.

P-NEO Narrative Report
NOTE: The report sent to your computer screen upon the completion of the IPIP-NEO is only a temporary web page. When you exit your web browser you will not be able to return to this URL to re-access your report. No copies of the report are sent to anyone. If you want a permanent copy of the report, you must save the web page to your hard drive or a diskette, and/or print the report while you are still viewing it in your web browser. If you choose to save your report, naming it with an .htm extension (example: Myreport.htm) as you save it may help you to read it into a web browser later. If you choose to print the report, selecting landscape orientation for your paper will display the graphs properly. Using portrait orientation (normally the default for printers) will cause the graphs to wrap around and render them unreadable.
This report compares iraqvet from the country USA to other adult men. (The name used in this report is either a nickname chosen by the person taking the test, or, if a valid nickname was not chosen, a random nickname generated by the program.)
This report estimates the individual's level on each of the five broad personality domains of the Five-Factor Model. The description of each one of the five broad domains is followed by a more detailed description of personality according to the six subdomains that comprise each domain.
A note on terminology. Personality traits describe, relative to other people, the frequency or intensity of a person's feelings, thoughts, or behaviors. Possession of a trait is therefore a matter of degree. We might describe two individuals as extraverts, but still see one as more extraverted than the other. This report uses expressions such as "extravert" or "high in extraversion" to describe someone who is likely to be seen by others as relatively extraverted. The computer program that generates this report classifies you as low, average, or high in a trait according to whether your score is approximately in the lowest 30%, middle 40%, or highest 30% of scores obtained by people of your sex and roughly your age. Your numerical scores are reported and graphed as percentile estimates. For example, a score of "60" means that your level on that trait is estimated to be higher than 60% of persons of your sex and age.
Please keep in mind that "low," "average," and "high" scores on a personality test are neither absolutely good nor bad. A particular level on any trait will probably be neutral or irrelevant for a great many activites, be helpful for accomplishing some things, and detrimental for accomplishing other things. As with any personality inventory, scores and descriptions can only approximate an individual's actual personality. High and low score descriptions are usually accurate, but average scores close to the low or high boundaries might misclassify you as only average. On each set of six subdomain scales it is somewhat uncommon but certainly possible to score high in some of the subdomains and low in the others. In such cases more attention should be paid to the subdomain scores than to the broad domain score. Questions about the accuracy of your results are best resolved by showing your report to people who know you well.
John A. Johnson wrote descriptions of the five domains and thirty subdomains. These descriptions are based on an extensive reading of the scientific literature on personality measurement. Although Dr. Johnson would like to be acknowledged as the author of these materials if they are reproduced, he has placed them in the public domain.
Extraversion
Extraversion is marked by pronounced engagement with the external world. Extraverts enjoy being with people, are full of energy, and often experience positive emotions. They tend to be enthusiastic, action-oriented, individuals who are likely to say "Yes!" or "Let's go!" to opportunities for excitement. In groups they like to talk, assert themselves, and draw attention to themselves.
Introverts lack the exuberance, energy, and activity levels of extraverts. They tend to be quiet, low-key, deliberate, and disengaged from the social world. Their lack of social involvement should not be interpreted as shyness or depression; the introvert simply needs less stimulation than an extravert and prefers to be alone. The independence and reserve of the introvert is sometimes mistaken as unfriendliness or arrogance. In reality, an introvert who scores high on the agreeableness dimension will not seek others out but will be quite pleasant when approached.
Domain/Facet........... Score 0--------10--------20--------30--------40--------50--------60--------70--------80--------90--------99
EXTRAVERSION...............69 *********************************************************************
..Friendliness.............91 *******************************************************************************************
..Gregariousness...........74 **************************************************************************
..Assertiveness............74 **************************************************************************
..Activity Level...........64 ****************************************************************
..Excitement-Seeking.......24 ************************
..Cheerfulness.............47 ***********************************************
Your score on Extraversion is high, indicating you are sociable, outgoing, energetic, and lively. You prefer to be around people much of the time.
Extraversion Facets
•      Friendliness. Friendly people genuinely like other people and openly demonstrate positive feelings toward others. They make friends quickly and it is easy for them to form close, intimate relationships. Low scorers on Friendliness are not necessarily cold and hostile, but they do not reach out to others and are perceived as distant and reserved. Your level of friendliness is high.
•      Gregariousness. Gregarious people find the company of others pleasantly stimulating and rewarding. They enjoy the excitement of crowds. Low scorers tend to feel overwhelmed by, and therefore actively avoid, large crowds. They do not necessarily dislike being with people sometimes, but their need for privacy and time to themselves is much greater than for individuals who score high on this scale. Your level of gregariousness is high.
•      Assertiveness. High scorers Assertiveness like to speak out, take charge, and direct the activities of others. They tend to be leaders in groups. Low scorers tend not to talk much and let others control the activities of groups. Your level of assertiveness is high.
•      Activity Level. Active individuals lead fast-paced, busy lives. They move about quickly, energetically, and vigorously, and they are involved in many activities. People who score low on this scale follow a slower and more leisurely, relaxed pace. Your activity level is average.
•      Excitement-Seeking. High scorers on this scale are easily bored without high levels of stimulation. They love bright lights and hustle and bustle. They are likely to take risks and seek thrills. Low scorers are overwhelmed by noise and commotion and are adverse to thrill-seeking. Your level of excitement-seeking is low.
•      Cheerfulness. This scale measures positive mood and feelings, not negative emotions (which are a part of the Neuroticism domain). Persons who score high on this scale typically experience a range of positive feelings, including happiness, enthusiasm, optimism, and joy. Low scorers are not as prone to such energetic, high spirits. Your level of positive emotions is average.
Agreeableness
Agreeableness reflects individual differences in concern with cooperation and social harmony. Agreeable individuals value getting along with others. They are therefore considerate, friendly, generous, helpful, and willing to compromise their interests with others'. Agreeable people also have an optimistic view of human nature. They believe people are basically honest, decent, and trustworthy.
Disagreeable individuals place self-interest above getting along with others. They are generally unconcerned with others' well-being, and therefore are unlikely to extend themselves for other people. Sometimes their skepticism about others' motives causes them to be suspicious, unfriendly, and uncooperative.
Agreeableness is obviously advantageous for attaining and maintaining popularity. Agreeable people are better liked than disagreeable people. On the other hand, agreeableness is not useful in situations that require tough or absolute objective decisions. Disagreeable people can make excellent scientists, critics, or soldiers.
Domain/Facet........... Score 0--------10--------20--------30--------40--------50--------60--------70--------80--------90--------99
AGREEABLENESS..............75 ***************************************************************************
..Trust....................65 *****************************************************************
..Morality.................80 ********************************************************************************
..Altruism.................63 ***************************************************************
..Cooperation..............76 ****************************************************************************
..Modesty..................37 *************************************
..Sympathy.................78 ******************************************************************************
Your high level of Agreeableness indicates a strong interest in others' needs and well-being. You are pleasant, sympathetic, and cooperative.
Agreeableness Facets
•      Trust. A person with high trust assumes that most people are fair, honest, and have good intentions. Persons low in trust see others as selfish, devious, and potentially dangerous. Your level of trust is average.
•      Morality. High scorers on this scale see no need for pretense or manipulation when dealing with others and are therefore candid, frank, and sincere. Low scorers believe that a certain amount of deception in social relationships is necessary. People find it relatively easy to relate to the straightforward high-scorers on this scale. They generally find it more difficult to relate to the unstraightforward low-scorers on this scale. It should be made clear that low scorers are not unprincipled or immoral; they are simply more guarded and less willing to openly reveal the whole truth. Your level of morality is high.
•      Altruism. Altruistic people find helping other people genuinely rewarding. Consequently, they are generally willing to assist those who are in need. Altruistic people find that doing things for others is a form of self-fulfillment rather than self-sacrifice. Low scorers on this scale do not particularly like helping those in need. Requests for help feel like an imposition rather than an opportunity for self-fulfillment. Your level of altruism is average.
•      Cooperation. Individuals who score high on this scale dislike confrontations. They are perfectly willing to compromise or to deny their own needs in order to get along with others. Those who score low on this scale are more likely to intimidate others to get their way. Your level of compliance is high.
•      Modesty. High scorers on this scale do not like to claim that they are better than other people. In some cases this attitude may derive from low self-confidence or self-esteem. Nonetheless, some people with high self-esteem find immodesty unseemly. Those who are willing to describe themselves as superior tend to be seen as disagreeably arrogant by other people. Your level of modesty is average.
•      Sympathy. People who score high on this scale are tenderhearted and compassionate. They feel the pain of others vicariously and are easily moved to pity. Low scorers are not affected strongly by human suffering. They pride themselves on making objective judgments based on reason. They are more concerned with truth and impartial justice than with mercy. Your level of tender-mindedness is high.
Conscientiousness
Conscientiousness concerns the way in which we control, regulate, and direct our impulses. Impulses are not inherently bad; occasionally time constraints require a snap decision, and acting on our first impulse can be an effective response. Also, in times of play rather than work, acting spontaneously and impulsively can be fun. Impulsive individuals can be seen by others as colorful, fun-to-be-with, and zany.
Nonetheless, acting on impulse can lead to trouble in a number of ways. Some impulses are antisocial. Uncontrolled antisocial acts not only harm other members of society, but also can result in retribution toward the perpetrator of such impulsive acts. Another problem with impulsive acts is that they often produce immediate rewards but undesirable, long-term consequences. Examples include excessive socializing that leads to being fired from one's job, hurling an insult that causes the breakup of an important relationship, or using pleasure-inducing drugs that eventually destroy one's health.
Impulsive behavior, even when not seriously destructive, diminishes a person's effectiveness in significant ways. Acting impulsively disallows contemplating alternative courses of action, some of which would have been wiser than the impulsive choice. Impulsivity also sidetracks people during projects that require organized sequences of steps or stages. Accomplishments of an impulsive person are therefore small, scattered, and inconsistent.
A hallmark of intelligence, what potentially separates human beings from earlier life forms, is the ability to think about future consequences before acting on an impulse. Intelligent activity involves contemplation of long-range goals, organizing and planning routes to these goals, and persisting toward one's goals in the face of short-lived impulses to the contrary. The idea that intelligence involves impulse control is nicely captured by the term prudence, an alternative label for the Conscientiousness domain. Prudent means both wise and cautious. Persons who score high on the Conscientiousness scale are, in fact, perceived by others as intelligent.
The benefits of high conscientiousness are obvious. Conscientious individuals avoid trouble and achieve high levels of success through purposeful planning and persistence. They are also positively regarded by others as intelligent and reliable. On the negative side, they can be compulsive perfectionists and workaholics. Furthermore, extremely conscientious individuals might be regarded as stuffy and boring. Unconscientious people may be criticized for their unreliability, lack of ambition, and failure to stay within the lines, but they will experience many short-lived pleasures and they will never be called stuffy.
Domain/Facet........... Score 0--------10--------20--------30--------40--------50--------60--------70--------80--------90--------99
CONSCIENTIOUSNESS..........69 *********************************************************************
..Self-Efficacy............70 **********************************************************************
..Orderliness..............54 ******************************************************
..Dutifulness..............75 ***************************************************************************
..Achievement-Striving.....48 ************************************************
..Self-Discipline..........73 *************************************************************************
..Cautiousness.............67 *******************************************************************
Your score on Conscientiousness is high. This means you set clear goals and pursue them with determination. People regard you as reliable and hard-working.
Conscientiousness Facets
•      Self-Efficacy. Self-Efficacy describes confidence in one's ability to accomplish things. High scorers believe they have the intelligence (common sense), drive, and self-control necessary for achieving success. Low scorers do not feel effective, and may have a sense that they are not in control of their lives. Your level of self-efficacy is high.
•      Orderliness. Persons with high scores on orderliness are well-organized. They like to live according to routines and schedules. They keep lists and make plans. Low scorers tend to be disorganized and scattered. Your level of orderliness is average.
•      Dutifulness. This scale reflects the strength of a person's sense of duty and obligation. Those who score high on this scale have a strong sense of moral obligation. Low scorers find contracts, rules, and regulations overly confining. They are likely to be seen as unreliable or even irresponsible. Your level of dutifulness is high.
•      Achievement-Striving. Individuals who score high on this scale strive hard to achieve excellence. Their drive to be recognized as successful keeps them on track toward their lofty goals. They often have a strong sense of direction in life, but extremely high scores may be too single-minded and obsessed with their work. Low scorers are content to get by with a minimal amount of work, and might be seen by others as lazy. Your level of achievement striving is average.
•      Self-Discipline. Self-discipline-what many people call will-power-refers to the ability to persist at difficult or unpleasant tasks until they are completed. People who possess high self-discipline are able to overcome reluctance to begin tasks and stay on track despite distractions. Those with low self-discipline procrastinate and show poor follow-through, often failing to complete tasks-even tasks they want very much to complete. Your level of self-discipline is high.
•      Cautiousness. Cautiousness describes the disposition to think through possibilities before acting. High scorers on the Cautiousness scale take their time when making decisions. Low scorers often say or do first thing that comes to mind without deliberating alternatives and the probable consequences of those alternatives. Your level of cautiousness is average.
Neuroticism
Freud originally used the term neurosis to describe a condition marked by mental distress, emotional suffering, and an inability to cope effectively with the normal demands of life. He suggested that everyone shows some signs of neurosis, but that we differ in our degree of suffering and our specific symptoms of distress. Today neuroticism refers to the tendency to experience negative feelings. Those who score high on Neuroticism may experience primarily one specific negative feeling such as anxiety, anger, or depression, but are likely to experience several of these emotions. People high in neuroticism are emotionally reactive. They respond emotionally to events that would not affect most people, and their reactions tend to be more intense than normal. They are more likely to interpret ordinary situations as threatening, and minor frustrations as hopelessly difficult. Their negative emotional reactions tend to persist for unusually long periods of time, which means they are often in a bad mood. These problems in emotional regulation can diminish a neurotic's ability to think clearly, make decisions, and cope effectively with stress.
At the other end of the scale, individuals who score low in neuroticism are less easily upset and are less emotionally reactive. They tend to be calm, emotionally stable, and free from persistent negative feelings. Freedom from negative feelings does not mean that low scorers experience a lot of positive feelings; frequency of positive emotions is a component of the Extraversion domain.
Domain/Facet........... Score 0--------10--------20--------30--------40--------50--------60--------70--------80--------90--------99
NEUROTICISM................9 *********
..Anxiety..................18 ******************
..Anger....................38 **************************************
..Depression...............7 *******
..Self-Consciousness.......20 ********************
..Immoderation.............1 *
..Vulnerability............24 ************************
Your score on Neuroticism is low, indicating that you are exceptionally calm, composed and unflappable. You do not react with intense emotions, even to situations that most people would describe as stressful.
Neuroticism Facets
•      Anxiety. The "fight-or-flight" system of the brain of anxious individuals is too easily and too often engaged. Therefore, people who are high in anxiety often feel like something dangerous is about to happen. They may be afraid of specific situations or be just generally fearful. They feel tense, jittery, and nervous. Persons low in Anxiety are generally calm and fearless. Your level of anxiety is low.
•      Anger. Persons who score high in Anger feel enraged when things do not go their way. They are sensitive about being treated fairly and feel resentful and bitter when they feel they are being cheated. This scale measures the tendency to feel angry; whether or not the person expresses annoyance and hostility depends on the individual's level on Agreeableness. Low scorers do not get angry often or easily. Your level of anger is average.
•      Depression. This scale measures the tendency to feel sad, dejected, and discouraged. High scorers lack energy and have difficult initiating activities. Low scorers tend to be free from these depressive feelings. Your level of depression is low.
•      Self-Consciousness. Self-conscious individuals are sensitive about what others think of them. Their concern about rejection and ridicule cause them to feel shy and uncomfortable abound others. They are easily embarrassed and often feel ashamed. Their fears that others will criticize or make fun of them are exaggerated and unrealistic, but their awkwardness and discomfort may make these fears a self-fulfilling prophecy. Low scorers, in contrast, do not suffer from the mistaken impression that everyone is watching and judging them. They do not feel nervous in social situations. Your level or self-consciousness is low.
•      Immoderation. Immoderate individuals feel strong cravings and urges that they have have difficulty resisting. They tend to be oriented toward short-term pleasures and rewards rather than long- term consequences. Low scorers do not experience strong, irresistible cravings and consequently do not find themselves tempted to overindulge. Your level of immoderation is low.
•      Vulnerability. High scorers on Vulnerability experience panic, confusion, and helplessness when under pressure or stress. Low scorers feel more poised, confident, and clear-thinking when stressed. Your level of vulnerability is low.
Openness to Experience
Openness to Experience describes a dimension of cognitive style that distinguishes imaginative, creative people from down-to-earth, conventional people. Open people are intellectually curious, appreciative of art, and sensitive to beauty. They tend to be, compared to closed people, more aware of their feelings. They tend to think and act in individualistic and nonconforming ways. Intellectuals typically score high on Openness to Experience; consequently, this factor has also been called Culture or Intellect. Nonetheless, Intellect is probably best regarded as one aspect of openness to experience. Scores on Openness to Experience are only modestly related to years of education and scores on standard intelligent tests.
Another characteristic of the open cognitive style is a facility for thinking in symbols and abstractions far removed from concrete experience. Depending on the individual's specific intellectual abilities, this symbolic cognition may take the form of mathematical, logical, or geometric thinking, artistic and metaphorical use of language, music composition or performance, or one of the many visual or performing arts. People with low scores on openness to experience tend to have narrow, common interests. They prefer the plain, straightforward, and obvious over the complex, ambiguous, and subtle. They may regard the arts and sciences with suspicion, regarding these endeavors as abstruse or of no practical use. Closed people prefer familiarity over novelty; they are conservative and resistant to change.
Openness is often presented as healthier or more mature by psychologists, who are often themselves open to experience. However, open and closed styles of thinking are useful in different environments. The intellectual style of the open person may serve a professor well, but research has shown that closed thinking is related to superior job performance in police work, sales, and a number of service occupations.
Domain/Facet........... Score 0--------10--------20--------30--------40--------50--------60--------70--------80--------90--------99
OPENNESS TO EXPERIENCE.....6 ******
..Imagination..............0
..Artistic Interests.......5 *****
..Emotionality.............22 **********************
..Adventurousness..........45 *********************************************
..Intellect................25 *************************
..Liberalism...............33 *********************************
Your score on Openness to Experience is low, indicating you like to think in plain and simple terms. Others describe you as down-to-earth, practical, and conservative.
Openness Facets
•      Imagination. To imaginative individuals, the real world is often too plain and ordinary. High scorers on this scale use fantasy as a way of creating a richer, more interesting world. Low scorers are on this scale are more oriented to facts than fantasy. Your level of imagination is low.
•      Artistic Interests. High scorers on this scale love beauty, both in art and in nature. They become easily involved and absorbed in artistic and natural events. They are not necessarily artistically trained nor talented, although many will be. The defining features of this scale are interest in, and appreciation of natural and artificial beauty. Low scorers lack aesthetic sensitivity and interest in the arts. Your level of artistic interests is low.
•      Emotionality. Persons high on Emotionality have good access to and awareness of their own feelings. Low scorers are less aware of their feelings and tend not to express their emotions openly. Your level of emotionality is low.
•      Adventurousness. High scorers on adventurousness are eager to try new activities, travel to foreign lands, and experience different things. They find familiarity and routine boring, and will take a new route home just because it is different. Low scorers tend to feel uncomfortable with change and prefer familiar routines. Your level of adventurousness is average.
•      Intellect. Intellect and artistic interests are the two most important, central aspects of openness to experience. High scorers on Intellect love to play with ideas. They are open-minded to new and unusual ideas, and like to debate intellectual issues. They enjoy riddles, puzzles, and brain teasers. Low scorers on Intellect prefer dealing with either people or things rather than ideas. They regard intellectual exercises as a waste of time. Intellect should not be equated with intelligence. Intellect is an intellectual style, not an intellectual ability, although high scorers on Intellect score slightly higher than low-Intellect individuals on standardized intelligence tests. Your level of intellect is low.
•      Liberalism. Psychological liberalism refers to a readiness to challenge authority, convention, and traditional values. In its most extreme form, psychological liberalism can even represent outright hostility toward rules, sympathy for law-breakers, and love of ambiguity, chaos, and disorder. Psychological conservatives prefer the security and stability brought by conformity to tradition. Psychological liberalism and conservatism are not identical to political affiliation, but certainly incline individuals toward certain political parties. Your level of liberalism is average.

Very good question.  The evaluation after a traumatic incident (ie., a shooting, witnessing horrific atrocities, etc.) is very important.  However, the MMPI is unlikely to pick up many of the changes that are most important in this situation. Many parts of the MMPI an be sensitive to changes in beliefs over time, but more so longer periods of time. Not days or weeks.

Moreover, MMPI is a gross screen for major psychopathology. It's content scales will pick up some salient issues in regards to post-traumatic questions, but we have many better measures for assessing Post-traumatic stress and maladjustment changes over time.  As the name implies, the MMPI is mutiphasic.  Giving several individual assessments that each look at specific constructs (i.e., post traumatic stress, anxiety, depression) will yield greater sensitivity and specifcity in picking up changes over time, especially, if the assessment is being given within weeks of an event.

In other words, I would give an MMPI post event and compare the results to baseline assessment, however, it would by no means be the only assessment I give, and I probably wouldn't make any diagnostic decisions based upon it. It would just be one piece of information to take into account.

IraqVet:

In short, no. The purpose of the NEO-PI is much different than the MMPI. As I mentioned before, the term "Personality Inventory" in Minnesota Mulitphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is rather misleading.  It's really looking at psychopathology, adjustment, and attitudes.  It not necessarily meant as a descriptive narrative of personality in normal populations, as the NEO-PI is. The NEO-PI is cool but is based on this five factors theory of personality.  Its strongly supported though. But you will notice the MMPI is totally atheoretical. Its totally emprical.  That is, there are no theories of personality of psychopathology underlying it.  
                                   HOWEVER
Factor analytic studies of the MMPI over the years have reveal that it is indeed tapping into essentially five factors. These are labeled as the "PSY 5 Scales." Harkness and McNulty developed a dimensional model of personality from quantitative studies of key personality and personality disorder descriptors (1994). The constructs that emerged from these studies are Aggressiveness (AGGR), Psychoticism (PSYC), Disconstraint (DISC), Negative Emotionality/Neuroticism (NEGE), and Introversion/Low Positive Emotionality (INTR). You will notice that these descriptors are very very similar to the Five factors of personality that Costa and McCrea used as the theoretical basis for the development of the NEO-PI. These dimensions (the PSY 5 Scales) can presented in the MMPI score report.  They provide an interesting, although clinically uninformative summary of a persons personality style.

thanks for the feedback, btw did you get my pm?

on a side note i just ate a kfc potpie and i feel mad sick lol

another note, i thought it was cool that it stated i would be best suited for law enforcement

i am drawing a conclusion here though, it seems i avoided a bunch of wuss stuff like poertry and flowers.. seems like that had a huge impact, i dunno thats my persdonality though. I dont give 2 hoots about art or poetry

;D Yes, well, considering the types of personalities law enforcement attracts, I'm sure a lack of interest in art and poetry is not outside the norm for this population..... ::) Im not sure id want my arresting officer to read me Miranda in Highku form.... ;D

lol @ psych1 (btw psych i take it the one that asks if i was closer to my father than my mother isnt face value? because i sure mr. bow tie wont let me answer it like i did on here. Or do they assume that i like them even? or are they testing if you are all snap into a slim jim macho? see what i mean, how can you tell if there is 50 different ways to percieve this as a test taker unless you can explain each answer? wouldnt the candidate deserve that?

btw for those who want these i found a few more questions from the test

I liked Alice in Wonderland by Lewis Carroll  wtf hell no
I have trouble falling asleep at night. i dont sleep at night i sleep during the day
As a child, I was closer to my father than my mother. false i am close to both evenly
I would join the circus if it paid enough. I'll pass on the bozo invite
I am an important person. depends on what role i am in, lead role or shit bag detail
I like poetry. Nope its puss shit
I am the life of the party. sometimes if i last long enough

And my favorite,
Lincoln was greater than Washington well i am not really a liberal or conservitive, but i will go with the real Dubya

<disclaimer> these answers are for pure fun and humor, iraqvet04 accepts no responsibility if you do this on the test>

I am not sure where you got these, but only a couple of these are actual items on the test.  More importantly, the MMPI-2 items are copyrighted by UM Press and Pearson and should not be posted in the public domain for various ethical and legal reasons.  

if you havent seen.. well there are 75 of them on here already, shit you can go to amazon and get the whole damn test lol, plus what would they sue me for? my empty bag of kfc? :P btw check my edit on there

the bottem line is if you dont know how they are scored, unless you do your online and book research then what in hell are ppl going to do with a few of these? you said it yourself need scoring and the whole test. I talked to my aunt, she said most the ones i read off  this site are on there, although she did tell me just to tell the truth, i am going to to that regardless, i dont have anything to hide, i had a top secret clearence in the military, i sat with a shrink for 3 hours to get cleared but never did the scan tron shit lol

[quote author=425D5203010101310 link=1109032158/131#131 date=1224376956]lol @ psych1 (btw psych i take it the one that asks if i was closer to my father than my mother isnt face value? because i sure mr. bow tie wont let me answer it like i did on here. Or do they assume that i like them even? or are they testing if you are all snap into a slim jim macho? see what i mean, how can you tell if there is 50 different ways to percieve this as a test taker unless you can explain each answer? wouldnt the candidate deserve that?

Off hand, I have no idea what scale that question is keyed on. Its just whatever clinicall criterion group endorsed it at a rate so above the norm sample that that item becomes a discriminator of the clinical population. I don't know what group endorsed that over the norm group, but that is the beauty of it.  Neither do you. It statistically empirical, and its hard to fake the test, because you don't know which way the deviant response is, or what the item even represents.

But the validity scales are really what is used to assess for underreporting or overreporting of psychopathlogy.

LMAO you just proved my point, you said i dont know what is deviant? here comes a rant, and this ends my wonders of this pos test. How the hell does some douche sitting in he chair beside me know if my father or my mom beat me? or maybe i liek the equal? or maybe dad hates me and i just liked my more? or vice versa? i mean dude with that statement this test lost a lot of credit with me. They sure as hell wont ask why, so who the F are they to judge my answer to that question? now even knowing why? sure you will say all this stuff but man he truth is in the pudding homie. No data or big words needed.

It is simply setting you up for failure basing your answers with a statistic, not treating you as an individual, just the minority or the majority. LOl this shit is too funny. On a side note my aunt replied and she has been teach psych for years.. shes said the test has to many loose ends and faults.

a post i found interesting

Another interesting thing about the MMPI is that it was never meant to be a "Psychiatrist in a box" as it is being used in nuclear power.  It was simply a clinical assessment tool to be used by mental health professionals in assessing, and diagnosing general disorders in new patients.
Once you have taken it once, it is no longer a valuable tool for this.  It is even LESS valuable for the purpose that nukes have given it.  I even have a way to get the 567 questions done in less than 45 minutes and still not have to talk to the shrink.  You read every question, but only mark the "true" answers on the scan-tron sheet.  There are only about 50 or so of those.  If you are very careful about marking the yesses on the right number, then you can just go through and fill in the unanswered questions on the sheet by filling in the "false" oval.  When you turn in your package, you will get a lot of funny looks and comments about how you couldn't have done it right, but it works.  Just don't goof up and mark a "true" on the wrong line or accidently skip a line.  Even if you do, it is no big deal, since it is all true/false and mostly false. All that could happen is that two answers get switched.  It's not like the multiple choice where one line can screw up the rest of the test.

lawlizard wrote on Oct 19^th, 2008 at 1:11am:

LMAO you just proved my point, you said i dont know what is deviant? here comes a rant, and this ends my wonders of this pos test. How the hell does some douche sitting in he chair beside me know if my father or my mom beat me? or maybe i liek the equal? or maybe dad hates me and i just liked my more? or vice versa? i mean dude with that statement this test lost a lot of credit with me. They sure as hell wont ask why, so who the F are they to judge my answer to that question? now even knowing why? sure you will say all this stuff but man he truth is in the pudding homie. No data or big words needed. It is simply setting you up for failure basing your answers with a statistic, not treating you as an individual, just the minority or the majority. LOl this shit is too funny. On a side note my aunt replied and she has been teach psych for years.. shes said the test has to many loose ends and faults.

Well, Im not here to debate. Just to inform. I understand that the methods and the stats are difficult to understand, and I prefaced all this with the notion that one needs to be well educated on the multivariate stats and taxometric approaches to psychaitric diagnosis.  Which you are obviously not, not would I expect you to be. Again, this is why the test is designed and interpreted by psychologists, not the lay public.  

lol see you had all the answers b4, but as soon as i make a valid point you toss the same answer out, my simple question is, is it possible to tell 100% shit even 50 at that what a person is thinking when they answer? no exactly.. thats why so many ppl are trying to get rid of it, again your baseline or whatever is throwing good ppl in with your majority finding over time, sure statistics and data is good, but you better be damn sure its right because they are f'in with ppls life. Again this is not a personal shot at you, but if the test was 100
% correct there wouldnt be an appeal option in almost every area due to the faults and loose ends of the test.

psych1 wrote on Oct 19^th, 2008 at 1:18am:

lawlizard wrote on Oct 19th, 2008 at 1:11am: LMAO you just proved my point, you said i dont know what is deviant? here comes a rant, and this ends my wonders of this pos test. How the hell does some douche sitting in he chair beside me know if my father or my mom beat me? or maybe i liek the equal? or maybe dad hates me and i just liked my more? or vice versa? i mean dude with that statement this test lost a lot of credit with me. They sure as hell wont ask why, so who the F are they to judge my answer to that question? now even knowing why? sure you will say all this stuff but man he truth is in the pudding homie. No data or big words needed. It is simply setting you up for failure basing your answers with a statistic, not treating you as an individual, just the minority or the majority. LOl this shit is too funny. On a side note my aunt replied and she has been teach psych for years.. shes said the test has to many loose ends and faults. Well, Im not here to debate. Just to inform. I understand that the methods and the stats are difficult to understand, and I prefaced all this with the notion that one needs to be well educated on the multivariate stats and taxometric approaches to psychaitric diagnosis.  Which you are obviously not, not would I expect you to be. Again, this is why the test is designed and interpreted by psychologists, not the lay public.

For the last post, I would simply recommend to be cautious about trusting the validity of information posted online. If people would prefer to discount the test and invalidated their profiles, that is well within their right. Although your hirer might not like it when the clinician reports this this was your preferred method.  This would be my 2 cents.

100% sensitivity and specificity?  I am unaware of any medical test that can reach that threshold, much less a test measuring psychological constructs. This is simply not possible, so i would argue that this is unreasonable expectation when dealing with this subject matter. And lastly, I think I have made the point before that the MMPI is not meant to be a diagnostic instrument in and of itself.  Simply one piece of contributory informations for the clinical puzzle.  Nothing trumps the information you gather in the clincial interview.  The MMPI supplements and adds to this process, its does not overrule it.

he or she wouldnt know, they could be my answeres right? and you can respond to my last statement yes? i think i have a solid arguement. you might have missed it, if so its cool. And no i thought it was a good read, i dont think i am going to base my answers on that, but i thinkk i will use that strategy when asnwering .. so all the true first, well the ones that are for sure. After all, i even did that in HS, do the easy ones first and such, so that you can concentrate on the others , or rule them out .

lawlizard wrote on Oct 19^th, 2008 at 1:31am:

he or she wouldnt know, they could be my answeres right? and you can respond to my last statement yes? i think i have a solid arguement. you might have missed it, if so its cool. And no i thought it was a good read, i dont think i am going to base my answers on that, but i thinkk i will use that strategy when asnwering .. so all the true first, well the ones that are for sure. After all, i even did that in HS, do the easy ones first and such, so that you can concentrate on the others , or rule them out .

I suppose that would be a good method if your department didnt want any valid information from it.  Certain validity scales would be through the roof and your profile would be invalid and it would be obvious what you are doing. The clinician will report this, but if the department doesn't care, then I suppose its all good. However, it has been my experience that hirers obviously like to have valid profiles so they can get the information they want.  If they didn't want it, they wouldn't have you take it in the first place, right? Nevertheless, if this is your preferred method, go ahead. If your really interested in the MMPI, I suppose you'll have to get a book to read about all the validity scales, cause I cant disclose or discuss them and how they work. Sorry.

well in fact it would be valid, i just said i would simply answer all my true first. Which would be the same answer even if i were to go in order...

The MMPI-2 includes a personality scale that measures traditional stereotypic masculine and feminine interests, but it is not used to measure psychopathology.  So if you like hunting or collecting stamps, on the MMPI-2 it has no relevance for measuring psychological disturbance.

ic, well i thought that questions like whats your favorite past time to watch ie baseball,football,tennis, or boxing.. you pick boxing and it shows you like and or might be violent.

I understand that the MMPI is not available online; what I am looking for is questions similar to this test. I have to create a survey for a research class and this is the test that best covers every personality disorder in one test. Anyone have any suggestions? (I need it A.S.A.P. ~ something I can get online).

nothing that i know of, but i did post my scores on a previous online personality test if you want to use that site lookup the name of it. As far as online, we just have the 75 questions from the test on here, i have around 30 more i have compiled also.

wrote on Oct 19^th, 2008 at 6:08pm:

I understand that the MMPI is not available online; what I am looking for is questions similar to this test. I have to create a survey for a research class and this is the test that best covers every personality disorder in one test. Anyone have any suggestions? (I need it A.S.A.P. ~ something I can get online).

Actually the MMPI does not assess personality disorders. Only major Axis I pathology. The test most frequently used for helping diagnose personality disorders is the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI-III).  It is not available online, because as with almost all instruments, it copyrighted. I'm not sure if you are doing this in conjunction with a professor in a psych department or as part of some formal research project.  If you are, I'm sure your adviser/professor has access to the test, or will at least can order it. However, caution is warranted in using the MCMI in non-clinical populations, as it was developed and normed on clinical pops. Therefore, it tends to overestimate pathology in normal samples.

If you would like a relatively brief descriptive measure of personality (but NOT personality pathology) apparently the NEO-PI-R is available online. I think the 16-PF is as well.

Thank you Iraqvet04, I agree with you. Others have been tough on me though

 please send first 75 questions

um, they are posted on here already, check the first few pages of the post

lawlizard

I find it amazing that psych1, like polygraphers, come here and continually try to uphold the validity of an invalid test worbling the same old poppycock humpteen dozen times.

I have taken this test two times at my own volition because I thought I might need some anger management. First time, a number of years ago, I was managing 2 mining operations. I had to fire a guy and before he left he forced me to kick his ass. Later that day he showed up wearing a six shooter. I strapped mine on and confronted him with a challenge to make his move. Fortunately, for him, he backed down. I would have killed him. Background story. The test showed that I was a noodle wimp. A few years ago I nearly killed a man for calling me an SOB. (Call me anything but that). I figured I better go back to the shrink and get some help before I wound up the Cross bar hotel. Guess what? He shoved another mmpi test under my nose. Again it showed me to be a noodle wimp. Therefore, mmpi like the polygraph is only a way for a lot of people to make a living. I guess I shouldn't criticize any one's livelyhood but, dammit, just try to push validity on me.

Twoblock wrote on Oct 30^th, 2008 at 2:11am:

he forced me to kick his ass.

;D I just found this particular line quite humorous and telling. I will leave it at that.  Although, maybe I will lay off talking about construct validity studies with twoblock.... ;)

psych1

That particular line is easy for a normal person to understand. Here it is in a form that you just might understand. He turned his physical aggresion on me and I had to defend myself and put him down. Now that wasn't hard for you to understand. Was it? What else is so telling? What else can you CON STRUCT that is not destructive? Like a polygrapher, you sound like a broke record, Bud.

Take it easy pal.  I knew what it meant, just some good natured humor, thats all.

Twoblock wrote on Oct 30^th, 2008 at 2:11am:

Later that day he showed up wearing a six shooter. I strapped mine on and confronted him with a challenge to make his move. Fortunately, for him, he backed down .. A few years ago I nearly killed a man for calling me an SOB. (Call me anything but that).

Gee twoblock   Sounds like your shrink gave you the wrong battery of tests.

Well, i posted a new thread about mine, i just took it. I did use a few guidelines. From what i am told by the department everything looked good when they got the call as of now. She stated she has to look at it a little more. But as of now its good too go.


She also asked me this, what is does the term mean strike why the iron is hot. lol I answered it by the book. But who knows what answer she was looking for.


I agree with you though twoblock, I dont think those test read a damn thing, but who am i to say that, I have only been living me for 26 years

Gee Dr. Panza - What battery of test would you prescribe. I thought for sure you would take psych1's position since you both are trying to push the validity of your chosen field tests. You don't believe in the mmpi test either. HUH?

lawlizard

When you reach my age 78, you surely will know you. You won't need a shrink to TRY and tell you who you are. I found out that old age is the best treatment for anger management if you can stay alive that long. There's some young bucks out there that's pretty good. However, I still haven't learned to back down. Maybe in 4 or 5 years.

How on earth do you fail a personality test?

Twoblock  You seem prepared to question the validity of any test that requires skilled data interpretation especially if YOU don't agree with the results.

But, since you asked; maybe the Aggression Disorders Scale (ADS) or State Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2(STAXI-2), Multi-dimensional Anger Inventory (MAI), etc. I say "battery" of tests because an anger disorder appears to be a multi-dimensional construct and one needs to explore and assess the different aspects of the anger experience. MMPI-2 really doesn't have an "Anger" sub-scale although some practitioners may draw an inference from a combination of existing subscales. Also I don't recall the phrase "noodle wimp" in any of the MMPI reports I have read.  

note:to PSYCH1  My apologies for any glaring errors here it has been awhile since I last set in a psychology class and I'm no Doctor, feel free to correct me if you wish.


Twoblock wrote on Oct 30^th, 2008 at 2:11am:

I had to fire a guy and before he left he forced me to kick his ass. Later that day he showed up wearing a six shooter. I strapped mine on and confronted him with a challenge to make his move. Fortunately, for him, he backed down. I would have killed him.  A few years ago I nearly killed a man for calling me an SOB. (Call me anything but that).

Tell me Twoblock, in this "High Noon" story; Was there background music playing?  Did you wear spurs for that intimidating jingling sound as you stepped into the dusty street in front of the old mine to face Black Bart and challenge him to "make his move"? Didn't they turn this story into a movie of the week a few years ago?  Your account is either the result of a great deal of creativity, or an abundance of poor judgement on your part.

Sancho Panza

Dr Panza

I try to stay prepaired.

Your second para. just made my point. Why did the idiot shove a mmpi test under my nose? Answer. MONEY.

There was no music and all I had with me was a dog ass polygrapher to lie for me just in case I made the first move. Could have been Gelb, Trimarco, hell, I can't remember his name. If I ever get in that situation again, you will be the first polydupe I'll call. I'm not very creative except in the mining business. I don't have an abundance of poor judgement. I do have an abundance of confidence in my ability with a side arm. Learned from a Hollywood fast draw artist nearly 40 years ago. I already knew the art of shooting from the hip.

As I posted earlier, age has taken care of most of my anger problems.

You really break my heart when you question my honesty. NOOTT. It's totally inconsequential to me whether you believe me or not.

You do have the propensity to jump into a discussion when your chain hasn't been pulled. I believe this discussion was between me and lawlizard.

I've never been to Hollywood, but I think they use blanks in the movies thus the stakes are different. Stepping out in to the street for your Marshal Dillon gunfight was pretty stupid. In REAL gunfights your opponent can still kill you after you have dealt him a lethal blow. I saw a guy shot in the chest with a 357 magnum, fire 3 rounds from a high powered rifle before he went down. Autopsy showed the round actually went through his left ventricle.

But, all that  doesn't make any difference. Your point was that the MMPI wasn't a valid test. You were wrong, it simply wasn't the most appropriate test for the circumstances.


Quote:

You do have the propensity to jump into a discussion when your chain hasn't been pulled.

Remember,

Quote:

Gee Dr. Panza - What battery of test would you prescribe.

You asked me what other tests might have been more appropriate and I answered your question. If you don't want my input keep your hands off my chain.

cur·mudg·eon (kr-mjn)
n.
An ill-tempered person full of resentment and stubborn notions.

Sancho Panza

SanchoPanza wrote on Oct 31^st, 2008 at 9:14pm:

I've never been to Hollywood, but I think they use blanks in the movies thus the stakes are different. Stepping out in to the street for your Marshal Dillon gunfight was pretty stupid. In REAL gunfights your opponent can still kill you after you have dealt him a lethal blow. I saw a guy shot in the chest with a 357 magnum, fire 3 rounds from a high powered rifle before he went down. Autopsy showed the round actually went through his left ventricle. But, all that  doesn't make any difference. Your point was that the MMPI wasn't a valid test. You were wrong, it simply wasn't the most appropriate test for the circumstances. Quote: You do have the propensity to jump into a discussion when your chain hasn't been pulled. Remember, [quote]Gee Dr. Panza - What battery of test would you prescribe.

You asked me what other tests might have been more appropriate and I answered your question. If you don't want my input keep your hands off my chain.

cur·mudg·eon (kr-mjn)
n.
An ill-tempered person full of resentment and stubborn notions.

Sancho Panza[/quote]


I don’t think it was your advice, I believe it was your disrespect to him by questioning his integrity. Seeing is you have never met him, I would think it was uncalled for.

lawlizard wrote on Oct 31^st, 2008 at 11:09pm:

I don’t think it was your advice, I believe it was your disrespect to him by questioning his integrity. Seeing is you have never met him, I would think it was uncalled for.

I did not question his integrity. What I said was "Your account is either the result of a great deal of creativity, or an abundance of poor judgement on your part"  I still maintain it is one or the other. If it didn't happen the way he said it did, it was certainly creative. If it happened exactly the way he said it did , he used poor judgment.

How often to you plan to do the name change thing iraqvet/lawnlizard  ?


Sancho Panza

Not sure, depends on if I think of a better name. If you didnt see I said i was changing it. I did want to make sure that I changed it with a low post count that way i could build on that. Anyway, why does it matter? I stand by what i write. If you were apart of this discussion longer than 2 posts ago then to most its clearly obvious that iraqvet is lawlizard. Which is me.

And yes, you did question his story. Maybe you dont see you undertones in your post. But it was obvious to him and me. Oh and creativity means making up when it has to with someone telling you about a real life event.Like how your post is a creative way to try and spin your statement.

I'll be sure to ask your permission before i change my account sir.

lawlizard wrote on Nov 1^st, 2008 at 1:06am:

Maybe you dont see you undertones in your post

Lawnlizard
There are no undertones in an either/or proposition. The only way one can doubt his integrity is by choosing the first part of the proposition. Obviously this is what YOU have done. I haven't disclosed my choice, I have just postulated that the truth lies in one choice or the other.

No Spin, No Undertone,  In my opinion it must be one or the other.

By the way when you say
lawlizard wrote on Nov 1^st, 2008 at 1:06am:

If you didnt see I said i was changing it

Are you trying to indicate that you announced in some previous post that you were changing your screen name or that you hid it in some spin, undertone, halftruth, or non-truth?


There is no spin in my explanation either, if you can't decide flip a coin.

Sancho Panza

lawlizard

Let it go.

You are new here and to should realize that the sole purpose of polygraphers posting here is to discredit this site, George and anyone who opposes polygraphy with false accusations and inuendos. When they find that they can't debate a subject which they picked, they resort to childish ridicule and name calling. Hence "lawnlizard". They will bait you with things like "twoblock  your shrink gave you the wrong battery of tests" and when you answer, they will accuse you of pulling their chain. They will make vain attempts to turn most every thing you say around to suit their purpose.

Dr. Panza, since it's important to you to have the last word, go ahead. I will do my best not to acknowledge your stupidity any longer.

Twoblock

I'm betting you won't be able to ignore my comments and I warn you if you keep calling people stupid,{other than being a prime example of the pot trying to call the kettle black,}  someone might start calling you an S.O.B. (Silly Old Bozo)

Of course, I never would.

Sancho Panza

good call TwoBlock, I dont want to hijack a good thread.

I dont understand these tests, how can they possibly disqualify you on such stupid questions? I will be taking this test in about a month and not sure what they are looking for if anyone could help me out i would appreciate it, Thanks..........thomasgsx@hotmail.com

::) Here we go again.  I would suggest reading through the thread, my posts in particular, if you are truley interested learning about how  the test was constructed, how and why it is a good empirical instrument for assessing attitudes and psychopathology, and how and why it is used in employment screening settings.

Please send me the rest of the MMPI 2 question it would be a great help to me. I take the test in a week. rodriguez7064@bellsouth.net

Thugcop
or
Any one
please send me the rest of the mmpi 2 questiton with the answers. it would help me very much. please send to rodriguez7064@bellsouth.net

Hey!

There's more then the Lie scale, like over 4 scales for Validity, so just be yourself and try not to think evil thoughts during the test!! LOL

If you think evil thoughts, get your sh#t together, stop drugs, heavy metal, say something nice to your mom, help a stranger and don't be an A-hole all the time!

worked last time!!!!  LOL

Just forgot,

I scored MMPI-2 like an air line pilot!  (over the years they have profiled thousands of people by job and background, etc, including axe murders in jail, so they know over a huge data base of results
if you are faking it (F scale).

So straighten up and fly right losers!!

After all,  they don't call me Mad Mikey for nothin' !!!

see ya saps!!

ATTENTION ATTENTION
PLEASE ANYONE SEND ME THE [b]QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS TO THE MMPI-2 ... sEND TO RODRIGUEZ7064@BELLSOUTH.NET

I am very upset that I had to take this MMPI 2 test.  I have severe back pain, confirmed by MRI as being caused by degenerative discs and bulging discs.  But standard medical protocol required I take this test to rule out depression as a cause of my back pain.

Did it ever occur to them to just ask me about it?  DUH!  Of course I am depressed, anyone would be depressed if they weren't able to carry out the most minor daily chores, like bathing, without experiencing a ton of pain.

And here's the main point, I had to pay out of pocket for a lumbar epidural steroid injection $50.80.  A major procedure to help me overcome my pain, right?  And yet, lo and behold, I will have to pay out of pocket $200.00 for this stupid MMPI-2 test.  Completely unnecessary, only adding to my medical bills, which are higher than a kite as it is!

That $200.00 could have been used toward useful tests, tests that could further determine the actual cause of my pain, things like CAT Scans, or more MRI's, or co-pays to other docs, whatever, so I am pissed I have to pay out $200.00 for a stupid test which does NOTHING to resolve my pain, or diagnose the true source of my pain.

Judi

With all due respect, I believe you have overlooked an important factor here.  There seems to be alot of focus on the MMPI-2 as a diagnostic instrument.  However, this is not its sole fuction in a clinical context.

In your situation, as a psychologist, I am very interested in the quality of life of individuals coping with chronic pain.  Since the MMPI-2 is sensitive to changes in distress over time, the MMPI-2 is often used as objective way of quantifying emotional distress level and emotional symptomatology and tracking their change over time. It is very common to give the MMPI pre and post treatment for chronic pain syndromes, so the treating physician can see how quality of life has improved (or possibly not improved) after a course of treatment. This is for your benefit, as it allows the treating physician to: 1.)understand how you are coping with chronic illness/pain so appopriate referals can be considered (ie., psychiatry, psychotherapy services if needed) 2.) as a way of tracking and objectively measuring improvments in emotional/psychological functioning after a treatment has been implemented.  

Although the cost is a pain (and I can sympthathize), you should feel comforted by the fact that your physician is taking a look at the entire clinical picture here. Until recetly, "sucessful treatment" in physical medicine was defined  solely as "symptom eradication."Fortunatley, in recent years, medical provders have become more cognizant of overall "quality of life" issues and the emotional/psychologcial sequelae that affect the chronic pain population. Personally, I would take comfort in the fact that your doctor is viewing you as whole person, rather than just a black box of symptoms that need to be treated.

Judi

You haven't seen anything yet. Look forward to all of us having to take MMPI 10 or 11 to detect our stress level caused by the Federal Reserve Globalist taking control of our lives and our unwillingness to work toward removing our idiot congress that allowed it to happen. They will use hundred dollar words, that is meaningless to the average citizen, to explain their five cent reasons for making us take it.

psych1 wrote on Nov 25^th, 2008 at 8:55am:

With all due respect, I believe you have overlooked an important factor here.  There seems to be alot of focus on the MMPI-2 as a diagnostic instrument.  However, this is not its sole fuction in a clinical context. In your situation, as a psychologist, I am very interested in the quality of life of individuals coping with chronic pain.  Since the MMPI-2 is sensitive to changes in distress over time, the MMPI-2 is often used as objective way of quantifying emotional distress level and emotional symptomatology and tracking their change over time. It is very common to give the MMPI pre and post treatment for chronic pain syndromes, so the treating physician can see how quality of life has improved (or possibly not improved) after a course of treatment. This is for your benefit, as it allows the treating physician to: 1.)understand how you are coping with chronic illness/pain so appopriate referals can be considered (ie., psychiatry, psychotherapy services if needed) 2.) as a way of tracking and objectively measuring improvments in emotional/psychological functioning after a treatment has been implemented.   Although the cost is a pain (and I can sympthathize), you should feel comforted by the fact that your physician is taking a look at the entire clinical picture here. Until recetly, "sucessful treatment" in physical medicine was defined  solely as "symptom eradication."Fortunatley, in recent years, medical provders have become more cognizant of overall "quality of life" issues and the emotional/psychologcial sequelae that affect the chronic pain population. Personally, I would take comfort in the fact that your doctor is viewing you as whole person, rather than just a black box of symptoms that need to be treated.

That's all fine and dandy if I WANTED to take the test, or if I was WILLING to shell out the $200. bucks!  I was FORCED to take this test, all patients MUST take this test if they want treatment from the Pain Management Clinic!

I can't see my pain managemnt doc until he sees the results of the stupid test.  Then he's gonna say "Gee, Judi, looks like you have a bit of occassional depression and you seem to be suffering from fatigue".  And I'm gonna say "Yeah doc, severe back pain has a tendency to piss people off, wear them out, and overall cause great frustration at the inability to carry out daily chores.  But thanks for the $200. dollar opinion, which I could have told you for FREE."

Psych, you obviously have no concept of out of control medical costs, and the average person's INABILITY to shell out $200. bucks at the drop of a hat.  You don't have a clue what happens to the average Joe when he can't come up with the extra money, especially around the holidays when money is tight enough already!

Well I can tell you what happens, they don't get treatment for their back pain!  That's right!  They go home, look at their bills, decide the power bill has to be paid first, and the back pain treatment has to be PUT OFF until sometime after the New Year, when they get a chance to cough up the extra money!  Chew on this: you are CAUSING people to SUFFER.  Suffer for weeks and weeks longer than necessary.

Like a lot of people my age, I have other medical problems I am dealing with, including the posibility of endometrial cancer, having to get surgery for that, which obviously takes priority over my aching back.  I had to cancel my appointment with the eye doc to do cateract surgery, coz I just can't afford it right now!

The ONLY thing this test does is wrecks havoc on my empty wallet, while plumping up the wallets of God knows how many folks who work in the psych system.  And wastes VALUABLE time, time I don't have, fooling around with nonsense.  I can quickly and easily describe my quality of life to my doc, I sure as heck didn't need some expensive test to do my talking for me.

I have very good insurance, BCBS, even so, the part I have to pay is quickly adding up to well over $1,000.00 and that Is BEFORE I get my bill for the endo surgery!  God only knows when I'll be able to get back to the eye doc, but please pat yourself on the back that your industry is hurting me.    

Twoblock wrote on Nov 25^th, 2008 at 3:03pm:

Judi You haven't seen anything yet. Look forward to all of us having to take MMPI 10 or 11 to detect our stress level caused by the Federal Reserve Globalist taking control of our lives and our unwillingness to work toward removing our idiot congress that allowed it to happen. They will use hundred dollar words, that is meaningless to the average citizen, to explain their five cent reasons for making us take it.

LOL, so true. ;)

Hi to all!

For those who want to 'practice'  MMPI-2  try this address and plug in your answers and the copy the results into MS word and print out.

Please don't jam up or abuse this site or it may disappear!
( I use it to weed out all the losers for free!)

www.fixcas.com/scholar/mmpi.htm

remember, they don't call me 'Mad Mikey' for nothin'!!!!

keep smilin'!!!

;)

I have a handful of the questions from when I took the test a month or so ago for the ARMY.  email electroniccourier@gmail.com  for info

Hi to all!

A good cheap place for books on MMPI is Ebay!!

I bought 2 off there for under $20 each. Just put 'MMPI' in the search window and let'r rip!

If you pick carefully you can get everything you need to figure it out, more over to do the test on your own and figure out the results and make sure the people testing you don't screw you over!!

Public libraries often don't have anything on MMPI, so this is the way to go!

see ya!


... remember, they don't call me 'Mad Mikey' for nothin'  !!

;)

Hi all!

Mad Mikey made a mistake!

EBAY  search  'MMPI Book'

The list of material is good, just bought another book on MMPI
for less then $10 shipping incl.!!


see ya!!!!

:D

Please be careful. The MMPI is a very good and thorough test, but must be interpreted by a trained counselor or psychologist. Anyone who would post these questions is not and it is irresponsible. This is a good test, but is also dangerous in the wrong hands.

JC

Dangerous???  Please explain how so. By saying such a thing, you are indicating that you know.

DippityShurff wrote on Aug 14^th, 2006 at 2:48am:

I guess I have always wondered if the MMPI and other personality inventory tests can be/have been defended in Court as valid instruments? Anybody have any information on this?

I've been studying this in my psychology class this semester. Though no test can ever give the complete picture of a person, the MMPI tests are highly regarded amongst psychologists. The MMPI is arguably the most effective.    

wrote on Dec 4^th, 2008 at 3:52am:

DippityShurff wrote on Aug 14th, 2006 at 2:48am: I guess I have always wondered if the MMPI and other personality inventory tests can be/have been defended in Court as valid instruments? Anybody have any information on this?   I've been studying this in my psychology class this semester. Though no test can ever give the complete picture of a person, the MMPI tests are highly regarded amongst psychologists. The MMPI is arguably the most effective.

I think it is safer to say that is the most emprically researched instrument, and has wide range of clinical utility, both diagnsotic and for treatment planning purposes. However, I generally prefer other briefer measures unless there is a specific reason I need to use it.  But yes, it is irresponsible (and illegal) to post the instrument online.  Scale elevations mean very differnt things depending on other scale elevations. What does Scale 3 represent when K is more than standard deviation above the mean? Does it really mean anything?  Should it be interpreted?  If all the Harris Lingoe scales of particular parent scale are elevated, but the parent scale itself isnt, what does this mean?  Can you interpret it, and if you do, what is your clinical rational for doing this?  Can you justify, both statisically and clinically, why this intepreation was done? How were the content scales constructed and keyed? How is this different from the way the clinical scales were keyed and constructed?  What does this mean when you interpret them?  If a content scale and clincial scale are discrepant from one another, what could be responsbile for this and what do these discrepancies represent clinically?  What if content scale DEP is elevated, but clinical Scale 2 isnt?  What does this represent? If the content scale ANX is elevated, but Scale 2 and 7 arent, what does this mean? Does the content subscale titled "Antisocial Practices", really measure this behavioral construct?  Scale names can be misleading ya know. How and at what T elevation do you intepret scale 8 if BIZ1 and BIZ2 are low?  How does that change the construct of what is realy being measured? And, do you know when you have to plot a non-K corrected profile? This is what clinical trianing provides, and you wont find all this stuff I mentioned in text books. This would be my argument for why interpretation by someone not trained is flawed and misinformed, and represnts an undue danger to the public through the risk of misdiagnosing, inappopriately diagnosing, or overlooking serious psychaitric disturbance. A persons emotional welfare/care is on the line here. Thats serious business if you ask me! This is also the rationale courts have used in decieding that this practice meets criteria for "malpractice" in tort litigation cases. Hence why we have licensing laws/requirements for practicing psychologists in all 50 states, right?

If people come across a bootlegeed copy on the internet and decide to "practice" it, so be it.  However, the literature on analogue malingering and coached malingering demonstates that this often a futile effort and can backfire unless you spend insane amounts of time reading about the clinical scales, content scales, validity scales, and so forth.  But that is me. I suppose I would just rather spend my time doing something else with my spare time.   ::)

"Admissability" of the MMPI itself in courts is not really an issue, because the MMPI itself is not entered as a piece of evidence. Courts can not, and do not, dictate what instrumens psychologists use in a court ordered psychological examination. However, the "Frye Standard" of admissability says that scientific evidence presented to the court as testimony must be interpreted by the court as "generally accepted" by a meaningful segment of the associated scientific community. This applies to procedures, principles or techniques that may be presented in the proceedings of a court case. In practical application of this standard, those who are proponents of a particular scientific issue must provide a number of experts to speak to the validity of the science behind the issue in question. The MMPI does indeed meets this standard, as there are literally hundreds of validity studies of the MMPI. Therefore, psychologists can depose or testify opinions based on the MMPI (and clinical interview among other things) to the court. It is up to the jury to deciede how much weight or credibility, if any, to give to this testimony.

PS: I sent a note to Pearson and the UM Press about the test being posted online.  Maybe they will shut it down, maybe not. Im not sure how they do it.  I have done my ethical duties either way.  Plus, someone would probably just host it on another site as soon as the other is taken offline. Se La Vee..... ::)

Hey   Psych1:

Say it ain't so!

don't take away my free MMPI  site!!

I love testing hires for free!!

Have a christmas heart!


see ya!

remember, they don't call me 'Mad Mikey' for nothin'!!

:D

JC

Are you going to defend your stupid ass statement or are you going to "hit and run"?  OTOH I guess it could be dangerous if used in the outhouse instead of softer paper. In untrained hands one could get a paper cut on one's hiney.

Ignorance is biss, I have takin this test over 6 times over a 7 year period and each time it has come up with a different answer, its a diagnosis test that does not look at just lies, but any type of incoherent, inappropriate thought patterns, that maybe considered twisted and deranged.  Any agency that uses this test will have there own criteria, so even if you attemp to cheat you will need to know the criteria for that agency to begin with you crappity smackin morons.

I took the test today and actually only had to answer 299 questions. I have to go back tomorrow and finish the last 24. I got side tracked with the receptionist and thought I was done. I do remember answering a lot of questions no but I think I will double check the questions I marked yes. Thanks for the heads up. What was the first question suppose to intend to do. What does it matter if you read a mechanics magazine? And the the question about whether I thought women should have equal sexual freedom. Was that suppose to make you unbios or somehow equal. I actually thought of my 3 young girls and wanted to answer no. But in the society we live in today everything has to be equal according to the statis quo.

Please send all 567, if possible.
Regards,
Bapat

Hey  Bapat  !!!


Dude!  having the quesions won't do you much good since you can't
possibly know how the questions are linked together!

There are like, 4-5 validation scales and 135 other clinical tests
computed from your answers.

Your attempt to second guess the test would fail somewhere and you'll
get caught-out!!!!

If you really got problems, don't try to fake it, it won't work!!
They have been working on perfecting MMPI since the 1930's!!!!

Stop smoking Pot and be a well adjusted smart-ass like me!!!

........'cause they don't call me 'Mad Mikey' for nothin'!!!!  LOL

see ya!!!

:D

I recently applied to work in Law Enforcement for the first time. After graduating from Universty, having plenty of work and volunteer experience I thought I would have a good chance of being hired. Anyways, after applying and passing the panel interview I did the MMPI2 and did not spend too much time thinking about the questions (as instructed). After doing the MMPI2 they made me and all the other applicants meet up with a psychologist. After meeting up with the psychologist they emailed me a letter 2 weeks later indicating that I would no longer be considered in the process. I am devastated because I honestly dont know what went wrong. So right now I am volunteering some more in order to keep busy. I am also looking for other ways to improve myself before re-applying again.

Payne

I will ask the same question that I have about polygraph. Why would you want to work for an intity that puts such faith in that crap? It's a total fraud on the taxpayers. As with the polygraph, it has NO validity in employment.

I agree with you Twoblock. I didn’t think it was fair either, I mean how could this happen to me. But I want to try again. I want to show them that I am not a quitter. I am going to improve myself as much as I can and re-apply after 6 months. Hopefully something good will happen the second time around. If not, I will give another Police Service a shot. Worst case scenario, I will switch career goals. At 23 years of age, I think I've got plenty of kick in me.  :)

Quote:

I agree with you Twoblock. I didn’t think it was fair either, I mean how could this happen to me. But I want to try again. I want to show them that I am not a quitter. I am going to improve myself as much as I can and re-apply after 6 months. Hopefully something good will happen the second time around. If not, I will give another Police Service a shot. Worst case scenario, I will switch career goals. At 23 years of age, I think I've got plenty of kick in me.  Smiley

Living well is the best revenge.  Don't eliminate the private sector as an opton.  Trust me,  more  $$$  Good luck!

TC

Hey Payne!

Dude!  Always think carefully about the questions and answer them
HONESTLY.  You may have been a bit careless and screwed yourself.

Other errors often made are when test takers mark their answer in
the wrong box, (off by 1 or 2 throughout the test) or even started marking in the wrong coloumn on the form, therefore all the answers
are totally screwed up!!

Good luck next time!

see ya!!

Thanks for all the advice and support fellas. You know its puzzling that my rejection letter did not say whether I passed or failed the MMPI2. It simply stated that I would no longer be in the process for that particular position.

Mind you that the position I applied for is called Prisoner Escort Officer. There is alot of competition in this field since every police service has a few Escort Officers while bigger cities have 20+.

Maybe I passed but was just not competetive enough and someone else got the job. Oh well, I'll man up and re-apply after some time. Hopefully the next time around they will see that I am a different and much more improved person.

Is it possible to view the rest of the test?ThanksPlease e-mail

Wow, this is pretty sad.  The MMPI is the most widely used, widely research psychological instrument in history.  It is, however, a poor instrument for screening law enforcement applicants if it is being interpreted by someone without any training on working with law enforcement officers.  The civilian profile looks different from the law enforcement profile.  If the examiner expects your profile to look like the "normal profile" you will get screened out.  If they understand uniformed service personnel, they will not screen out applicants so readily.  The problem isn't the test, it's unqualified examiners interpreting the test.  Talk to your departments about it if you are upset, but arguing that the MMPI is crap is a silly argument.  There is far too much research supporting it's use.  Also, publishing these questions online is a serious copyright infringement let alone the fact that you are breaking the law in the process of trying to be hired into law enforcement.  Pretty sad.

Hi all!

Well said POLICESHRINK!!!!

Since the 1940s all kinds of people in all walks of life have been profiled and compared to Control groups to verify the validity of the test and new tests developed around the standard 567 question set.

Look up any books by James N Butchner, (the U of M guy that runs all MMPI research).


...remember, they don't call me Mad Mikey for nothin'!!!
(da sanest crazy-guy to fly an L-39 in AZ!!)

see ya!
:D

Por favor me pueden pasar el resto del The MMPI-2 is made of 567 binary (true or false) items (questions).
Is it possible to view the rest of the test?ThanksPlease e-mail, but I only  have the first 75 out of 567 questions.  and I need see the rest
Thank's

Hi.

I am writing to ask you to please take down these questions, as it invalidates the test. I don't know if NCS Assessments could sue, but I do know that they would greatly appreciate you taking down this information. No one is supposed to have access to this information unless they are licensed psychologists or are in a graduate degree seeking licensure- it is strictly confidential information.

Thanks.

girl

Once information hits a computer it is NOT confidential any more. Computer guru's tell me that anyone's computer can be hacked. Even our nation's security systems, but the stupids keep using the net as a secured entity. During research for case law I have inadvertently hacked into places that I shouldn't have been and I'm far from being a computer guru. Though I immediately got out, I was still there.

thug cop you do not have those questions in the write order. so you guys be careeful, those guestions are there but not in that order!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hi,
I was trying to print the questions but only 15 of them is making it, the other 60 does not appear on the printing.
How can I get them?
Zolo

Hi all!

There's actually a couple of books written by Dr James N Butchner
where he actually listed all the questions used in MMPI-1 /-2 /-A.

So they are out there to be had if you locate the right book!

...remember they don't call me 'Mad Mikey' for nothin'!!

see ya!!

:D

Do you think I can get all of the MMPI2 question from you?
my email is samchi33k@yahoo.com   (1/29/2009)

Thank you

hey mate, i've found this really helpfully, and am wondering if you can help me out by sending me the rest of the q's...would really appreciatre it
cheers
alistair

zalgen1@yahoo.com :D

Hi Zolo / Samchi / Alistair!!

Just go to the link below:

www.fixcas.com/scholar/mmpi.htm

......remember, they don't call me 'Mad Mikey' for nothin'!!!!

Keep smilin'!!!

:D

List of popular MMPI books

wrote on Jan 20^th, 2009 at 2:04am:

thug cop you do not have those questions in the write order. so you guys be careeful, those guestions are there but not in that order!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The questions in the first post are from the MMPI, not the MMPI-2. When the MMPI was revised to become the MMPI-2 some questions where removed and some new ones added.

Which means MMPI was flawed so they change things and now it's MMPI-2 which again is flawed.  Next will it be MMPI-4? Since a test of this sort will always be flawed, the revision numbers go up and the scam will continue. Who says crime doesn't pay.

Hi to all !!

Nice to see a spirited discussion on all things MMPI!  Revisions to MMPI
are normal and occur over a long period of time since any change has to tested before it is legally admissable in various applications.

There is MMPI-1 (old) MMPI-2 (current) and MMPI-A (for kids)

Previously somebody mentioned the questions are out of order, they are numbered, take them as they come and answer carefully and honestly.

I used to doubt MMPI-2, but I know now after running tests on known good and known bad subjects that it works and even obtained 3rd party verification in one case as proof.

As I said before in this forum, clean yourself up, don't be perv and you could be normal after all!!!

Am I doctor? nope. do I have an undue interest? nope. I'm an ordinary
L-39 flyin' Joe that almost got jacked over by a court ordered shrink who was told I was 'schizophrenic' and then tried to make it stick!!!!

Well it took a year but that shrink lost her license!!!  thanks to me!!

So straigthen up and fly right and you'll be OK, unless you are a basket case, if so, get help!!!

......remember, they don't call me 'Mad Mikey' for nothin'!!!!

Keep smilin'!!!

:D

I just took the MMPI 2 for custody battle.  I had never heard of this test previously so I naturally began searching the internet to find out what its all about.  I found the site and re-took the test online by myself.  I noticed that the scales 4 and 6 were elevated (both above 70).  I found information on the internet that states women going through custody battles will often have an elevated 4 and 6.  Where can I find a profile of a woman that will show me what is considered "normal"??  I find it very difficult to accept that a psychologist (aka complete stranger) is going to provide testimony regarding my "fitness" when she knows very very little about me.  It seems ridiculous that 567 questions (which is nothing more than a "SNAPSHOT IN TIME") can have a profound effect in a court of law.
Thanks for comments and/or help!  

I recently took the mmpi-2 test and received feedback that did not match my personality at all. When I questioned the Psychologist regarding possible biases within the test he denied any bias existed. He also stated that he had not used any of my background information in his assessment. Was he lying or are there no biases for this test.

The reason I ask is that some of the questions I answered on the test may appear to be a false positive. For instance "People say insulting and vulgar things about me", I have filed complaints against co-workers for saying extremely inappropriate things about my ethnicity. I am not cynical in answering true to the question because it still is happening.

wrote on Feb 4^th, 2009 at 3:45pm:

There is MMPI-1 (old) MMPI-2 (current) and MMPI-A (for kids)

The restructured clinical (RC) scales where added to the MMPI-2 a while ago as an alternative to the original 10 clinical scales. The latest version is the MMPI-2-RF (Restructured Form).  Neither the RC nor RF has yet to become very widely used.

Neither the RC nor RF has yet to become very widely used.

[/quote]

I am not sure this is an accurate statement.  I know that Ben-Porath is currently working on a survey of such though.  In my experience, practioners (the ones who were most attached to their dear ole codetypes) are really liking it. Especially at the VA setting where I work, as well as in academic setings.  Some in PP may be slower to join in, but I would say it has been well recieved.

Twoblock wrote on Feb 3^rd, 2009 at 4:28pm:

Which means MMPI was flawed so they change things and now it's MMPI-2 which again is flawed.  Next will it be MMPI-4? Since a test of this sort will always be flawed, the revision numbers go up and the scam will continue. Who says crime doesn't pay.

This is also a very inaccurate interpretation. Fore example, when Microsoft came out with Vista, the purpose was to enhance and update over previous versions due to increases in technology that occur over time.  No? I am not sure why you have  the notion that updated editions of something imply that previous editions were fatally flawed? If this was the case for the MMPI, then they would have had to assemble new clinical groups and drastically change the questions. They did not. They simply updated antiquated language, and normed it on a sample that matched 1990 census data. This was necceary, since the demographic/ethnic make up of the country is so much different now than it was in 1939. Natural changes over time.  Not flawed theory or test construction.

Please post me all the questions of MMPI-2.
Thanks
Magie

sorry posted on wrong tread

Ladies and Gentlemen,  Relax please.  Most of the post i have read seem to deal with a sub-consious fear of testing.  This is the first portion of the test.  How doe this indiviual handle stress.. Althought the test has many questions a great deal are the same question re-worded or phrased.  a large portion of the results are from the interview and the post interview of the test results.  Face it if you are taking this test for Law enforcement standards the pre-interview will determine your attitude and abilities to handle the stress filled job of law enforcement.  Just look slowly at the 75 questions just relax and the answers will flow easily.  The whole design is to see if you are you or trying to be someone your not.  I recall a post from a former marine ( semper fi ) the test got you because you were thinking from a battlefield point of view.  Survival in war.  Law enforcement is not a complex battlefield of kill or be killed.  its gonna be 90 plus or minus boredom and 10 plus or minus percent shear terror or panic.  Just be yourself.  And if you get threw all the testing and training.  your primary goal is voluntary compliance.  serve your citizens and protect them, their children, and property.  we have enough JOHN WAYNES in this profession.  treat people as you would like to be treated and i promise you respect beyond your dreams.  dont get me wrong its not a cake walk but how you handle things will make the difference in a job you work, or a career of good memories, comrodarie , and people who will never forget your name.  Good luck.  Sorry about rattleing on.

@ this moment i am chuckling to myself.  
i 1st came across this msg board a few months ago.
quickly & simply found 567 things of interest!  (thanX mad Mikey)  
the reason for my inner amusement is that continually people keep asking for "all 567" of the questions.  & they have been posted TWICE!!  also the comment about "cheating" on a personality test is priceless!  
makes one wonder......Hmmm

......things that make ya' go "Hmmm"......

also comical is the all mighty Quest for the "correct" answers.  there are no right answers.  there are no wrong answers.  kinda like answering the following questions;  

TRUE or FALSE:
eg.                   1.  my hair is auburn
                       2.  i have green eyes
                       3.  kittens are my favorite animal
                       4.  blue is the color is like best
                           
trucker,  'tis true about the "stress factor".   & honesty.  honest answers work best.  as in the above examples, yes, you can look bad like answering TRUE to #2 when your eyes are blue.

anyhow, just remember, if taking the test~~~RelaX & be Honest.

Hi all!

Thanks for the credit,  susieT !!

A good point was raised: relax and don't out-smart yourself!!


see ya!

...remember they don't call me 'Mad Mikey' for nothin'!!

:D

I don't think anyone here really WANTS to cheat. I think it is fair to study something though, to know what you're up against. When it comes to a matter of ARE YOU THE RIGHT PERSON FOR THE JOB, I think this test is a pretty solid foundation for an employer to base their opinions. As a employee, I think it is fair to get a look at what you're facing.

In this light, I think both sides are correct.

There are a couple of old sayings I like that really describe this situation.

1) In fighting, the losers, generally speaking, are the ones who complain about broken rules.

2) "Your best? Losers always whine about their best. Winners go home and crappity smack the prom queen." --Sean Connery (as John Patrick Mason), "The Rock"

Let's face it. Big business, ANY big business, private, foreign, or government wants to know that their investments are secure. This includes investments made in employees. This is an ongoing fight, a fight which any business is clearly going to win. So. It is the employee who will lose, and cry about the rules, or what's fair, and not fair.

Likewise, we as employees have a right to equal oppurtunity. Leveling the playing field doesn't mean "trying our best". It means we level the playing field so no one has the high ground. Thise means no cheating, but no being surprised either.

So I feel that IF any business will issue an MMPI-2, then we should as employees come prepared, not to try our best, but to be the best employee. To be the employee that they are looking for.

As far as lie scales go. Yes. They know when you're lying. If your test looks remotely suspicious, you have to retake it. If you fail, generally, you retake it once, and if you fail again, you may be subject to a psychiatric evaluation.

These are tricky questions, and seeing as I have to take my test tomorrow, yes. I'm looking for information, but nevertheless, I will answer honestly. This test is not about fabricating answers. It's about honesty, and can you be honest enough to share your mental health (or lack thereof)?

In the end, if you're mentally sound, you'll win. If you're not, and you somehow find a loophole, consider this: Somewhere along the road, you will make a poorly based decision that will bite you hard in the ass. I'm talking investigations, inquiries, and jail time.

Ask yourself if this test is worth it, and if it is, what are the consequences down the road, six months, six years, or a decade ahead?

Figure it out for yourself.

I support both sides.

For you "unfair testing" critics, grow up, win, and go crappity smack the prom queen.

Anonymous

LOL

prom queen here~~~ready & waiting for a winner!!!!

Good morning Thug cop.....I am doing a college project on the MMPI-2 Test.  Would you please send me the entire list of questions so I can utilize them as class participation aides during my presentation?  I would greatly appreciate it.  Thank you!

Tracy H :)

no, because the test is copyrighted and it is agianst the law to copy or distribute it to the the lay public.

psych1 wrote on Feb 28^th, 2009 at 7:35pm:

no, because the test is copyrighted and it is agianst the law to copy or distribute it to the the lay public.

Is there a precedent on that?

I think if a person copies the questions for instructional purposes or research it falls under the fair use exception, doesn't it?

Thank you anyway.  I appreciate your rapid response.

Sergeant1107 wrote on Mar 1^st, 2009 at 10:05am:

psych1 wrote on Feb 28th, 2009 at 7:35pm: no, because the test is copyrighted and it is agianst the law to copy or distribute it to the the lay public. Is there a precedent on that? I think if a person copies the questions for instructional purposes or research it falls under the fair use exception, doesn't it?

Yes, this is a good point.  However, instructional purposes for what exactly, and to whom? Presented to grad students in a clinical psychology doctoral program, then yes, giving out the questions would be permissable because all doctoral students in clinical psychology are bound ethically (and in many states, legally) to the APA ethics code. It is pressumed (because you student practice license in on the line) that you know the legal and ethical quandries associated with releasing/sharing test information. Furthermore, they are being trained in the use and intepreation of the test as part of their clinical trianing. Students in an undgrad abnormal psych class are not bound by the APA ethics code and are not being formally trained in its use. I learned about the MMPI (and other measures of psychopathology) as an undergrad and was able to become familiar with its underlying theory, psychometric properties, and purpose without the professor handing out the entire test booklet.  Did they mention a question from the test in a lecture? Yes, I am sure they did.  But we did not get a test booklet. This was simply not needed for puposes of undergrad training.  At this stage, it all about theory and purpose.  When you in grad school, that when you need to get deeper, and learn interpetation as well.

This test will probably be the most important thing I do in my life, also
to everyone who has responded to this. I am not taking this test to
become a cop, FBI, or any other law enforcement agency employee,
I am doing this because I need a life altering surgery. If I want to be
pain free or hopefully close to it I need a Spin Stimulator put in, due to
damage from a accident to my neck.      So this test is new to me and in my opinion if your information on this test isn't informitive, why are you posting anything. This is a pretty scarry thing if people sit and listen to some of you go back and forth.  Quality info is much more appreciated.                                                    Thank- You

Trucker,
            After reading your post, I applaud you if there were any ?'s
about this test you've just answered them plain and simple!!!

                                                            Thanks
                                                                 w

Hi to all!

Hey!!!   Who are the poor sports who had my favorite self administered PPMI-2 site yanked off the web ?????

it used to be:

www.fixcas.com/scholar/mmpi.htm

it's a sad day in America.......

Mad Mikey is a Saaaaad Mikey...........


:D

Well I wrote Pearson and the APA and requested that your link be taken down back in January.  I'm actually sorry they are so slow. Red tape I guess...what can you do?.........

Mad Mikey

Where's your fighting spirit?  Put it up again and keep putting it up. Maybe some lawyer will see the violation of freedom of speach and expression. Like polygraphers, psyc 1 comes on here whining trying to save a rip-off industry. Keep putting it up and keep them busy here so they won't have time for rip-offs.

psych1 wrote on Mar 14^th, 2009 at 1:12am:

Well I wrote Pearson and the APA and requested that your link be taken down back in January.  I'm actually sorry they are so slow. Red tape I guess...what can you do?.........

Psych1
Will knowing the questions in advance or understanding MMPI test structure significantly skew results?

Are you aware of any EFFECTIVE countermeasures to an MMPI test?
(by effective, I mean are there any known countermeasures for MMPI that reduce the test's ability to identify potential psychological problems or that would allow someone to conceal a psychological problem the test was designed to illuminate?)
OR
Would MMPI countermeasure attempts actually be more likely to indicate a problem area where perhaps none existed?

I am NOT asking you to provide any specific information that would possibly enable someone to attempt to tamper with MMPI test results.

see below

psych1 wrote on Mar 14^th, 2009 at 10:45pm:

I'm not sure what you mean by "countermeasures"....but the MMPI has several embedded scales that tell psychologists if the individual has a tendebcey to respond a certain way. It suggests that they may be over pathologizing problems, or on the other hand, under reporting symptoms. This is done by using base rate sampling of item endorsements in both psychiatic and normative samples. Regression models are used to determine the probablity with which this sugestion becomes more and more likely. Because the test was contructed using a empirical keying aproach to assess psychoapthlogy and personality constructs (very different from what most people think, which is "rational item selecton") it is difficult to tell which questions are keyed to which scale. So, no, having the questions themselves is not that big a deal. But combine it with a text book and way to score the thing, and it would be plausable that a person could practice everything enough to where they could successfully feighn a profile. However, going to this great of a length to feighn a profile means the person is either 1) so paranoid or 2.) has so much pathology to hide, (or thinks he does) how they would manage to cover up all this pathology during a clinical interview and/or on other measures is beyond me.  This behavior in and of itserlf suggests hypervigilance, lack of trust and confidence, and decpetive behavior that is contraindicated in being a law enforcement officer. Who knows what else this potential officer might fake, lie, or make up, right? I think most reasonable persons would agree to this as well. The MMPI is not perfect, and results are always taken into account with a interview and complete history.

I have been reading many many of your messages.  Personally, you all have scared me to death.  I have been referred to a neuropsychologist by my psychiatrist and neuroligist due to both long-term and short-term memory loss after 36 ECT treatments.  I saw him onThursday and testing was begun.  I brought the MMPI-2 home and completed it.  I answered the questions truthfully.  Now you all have me afraid of what I may be "labeled" as.  I am sure depression will show up as I am being treated for that but who knows what else it will show.  Should I be concerned about this test.  Does anyone have any suggestions for help for my memory problems?

im sorry, to hear about your problems. However, you docs seem to be reffering you appropriatley to get to the bottom of your problems. In neuropsych evals, the purpose of the MMPI is to claify what memory problems may be associated with psychaitric factors such as anxiety, poor coping skills, and depression. Several psychiatic illnessses such as severe depression, bipolar disorsder, and schizophrenia are associated with cognitive problems in and of themselves. The MMPI is not used to  label you, it is already quite clear you have had severe depression since you have had ECT treatments.  Again, its used parse out what is psychiatric and what is neurologic, and to see help clarify which one is contributing most  to your memory problems.

Please talk to the neuropsychologist about what can be done to help your memory problems.  I dont know the specifics of your case and it is unethical to commment or give medical, or mental health advise on this forum.

psych1 wrote on Mar 14^th, 2009 at 10:49pm:

This behavior in and of itserlf suggests hypervigilance, lack of trust and confidence, and decpetive behavior that is contraindicated in being a law enforcement officer. Who knows what else this potential officer might fake, lie, or make up, right? I think most reasonable persons would agree to this as well.

Well said.  I think exactly the same statement would apply to anyone who attempted countermeasures on a pre-employment polygraph for a law enforcement agency.

Thank you for your reply.  You are correct.  I have been suffering from severe depression since a serious auto accident which left me unable to work as a nurse any longer-something I dearly loved.  I completed a whole battery of tests the other day, which I could tell I did not do very well on.  I just wish there was an answer to solve my problem with my memory and I don't understand how the MMPI-2 plays a role in that.  I suppose to get a better view of the "total" me.  It is funny, I have gone from a college graduate to someone barely able to follow a recipe and must write notes for everything.  I lose things all the time and get lost in places I have always gone before.  Thanks for writing back.

Twoblock wrote on Mar 14^th, 2009 at 8:22am:

Keep putting it up and keep them busy here so they won't have time for rip-offs.

Yes, yes..... Im sure all psychologists will come here to fight rather than designing new and better assesment measures or seeing their patients...lol.  Get real......

Sometimes when you dont understand a subject matter (i.e., psychometric theory, multivariate statisitics, personality assessment) its best to keep your mouth shut and defer the judegments to those who do, lest you look foolish. My mother taught me this at an early age. Just like tommy cruise....everyone wants to play amateur psychologist/psychiatist, right?

wrote on Feb 14^th, 2009 at 8:11pm:

also comical is the all mighty Quest for the "correct" answers.  there are no right answers.  there are no wrong answers.  kinda like answering the following questions;   TRUE or FALSE: eg.                   1.  my hair is auburn                        2.  i have green eyes                        3.  kittens are my favorite animal                        4.  blue is the color is like best

OF COURSE, there are right & wrong answers. The right answer is the one that the tester is looking for ... and the wrong answer is the one that pegs the person has having something "undesirable".

The actual test has no questions AT ALL along the lines of green eyes, favourite colour etc.  

Some of the actual questions are very obvious attempts to check if a person has psychiatric problems. Hence:
"Evil spirits possess me at times" True/False?

Now, it's pretty obvious that if you're applying for a job as a cop, then it's definitely the WRONG answer to say that you're possessed by evil spirts. This'll get you pegged as a lunatic & there's no way you'll get the job. Instead the best thing to do (even if you are actually possessed by spirits) :) is to answer False.

In some other circumstances, for example, when trying to plead "not guilty due to insanity" :) it would actually be the RIGHT answer to reply "True" to this question.

Other questions in the test are more subtle & the right or wrong answer is not immediately obvious ... but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

For example:
"I get angry sometimes." True/False?

Now, a normal person always gets angry "sometimes", so I suspect this question was put in as a control to see if a person is lying. So it may be the right answer to admit that "yeah, I do get angry sometimes".

The real check for anger management issues, I think, is other questions such as:
"Sometimes I get so angry and upset I don't know what comes over me." True/False?

Now, a "normal" person would get angry sometimes, but not to the extent of "losing control". So, the right answer here (for the cop interview, anyway) is to reply False.


wrote on Feb 14^th, 2009 at 8:11pm:

trucker,  'tis true about the "stress factor".   & honesty.  honest answers work best.  as in the above examples, yes, you can look bad like answering TRUE to #2 when your eyes are blue. anyhow, just remember, if taking the test~~~RelaX & be Honest.

No, honest answers do NOT work best if, for example, you really want that cop job to feed your family, but you suffer from occassional episodes of demonic possession. :)

If you want the job, then the only option is to lie through your teeth and claim to be just like "everyone else" ... not a saint (because that would show that you are lying) :) .... but just a normal "Joe Average".

Personally, I feel it WOULD be useful to go over the questions first, and think of what it is that "The Man" would be looking for as the "ideal" replies.

And I think it is precisely because of this empowerment, that the "The Man" is so afraid of the questions getting leaked & wants to keep them a secret.

And I think it is precisely because of this empowerment, that the "The Man" is so afraid of the questions getting leaked & wants to keep them a secret.[/quote]

Or we could be slightly more parsimonous here and say that perhaps it is because 1.) it's a copyright violation due to the fact that developing and norming the test was expensive and test companies would like to be able to pay for this process by actually sellng the test(much like a publishing company sells a book, rather than giving it away) 2.) to ensure the integrity of the test in order to minimize the likleyhood that some would attempt to develop amateurish scorring progams that can assist individuals in attemtping to succsfully feign profiles.  

I'm not sure about you, but this seems much more parsimonous and logical. However, I do understand that some people will always be distrustful of "The Man"...although I must admit, I've never been sure who this is actually reffering to. I've never thought of myself much as "the man" seeing as that I am a female  :)

I have to do some research on predicting behaviors...so I was wondering if you could e-mail me the rest of the questions for me to use as my instrument!! I would really appreciate it!!

No, because the test is copyrighted and it is against the law (and unethical) to copy or distribute it to the the lay public.  

As an aside...predicting behavior? The MMPI is notorioulsy poor at predicting anything except psychotherapy treatment outcomes. It's not even a very good predictor of job performance, although "mental health" taken as a whole tends to be powerful predictor. Psychologists, much less anyone else, are poor predictors of almost all complex human behavior variables, including violence, criminal recidivism, etc.  Meehl (1954) demonstrated the superiority of actuarial methods  over clinical judgment for predicting behaviors.... we have just been slow to accept this notion. If anyone was actually good at predicting behavior, then the controversy surrounding parole and "early release" programs would be significantly less.

What behavior(s) are you ypu interested in trying to predict anyway? The tool you choose to employ will depend on what behaviors/type of behaviors your interested in.

Hi to all!!!

SUBJECT: SELF ADMINISTERED MMPI-2 TEST SITE:

On a serious note:  When I found the site listed below, it helped save the life of a person who did not know how to communicate the problems they had, as a result they suffered with schizophrenia for many years and was at the edge of doing injury to themselves and others. By helping get the test done and using myself as a 'Control' sample we printed out a result that helped prompt a 'Doctor' to finally do their job.

Since then, I have been a fan of the MMPI-2 test and the possibilities it has when used correctly. For us unwashed mortals it gives us at least an idea of where to look.

EVERYONE here should give 'PSYCH1' a swift kick in the @#% for protecting his turf above all else!!!  He has done a disservice to us all
by limiting access to knowledge with the excuse that MMPI-2 can be abused.  Anything can be abused, cars, booze, drugs, relationships, guns, power or knowledge - are we to live in the stone age 'pysch1'?

The MMPI-2 copyright protection psych1 refers to cannot be any greater then when it has been published in various books by Dr. James N Butcher himself (UM authority on MMPI-2).

LOOK UP  ISBN # 1-55798-182-5    (see pages 233 to 246)


RIP little buddy:
www.fixcas.com/scholar/mmpi.htm  ('thanks' to 'psych1')


......for now, Mad Mikey is a Saaaaaaad Mikey.....

try to keep smilin'!!!  (except psych1)

:D

There are several other MMPI & MMPI-2 tests on the Internet. Just use your favorite search engine to find them. Try various keywords and don't stop at the first page of search restults.

MMPI BOOKS ON EBAY!!!!!

Now that I have your attention, theres lots of good books out there on the cheap including Ebay when you search 'MMPI' and see what pops up - unless 'psych1' corners the market to keep this stuff out our hands!!! LOL

2 other books I liked are:

Essentials of MMPI-2 and MMPI-A Interpretation by none other then
James N Butcher  ISBN # 0-8166-2100-4
He decontructs the tests and explains them in a readable manner.

MMPI-2 Assessing Personality and Psychopathology
John R Graham  ISBN # 0-19-506068-7
A much dryer read but still very useful

One thing to remember is that a lot of this relies on methodology for assessment and statistics a lot of folks won't get, but if you like to calculate the statistical probability of getting 2 flat tires at once, etc,
there's a world of info out there at a whole other level!

But these 2 books and the previous book mentioned in the earlier post are the books I rely on when helping out pals that are getting jacked over in custody disputes!

They may call me 'Mad Mikey' but I was as sane as can be when I finally took the test for real myself!!!  But hey! I'm just an engineer from my Fermilab days, with my powers of deductive reasoning, I'd already figured out the design of the test 6 questions in!

But I know  of several cases where the test was admininstered incorrectly by shrinks paid to fail people and they had no idea they were jacked over.
stuff to watch for:
- Never accept an Answer sheet or MMPI question book that is marked up or was marked up and erased.
- Never get suckered into answering only 300 or 400 questions, the 'short test'
- Mark or answer sheet with the HB pencil real hard so no one can change your answers.
- Write your name and sign the sheet in INK so your name is not swapped onto another sheet.  If some on else marks your name on the sheet, authenticate it with your signature.
- Be sure the answer sheet and question book versions match, sounds stupid but some doctors mix them up and you get screwed!
- Be sure the question number you read and the one you mark are exactly the same! With 567 questions to mark in columns, you could make this mistake at any time.
- Don't lie! None of us are really good liers anyway, plus other tests and the observations of a good doctor is gonna figure you out! they've seen it all after a while!
- Be honest, look in the mirror and get your sh#t fixed up, you'll be better off in the long run!


....they don't call me Mad Mikey for nothin' !!!!!!!!!!!!

see ya!

:D

Mad Mikey

I was sure you would be back. Welcome

If you worked at Fermilab, there's a polygrapher that visits here often that may wish to discuss particle separation with you.

mad Mikey wrote on Mar 20^th, 2009 at 5:22am:

But these 2 books and the previous book mentioned in the earlier post are the books I rely on when helping out pals that are getting jacked over in custody disputes! :D

Perhaps you could enlighten me on the rationale for licensing and board certification in the psychological sciences and medicine? If you can not answer this question, I think it wise that you consider it.

To   'psych1'

Of course medical professionals need to be licensed - or it would be way worse!!!!!!

But folks in duress, ie, custody disputes will never know if a test was screwed up by sloppy work if they have no idea what to look for and are preoccupied by their problems at the same time.

This gets much worse when 'Child Protection Agencies' think dirty and jack you over because a nasty grandma decides to make a false claim.

Shrinks that work for these agencies have Expert Witness Immunity for any testimony they give and any report they write is considered 'prima facie' evidence (considered true unless you prove otherwise).  That means ordinary folks need big bucks to defend themselves, not good in this economy.

We are citizens, we have the right to know!  If MMPI-2 is suposed to be a secret, then none of the books should be printed in the conventional way with ISBN #s, etc and found in libraries or Ebay!!!

It reminds me of a collection of top secret books during WWII for radar development and nightvision systems, etc, they all had serial numbers and and to be signed out to companies under contract to build equipment for the allied effort.  These books were a technology transfer vehicle, theory, practice and construction of new equipment. Now that's secret - not MMPI-2!

.....remember they don't call me 'Mad Mikey' for nothin' !!!!!

see ya

:D

So where do you draw the line? Should we encourage the public to perform surgery on themselves or others (without a license) in case their surgeon makes an error?  You know, this way we can just try it out on our neighbors after reading the Grey's Anatomy testbook and a suture manual. The fact is, although you may indeed have a basic understanding if the MMPI itself from thouroghly reading Butcher's text, you are not trained in psychological assessment. (i.e., integrating information from tests score, clinical observation, and knowlege about personality theory and psychopathology/psychiatric diagnosis to describe a person). Big difference betwen testing and assessment. It's not just about a test score. If this is all it was, this wouldn't be a doctoral level profession.  

Additionally, what is the rationale for requiring a doctoral degree if the subject to be mastered requires no more than reading a test textbook? I find this to be extraordinarly naive and demostrative of a lack of understanding of the complexities of personality/psychiatric assessment.

Shrinks that work for these agencies have Expert Witness Immunity for any testimony they give and any report they write is considered 'prima facie' evidence (considered true unless you prove otherwise).  

Lastly, where on earth did you get this idea?! This is categorically false! You obviously have no formal training in jurisprudence either do you?

I propose that if we trash a test, we talk shit about the Rorschach Inkblot Test. I mean, can we please bury this thing?  I will gladly scientific trash this test with the rest of you. Fortunately, it is used less and less nowadays, especailly in legal or forensic settings.

na

psych1,

What is the purpose of question #69 cited in the first post of this message thread:

(yes or no) "I am very strongly attracted by members of my own sex."

Do you think this is an appropriate question for prospective employees to be asked?

George W. Maschke wrote on Mar 21^st, 2009 at 7:27am:

psych1, What is the purpose of question #69 cited in the first post of this message thread: (yes or no) "I am very strongly attracted by members of my own sex." Do you think this is an appropriate question for prospective employees to be asked?

All I can say is that is NOT item 69 on the MMPI-2.  The person posted the orginal MMPI question list (not MMPI-2), which has been out of use for some 25 years now. Further, an employer never sees an inividual's actual answers or responses from the MMPI-2 anyway. It is not given by them, its done by a contracted psychologist whos ethics code (APA, 2002) strickly forbays sharing raw test data with employers (or anyone who is not a licensed psychologist for that matter). There is no reasson to either.  Again, using an interview to inform the assessment, the psychologist simply writes a report (or verbally reports) an opinion regarding job fitness and/or mental health.

psych1,

Are you quite sure? I yesterday received a letter from a lawyer for NCS Pearson, Inc. who avers that the first post in this message thread contains material from the MMPI-2.

Most of the questions in the MMPI where retained in the revised MMPI-2, so the first post does contain some MMPI-2 content.

The complete set of questions from both the MMPI and MMPI-2 are available here

George W. Maschke wrote on Mar 21^st, 2009 at 9:21am:

psych1, Are you quite sure? I yesterday received a letter from a lawyer for NCS Pearson, Inc. who avers that the first post in this message thread contains material from the MMPI-2.

There is considrable item overlap betwen the two versions. I am sure Pearson simply saw the title "MMPI-2" and the list of questions.  I doubt they have time to read through all 567 to see from which version it is or to see of they are all completely accurate.

As I mentioned earlier, a lawyer for NCS Pearson, Inc. has sent AntiPolygraph.org a letter averring that the first post in this message thread contains material from the MMPI-2 and demanding that it be deleted. For the full text of the letter, and AntiPolygraph.org's reply, see AntiPolygraph.org Receives (and Rejects) a Copyright Takedown Request on the blog.

psych1

Ref: your analogy concerning the public performing surgery on themselves without a license: This presents an opportunity for me to share my personal experience and refute your analogy. I have removed three basal cell carcenomas and one melanoma from my face and temple. Two of the carcenomas were previously surgically remove by a dermatologist and came back. After my treatment they have never come back.  Six others, through my involvement, have been successfully cured. I have not experienced a failure. I have four personal friends that have cured themselves with this product who had been sent home to die by the medical profession.

Another example: I have a degree in Bus. Adm. and had a suit and tie job for a number of years. Without additional formal education, I have acquired expert status in the precious metals business which includes all technical aspects of prospecting, developing, assaying, producing, designing and refining to purity precious metals. All this without associated technical degrees.

I consider your statement that success in any endeavor requires a degree in the field is arrogant and self serving.

Twoblock wrote on Mar 22^nd, 2009 at 10:57pm:

psych1 I consider your statement that success in any endeavor requires a degree in the field is arrogant and self serving.

I dont recall saying this. I believe I made it perfectly clear that I was talking specifcally about knowledge of psychological assessment.

The first post in this discussion thread is temporarily unavailable due to a DMCA takedown notice received by our web hosting company's bandwidth provider. We have sent our service provider a counter-notice and plan to have the original content of this post back up no later than 6 April 2009.

For more on the DMCA, see, "DMCA Take-Down....Or Copyright Law Breakdown?" by Stephen Luther:

http://www.dri.org/ContentDirectory/Public/Newsletters/0045/2007%20Commercial%20Litigation%20Committee%20Business%20Suit%2006%20June.pdf

For discussion of this situation, please see AntiPolygraph.org Receives (and Rejects) a Copyright Takedown Request on our blog and Dealing With a Copyright Takedown Request? on Slashdot.org.

First off, I'd like to thank you, psych1, for your explanations of how the MMPI works; You've already answered some of the questions I was going to ask.

However, I still have a few. Many questions seem to have several different interpretations, or connotations that can completely change how you would answer the question. If this only occurred once in a while, I'm sure it would average out. However, it seems far to frequent for comfort.

A big problems seems to come from subjectively rating a subjective qualifier, and then trying to stuff it into a true/false matrix.
Questions that start, "I sometimes have... [statement]"
Let's say [statement] happens all the time. The answer should be 'false', since 'sometimes' is far removed from 'all the time'. If [statement] happens hardly at all, the answer is still 'false', since 'sometimes' is also far removed from 'hardly at all'. Only when your frequency of [statement] approaches 50/50 should you answer 'true'. The problem, I'd wager, is that many people are going to answer 'true' if [statement] happens all the time, and 'false' if it happens seldomly. The reasoning being if it happens often, then logically, that includes sometimes, therefore the answer is 'true'.
How are these differences reconciled?

Then there are connotative differences. Take the T/F questions: "I would like to be an used car salesman." And, "I would like to sell automobiles." These questions were listed in a Psychology textbook as an example of repeated questions to test for consistent answers. Yet, I can think of many legitimate reasons why they might be answered differently. What if someone has the image of the sleaze-ball used car salesman that would sell his grandmother a lemon, as compared to the guy selling brand new cars from the factory. That person will likely score as deceptive or inconsistent.

Now to look at some actual MMPI examples:
3) I wake up fresh and rested most mornings.
Is the question testing for 'fresh and rested' or 'mornings'? If one has a schedule where they wake up in the evening, it seems like you should simply transpose 'evening' for 'morning'. But this is exactly the sort of interpretation we're not supposed to read into, since we can't be sure if we're being categorized into a statistical group (night shift people or 'morning person') or testing for poor sleep habits. What if the answer is, "It depends on what day it is?" What about, "Right now, yes. If I actually get a job and have to wake up at a particular time, probably not."

4) I think I would enjoy the work of a librarian.
Ok, is this asking about what you think a librarian does? Maybe a stereotypical librarian? Or what an librarian job is really like? How many people actually know what a librarian job is really like? Or is this question referring to liking quiet scholarly pursuits? Perhaps it refers to helping others find information, almost like solving a problem? Perhaps it refers to a fondness for organization?

5) I am easily awakened by noise.
What kind of noise? Normal, random, sounds from outside? Or a child crying next you? Quiet conversation in the next room? Laughing in the next room? This question is way to vague. Normal every-day sounds? No. Unexpected banging near my head? Yes. How would I answer this?

Only five questions in, and already three of them have serious wording issues.
And I didn't even complain about question 2) "I have a good appetite." I'm reasonably certain that 'good' in this instance refers to normal or appropriate. However, anyone speaking this line in real life would probably have meant 'I'm very hungry' i.e. more so than normal.

Moving right along...
7) I like to read newspaper articles on crime.
Imagine the thought process upon reading this question:
"Well, sure, I guess. But I wouldn't say I like them over other articles. But I don't hate them. I guess I don't like them, I'm indifferent. So that would be 'false' then. But saying 'false' seems to suggest I don't like them. Ok, I'll put 'true' here, and next time I see something similar I'll put 'false' so it'll even out."
Do you see where I'm going with this?

24) Evil spirits possess me at times.
Ok, WTF. Who is going to answer 'true' to this question? I'd postulate even a person who believes this to be true, is going to answer this 'false', especially while applying for a job. Ok, granted, maybe you're not actually checking for insanity, but rather a statistical category. Would that category happen to be the people who answer 'true' just to see what'll happen?

25) I would like to be a singer.
Ah, it's the same problems as question 4, but more so. Again, I'm going to say that most people don't actually know what it's like to be a singer. Are we talking about the myriad stereotypical singers, or actual singers?
This question even has a talent conditional thrown in. As in, if I had the talent to do so, yes. But seeing as I don't, no. Which way should I answer this question?

34) I have never been in trouble because of my sexual behavior.
Define 'trouble' i this context, please. Trouble as in, I got arrested? Or trouble as in, I got caught cheating? Or trouble as in, I got an STD? Or trouble as in, my mom caught me masturbating? Does this question imply deviant behavior? What's considered deviant? Also, some people equate trouble with simple embarrassment, does that count?

68) I sometimes tease animals.
Define 'tease' in this context, please. Good natured teasing one might engage in with a family pet? Reading teasing as closer to playing. Or the cruelty a kid might inflict on a squirrel? Reading teasing as mischief. What about shouting 'Moo!' to cows out of the window of a moving car?

I'll stop here as I think I've covered most of the types of problems.
It seems like some of these questions are deliberately vague. If that's the case, then it is up to the test taker to interpret them, and I have trouble seeing how that's useful. If there are multiple interpretations, than how is anyone able to tell what I meant and put me in a category?
Regardless, if they're up for interpretation, I'd be able to answer some because I can feel like I'm 'leaning' towards a particular interpretation, and therefore an answer. But there would still be many that are basically unanswerable without clarification. Seeing as there is never any clarification (and the non-PhD test administrators would probably be unqualified to comment anyway) I'm always inclined to remember how I answered, and then answer the other way on a similar question later. But apparently that's not correct to do either. Where does that leave me?

About copyright.
I mean no offense, but you would do well to brush up on your impression of what copyright is, and what it isn't. The quoting of a few questions in a discussion about how the test works easily falls under fair use. e.g. This post. The purpose of copyright is never to stifle discussion.
Your claim that because we aren't studying psychology gives us no moral or ethical reason to see or quote the questions is quite misguided. Or did I mis-read what you said?
I will, however, agree that posting the whole test would be a copyright violation. (Though trying to combat it is a lost cause - if anything, it makes sure more people see it. Streisand Effect, anyone?) As for the 75 questions originally posted here, that's probably going to be considered fair use. But, it depends on more factors than just a flat percentage of the work. (See fair use link above)
You've taken a rather over-defensive copyright stance with regard to this work. Do you work on/for/research/publish the MMPI?
And finally, if seeing the questions invalidates the test, then the test is flawed. Just as in cryptography, if seeing the encryption algorithm breaks the encryption, then that encryption scheme is flawed.

http://geisel.narod.ru/mmpi2.htm

Thank you comrade!

TC

Desprez wrote on Mar 24^th, 2009 at 11:51am:

First off, I'd like to thank you, psych1, for your explanations of how the MMPI works; You've already answered some of the questions I was going to ask. However, I still have a few. Many questions seem to have several different interpretations, or connotations that can completely change how you would answer the question. If this only occurred once in a while, I'm sure it would average out. However, it seems far to frequent for comfort. A big problems seems to come from subjectively rating a subjective qualifier, and then trying to stuff it into a true/false matrix. Questions that start, "I sometimes have... [statement]" Let's say [statement] happens all the time. The answer should be 'false', since 'sometimes' is far removed from 'all the time'. If [statement] happens hardly at all, the answer is still 'false', since 'sometimes' is also far removed from 'hardly at all'. Only when your frequency of [statement] approaches 50/50 should you answer 'true'. The problem, I'd wager, is that many people are going to answer 'true' if [statement] happens all the time, and 'false' if it happens seldomly. The reasoning being if it happens often, then logically, that includes sometimes, therefore the answer is 'true'. How are these differences reconciled? Then there are connotative differences. Take the T/F questions: "I would like to be an used car salesman." And, "I would like to sell automobiles." These questions were listed in a Psychology textbook as an example of repeated questions to test for consistent answers. Yet, I can think of many legitimate reasons why they might be answered differently. What if someone has the image of the sleaze-ball used car salesman that would sell his grandmother a lemon, as compared to the guy selling brand new cars from the factory. That person will likely score as deceptive or inconsistent. Now to look at some actual MMPI examples: 3) I wake up fresh and rested most mornings. Is the question testing for 'fresh and rested' or 'mornings'? If one has a schedule where they wake up in the evening, it seems like you should simply transpose 'evening' for 'morning'. But this is exactly the sort of interpretation we're not supposed to read into, since we can't be sure if we're being categorized into a statistical group (night shift people or 'morning person') or testing for poor sleep habits. What if the answer is, "It depends on what day it is?" What about, "Right now, yes. If I actually get a job and have to wake up at a particular time, probably not." 4) I think I would enjoy the work of a librarian. Ok, is this asking about what you think a librarian does? Maybe a stereotypical librarian? Or what an librarian job is really like? How many people actually know what a librarian job is really like? Or is this question referring to liking quiet scholarly pursuits? Perhaps it refers to helping others find information, almost like solving a problem? Perhaps it refers to a fondness for organization? 5) I am easily awakened by noise. What kind of noise? Normal, random, sounds from outside? Or a child crying next you? Quiet conversation in the next room? Laughing in the next room? This question is way to vague. Normal every-day sounds? No. Unexpected banging near my head? Yes. How would I answer this? Only five questions in, and already three of them have serious wording issues. And I didn't even complain about question 2) "I have a good appetite." I'm reasonably certain that 'good' in this instance refers to normal or appropriate. However, anyone speaking this line in real life would probably have meant 'I'm very hungry' i.e. more so than normal. Moving right along... 7) I like to read newspaper articles on crime. Imagine the thought process upon reading this question: "Well, sure, I guess. But I wouldn't say I like them over other articles. But I don't hate them. I guess I don't like them, I'm indifferent. So that would be 'false' then. But saying 'false' seems to suggest I don't like them. Ok, I'll put 'true' here, and next time I see something similar I'll put 'false' so it'll even out." Do you see where I'm going with this? 24) Evil spirits possess me at times. Ok, WTF. Who is going to answer 'true' to this question? I'd postulate even a person who believes this to be true, is going to answer this 'false', especially while applying for a job. Ok, granted, maybe you're not actually checking for insanity, but rather a statistical category. Would that category happen to be the people who answer 'true' just to see what'll happen? 25) I would like to be a singer. Ah, it's the same problems as question 4, but more so. Again, I'm going to say that most people don't actually know what it's like to be a singer. Are we talking about the myriad stereotypical singers, or actual singers? This question even has a talent conditional thrown in. As in, if I had the talent to do so, yes. But seeing as I don't, no. Which way should I answer this question? 34) I have never been in trouble because of my sexual behavior. Define 'trouble' i this context, please. Trouble as in, I got arrested? Or trouble as in, I got caught cheating? Or trouble as in, I got an STD? Or trouble as in, my mom caught me masturbating? Does this question imply deviant behavior? What's considered deviant? Also, some people equate trouble with simple embarrassment, does that count? 68) I sometimes tease animals. Define 'tease' in this context, please. Good natured teasing one might engage in with a family pet? Reading teasing as closer to playing. Or the cruelty a kid might inflict on a squirrel? Reading teasing as mischief. What about shouting 'Moo!' to cows out of the window of a moving car? I'll stop here as I think I've covered most of the types of problems. It seems like some of these questions are deliberately vague. If that's the case, then it is up to the test taker to interpret them, and I have trouble seeing how that's useful. If there are multiple interpretations, than how is anyone able to tell what I meant and put me in a category? Regardless, if they're up for interpretation, I'd be able to answer some because I can feel like I'm 'leaning' towards a particular interpretation, and therefore an answer. But there would still be many that are basically unanswerable without clarification. Seeing as there is never any clarification (and the non-PhD test administrators would probably be unqualified to comment anyway) I'm always inclined to remember how I answered, and then answer the other way on a similar question later. But apparently that's not correct to do either. Where does that leave me? About copyright. I mean no offense, but you would do well to brush up on your impression of what copyright is, and what it isn't. The quoting of a few questions in a discussion about how the test works easily falls under fair use. e.g. This post. The purpose of copyright is never to stifle discussion. Your claim that because we aren't studying psychology gives us no moral or ethical reason to see or quote the questions is quite misguided. Or did I mis-read what you said? I will, however, agree that posting the whole test would be a copyright violation. (Though trying to combat it is a lost cause - if anything, it makes sure more people see it. Streisand Effect, anyone?) As for the 75 questions originally posted here, that's probably going to be considered fair use. But, it depends on more factors than just a flat percentage of the work. (See fair use link above) You've taken a rather over-defensive copyright stance with regard to this work. Do you work on/for/research/publish the MMPI? And finally, if seeing the questions invalidates the test, then the test is flawed. Just as in cryptography, if seeing the encryption algorithm breaks the encryption, then that encryption scheme is flawed.

I can't answer all of this zillion part question.

However,The MMPI is NOT interpreted at an individual item level. If you consider having headaches once a month "frequent"....thats fine by me.  Items were keyed to a scale by using clinical criterion groups during a norming process. If you think you have headaches "frequently"......that's all need to know. You are thinking (i.e., endorsing) just like the criterion group for that question.  It doesn't really matter how frequently they actually occur because it not really the headaches themselves that are the point. The test is just seeing if you indentify in the same way the clinical criterion group did. In other words, you identified yourself as having them frequenly, just like they did, no matter what "frequently" actually means to you. I dont really care how you or any of the critrion group defined the abstarct notion of "frequently." You think you have headaches "frequently"......just as they thought they had headaches "frequently." It would be just one questiion out of dozens that could potetially indentify you as endorsing similair to the criterion group. NOW, Could this item inividual endorsement be toally meaningless?  OF COURSE! That's why we dont look at individual items for content! Many times it is just totally meaningless, and/or totally by chance that you happen to be endorsing like the criterion group. However, when you are endorsing 25 out of 30 items like the clinical criterion group (rather than just 4 or 5 items), then we can say with a much greater degree of likelyhood that your indentification (i.e. similarity) to the criterion group is not by random chance, statistically speaking. Once this termination is made, then this is where clincial training, experience, and clinical judegment fill in the blanks and guide final intepretation of whether the scale that was elevated by those 25 endorsesments is clinically meaningful for the individual case in question.  

In the instances where I do loook at individual items for their content, I ask the client to "tell me more about that"; especially questions involving risk for self-harm, legal problems/violence, or substance abuse. For example, I might say, "Mr. X, I see here that you said you have been in touble with the law?"  As you pointed out, this could be anything from a speeding ticket to serial murder depending on how he interpreted the questions. In this case I would simply say: "So Mr. X, you endorsed having been in trouble with the law before.......tell me a little bit more about that." The  client then describes the situations/circumstances, and ta-da, no more ambiquity.

Ok to be honest,i dont understand this:

L Lie 11   83

I have a high lie score here. I am not sure why, i answered everything to the best of my ability and yet it says i scored very high on the lie portion. How can that be? I dont understand.

I would not take the name of the scale too literally, especially in isolation. Having a high L scale in and of itself is really not an issue, especially when considering the population (i.e., prospective employees), and simply denotes some unusual responding there.  By itself, it doesn't suggest anything more than that.

Yea, i took it twice. I am trying to be a police officer. Everything on the result i got seems to be inline. yet the L-lie score seems high, too high. But hopefully it wont be a disqualifier, i really answered to the best of my ability.

JSP wrote on Mar 25^th, 2009 at 10:34pm:

Yea, i took it twice. I am trying to be a police officer. Everything on the result i got seems to be inline. yet the L-lie score seems high, too high. But hopefully it wont be a disqualifier, i really answered to the best of my ability.

You seem to have an awful lot of trust in the accuracy of an illegally bootlegged scoring program?  It is somewhat amazing to me that people's hypervigilance/paranoia about this issue doesnt extend to having any skepticism or distrust regarding the accuracy of materials provided by strangers on an internet chat forum. If your distrustful about one, why would you not be distrustfull about the other.

If the questions themselves are completely unimportant, than why not just have very abstract questions asking to pick between different words, like:
1) Red or Blue
2) Car or Train
3) Fast or Slow
ext.

I mean, couldn't you build up the same statistical models about groups answering similarly, or interpret/assign meanings to the questions similarly?

And then you wouldn't have to worry about a 'Lie' index, because why would you lie about 'Red or Blue', and you don't have to worry about some people thinking a particular question is going to disqualify them.

Desprez wrote on Mar 25^th, 2009 at 11:05pm:

If the questions themselves are completely unimportant, than why not just have very abstract questions asking to pick between different words, like: 1) Red or Blue 2) Car or Train 3) Fast or Slow ext. I mean, couldn't you build up the same statistical models about groups answering similarly, or interpret/assign meanings to the questions similarly? And then you wouldn't have to worry about a 'Lie' index, because why would you lie about 'Red or Blue', and you don't have to worry about some people thinking a particular question is going to disqualify them.

If red and blue color preference happens to be a statistical discriminator between schizophrenics and "normals", than yea, sure go ahead. This is how the empirical keying method works. However, I think the likelihood of seeing a 95% to 5% split between those 2 groups on red and blue color preference is improbable at best.  But hey, if it works....sure.

For those wishing to know the MMPI 2 test questions in full:  Do a search in your local library (or nearest university library) and see if they have the following book:

Development and use of the MMPI-2 Content Scales by James Neal Butcher.

It contains the entire list of questions in an appendix at the back of the book, or so one Amazon review of the book says.  (No wonder it's currently out of stock......)

My local university library has it, and I'll be borrowing it on Monday.

I would certainly appreciate if you could send send me the remaining questions.

Thanks

I suspect my boss will have me pass the Rorschach test in order to be able to fire me.

The protection my union offer is that if I fail the test, I will be sent to see another psy.

Do you know how I could prepare for that test ?

;D....no one is gonna fire you based on a Rorschach. Intellectually interesting. Psychometric nightmare!

Moreover, just FYI, your boss does NOT dictate what tests a psychologist will give. Your boss can request that you get a psych eval (you can refuse this) and he can request that a specific question related to your job functioning be answered in that eval (ie., dangerousness to others, fitness for duty, etc). HOWEVER, your boss can NOT dictate what specific tests he want the person to get. I give tests that I think will provide the cleariest most valid answer to the refferal question. I make the decisions about what tests I think are appopriate to give, no one else.

I would really appreciate getting the other questions for the MMPI-2, and any other information you have. Do you know how to get the answers that they score it by, or determine your personality by?
Would you email me at giogemel@gmail.com. Thanks for any help you can give.

geeve

Research this thread. Hostage posted a website that lists all questions on MMPI-2. If you have a copier, make yourself a copy.

I need to get the answers to a test that's quite similar to the MMPI 2. Specifically, for the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory, or MCMI-III, I need the Manual, answer keys, and Hand-Scoring User's Guide. Does anybody have any of these items, or have any ideas on how to get them. You can either answer here, or email me privately at davido_de at yahoo.com.  Thank you.

Davido

All of these assessment instruments are copyrighted, are not in the public domain, and there are no "answer keys." Im sure the MCMI-III is being used as part of a larger assesment process. Just answer the questions honestly.

(Yes, the research literature does indeed show that the MMPI-2 is a good measure for assessment of psychopathology. It is the most widely used personality/psychopathology screening in the Western world for this very reason. However, the test should not be interpreted blindly and the results should always be supplemented by other clinical information (such as an thorough clinical interview before hand) if diagnostic decisions are going to made. For example, If a cleint is in the midst of messy divorce and the partner is using every method possible to get child custody and take all of his financial assets, I would certainly expect some elevation of paranoia above the norm. In the context of this situational variable it is quite understandable, and I would explain this in the report so no one gets the wrong idea by just looking at the numerical score.

I mentioned in my last post that both the sensitivity (proportion of actual positives which are correctly identified) and specificity (proportion of negatives which are correctly identified) of the individual subscales is very high. I do not have the sensitivity and specificity averages for each scale in front of me at the moment.  It varies by study and the population in question, but its in the very high 90% range. Perfectly acceptable for clinical use. I do not do these screens for enforcement agencies as part of my practice, but I see no reason why people should be paranoid about this issue.)
============================================
============================================
I have to disagree with the above post!!!! I took the MMPI-2 and the Rorschach after I just had moved from Europe to the US. I am also originally diagnosed with a psych disorder in europe. 

I never was shown any resulst from these tests from the LPAE who administered the test. I just thought it was a waste of time to be honest. After about 6 months I quit seeing this blowho because I was tired of being told that everything I had experienced in my abusive childhood never happend and that I just imagined my illness. What I find even more insane about this is, she had access to my mental records from Europe. You know what she did?????? She went in the records in front of me, picked pieces apart, made fun of the pdoc who wrote the notes and basically disregarded everything.  ???????? Professional huh? 

Now almost 2 years later I found out, that she diagnosed me with Antisocial Personality Disorder!  ??????? I NEVER was involved in any crimes. I don't have a record.  I NEVER took any drugs and am NOT a alcoholic. I NeVER coned anybody. I am NOT violant. Everything what they list for this personality disorder I am not.

You would not believe to what extend this LPAE went to warn the whole hospital staff AND the community about me.  Because of her unprofessional actions, my life in that community was ruined!!! We ended up moving this year to get away from it.

I have done some research now and she never conducted a pre interview about my past, she never considered my current situation when I took the test and she never explained the test to me. She never asked for any documents. NOTHING!!! She even claimed I made up all my education from my homecountry. Heck, she even claimed that the statement in my regular medical records about both of my parents having high blood pressure was made up.  Or that my mother's brother doesn't have schizophrenia, since I supposedly made that up too.

So she basically read it blind I guess.  The minute I walked into this womans office, she didn't want to hear what I had to say. Would interrupt me and then talk about her family or a patient who was colour blind.

When I tried to put in a complaint, I was laughed at by the patient advocat. I tried to have my records released to my new pdoc, but they continued to loose the request of release. I put in a complaint, which was lost also.   I had no support whatsoever, because of this bloody idiot going amok with her "diagnosis"!!!  And all I am is a SAHM!!!  I don't even have a influenzing position.  I could not even get a job because of this, it was known all over the community.  Even my neighbors in the street where I lived knew about this. Which is actually a federal offense, but hey... I am the bad guy, that is what her test results say, so I guess it is ok for her to break the law.

  Do you have any idea what I had to go through??? And I have NEVER done a thing to anybody.  She even went so far and had notes put in my children's medical file about this, so when I brought my children in for routine appointments they were automatically checked for abuse. Every time I saw a physician I was treated very negative. Before I knew I just thought these people were just rude, but after I found out, it made all sense.

Yes I am angry! And I am very bitter about this!!! 

I do NOT support these tests!!! In the wrong hands, they can be lethal weapons and ruin lifes!!!!  This is just nuts!!!

So did a test do all this to you, or did a person?

If true, this seems to be the story of an incompetent practitioner and misuse of test data, no? Is that the tests fault, or the persons fault?

PS: What is an "LPEA" anyway. Assuming this is in the US, if this person not a doctoral level provider, they should not be giving the MMPI at all anyway.

psych1 wrote on Jul 26^th, 2009 at 8:23am:

So did a test do all this to you, or did a person? If true, this seems to be the story of an incompetent practitioner and misuse of test data, no? Is that the tests fault, or the persons fault? PS: What is an "LPEA" anyway. Assuming this is in the US, if this person not a doctoral level provider, they should not be giving the MMPI at all anyway.

Ok, I got a little carried away last night. Just thinking about what I had to go through upsets me all over again.  I agree it was not the test itself, but the person who evaluated it.  I actually ended up in a psych facility last year for 11 days, because I had a mental breakdown. My husband had to involuntary admit me. I never have felt so freaked out and scared before, not even when I used to hear voices and had hallucinations. 

It took me a little while to find out what her credentials were, because she never told me. I guess I was a bit naive and trusting in that matter when I first came to the States, because I had a really good Psychologist and Psychiatrist where I came from. 
LPAE stands for Licensed Professional Art Therapist or Licensed Professional Art Education, depending on which State he/she is licensed at. I read that this is a Masters Degree. So no PHD.

What I also don't understand is, she lives in the South, but is licensed in the State of Alaska.  When I do a search on her, supposedly she never has lived in Alaska. Now why would she be licensed there??? Don't you have to live in the State where you are licensed in???

I did some research on my own now to figure out why she could come to such a conclusion.  I assume, that my level 4 must have read high.  But that does not automatically mean the person is a psychopath. I have always honored any laws and regulations. In fact, in my country I have a degree as a Legal-Assistant. One big logical conclusion for her should have been, that if I would have had a record somewhere, I could not have qualified for a green card/legal alien visa. They do a extensive background check for that.

I am though, somewhat opinionated and I don't easily just let someone tell me what to think. I like to form my own opinion about something, by looking at it closer, collect information and facts, then draw my own conclusions and then either agree or disagree. Though, I don't harp on my opinion, especially not, when someone has much better facts and information than I do.  I also tend to be outspoken and say what I think. But I don't believe that makes me a psychopath, I believe it makes me more of an independent thinker. What is your take on that? 

Also, during the time of taking the test I was very homesick, I also didn't like where we had to live and was in a depressive phase because of that. Plus, I did not really want to come to the States to live. I really like my homecountry!! I think it is a pretty good place to live.  So I don't know if that had something to do with how I answered certain questions???!!!  I am just left to wonder.

I tried to gain insight to these records, but was told by the patient advocate with a grin on her face, that if the Psychiatrist and therapist deem it dangerous to the patient they can deny showing the medical records. ???? I think that is a load of crap to be quite honest!! But they can turn around and just spread around defamatory statements and all just based on a test result???? I mean, she has no facts whatsoever.  Same with accusing me of doing drugs. She never even asked me if I would be willing to do drug testing. I would have agreed to that. She could have randomly tested me for drugs.  Besides...... the Psychiatrist I saw back home did random testing on me, because I used to be on Tegretol.  And to cover all of her bases this Psychiatrist I saw back home also tested for drugs. And as I said before, this blowhole of a LPAE had access to these records. 
Unprofessional to no end!!!

I still believe though, in the hands of the wrong person, these tests are lethal weapons!!!   

wrote on Mar 14^th, 2009 at 11:12pm:

I have been reading many many of your messages.  Personally, you all have scared me to death.  I have been referred to a neuropsychologist by my psychiatrist and neuroligist due to both long-term and short-term memory loss after 36 ECT treatments.  I saw him onThursday and testing was begun.  I brought the MMPI-2 home and completed it.  I answered the questions truthfully.  Now you all have me afraid of what I may be "labeled" as.  I am sure depression will show up as I am being treated for that but who knows what else it will show.  Should I be concerned about this test.  Does anyone have any suggestions for help for my memory problems?

Run and burn the test!!!!  Besides, the requirements for how the test is supposed to be taken are already violated, because you are not supposed to take the test home and finish it. 

Run, all I can say. And don't forget to burn the test!!! I am serious. Taking this test and some lunatic evaluating my test has brought me nothing but grief and trouble!!!!

Twoblock wrote on Dec 4^th, 2008 at 2:10am:

JC Dangerous???  Please explain how so. By saying such a thing, you are indicating that you know.

Yes, dangerous in the wrong hands!!!!  I have experienced it myself, took the test and some lunatic read it.  Nothing but grief and trouble!!!

Again, your gripes seem to be with an individual practitioner, not a test. Obviously, a person who is incompetent enough not to know that she is not  suppose to give this test in the first place is not gonna be competent enough to properly interpetret its results either. Again, this has nothing to to do with theory or psychometric validity of the test itself. Im sorry for your struggle, but perhaps your issue is one another board? Perhaps a formal ethics complaint to her licensing board as well?

psych1 wrote on Jul 26^th, 2009 at 8:02pm:

Again, your gripes seem to be with an individual practitioner, not a test. Obviously, a person who is incompetent enough not to know that she is not  suppose to give this test in the first place is not gonna be competent enough to properly interpetret its results either. Again, this has nothing to to do with theory or psychometric validity of the test itself. Im sorry for your struggle, but perhaps your issue is one another board? Perhaps a formal ethics complaint to her licensing board as well?

I am sorry that I have to disagree with you here, this is not just a gripe as you call it.  I believe people need to be aware that this test is not foolproof, especially not in the hands of incompetent professionals. I also want people to be aware, that it can have pretty bad consequences.  Isn't this test also used in forensics? What I have read is, it actually also decides if someone goes to jail or not.  I find that pretty frightning.  And no, I don't consider this a rant/gripe either what I just wrote.

Anti-MMPI-2 wrote on Jul 26^th, 2009 at 11:56pm:

psych1 wrote on Jul 26th, 2009 at 8:02pm: Again, your gripes seem to be with an individual practitioner, not a test. Obviously, a person who is incompetent enough not to know that she is not  suppose to give this test in the first place is not gonna be competent enough to properly interpetret its results either. Again, this has nothing to to do with theory or psychometric validity of the test itself. Im sorry for your struggle, but perhaps your issue is one another board? Perhaps a formal ethics complaint to her licensing board as well? I am sorry that I have to disagree with you here, this is not just a gripe as you call it.  I believe people need to be aware that this test is not foolproof, especially not in the hands of incompetent professionals. I also want people to be aware, that it can have pretty bad consequences.  Isn't this test also used in forensics? What I have read is, it actually also decides if someone goes to jail or not.  I find that pretty frightning.  And no, I don't consider this a rant/gripe either what I just wrote.

A test does not deciede whether someone goes to jail. That is strictly a judge's or jury's job/ruling.  In a forensic case, a psychologist renders an opinion to a court based on many sources of data (not just one test) that assists in "trier of fact," and then a judge or jury deciedes how much weight to give that person's opinion/testimony in the context of the rest of the facts of the case. A judge or jury then reders a verdict. Psychologists and test results do not send people to jail, judges and juries do. I am not sure how or why you have this mistaken impresion of the american justice system.

Lastly, I do not know of any professionals who view any tests (medical or psychological) as "fool proof." I think most of the public knows this as well. This is why we (psychologist) are aware of, and publish, the senstivity and specificty of our assessment instruments, just as any medical physician is aware of the false-positive and false-negative error rate of their medical tests. So, again I am unsure why you think that anyone would view a test a "fool-proof"? Professionals know this of course, and i think any reasonably educated member of the public knows this already as well.

PS: Any test is arbitrary without a properly trained professional to interpret it, and, any and all tests can be misued in the hands of the wrong person. This is not a new concept, or one that is unique to the MMPI.

Can a person facing criminal charges be forced by the court to take the MMPI 2?  When is it used?  To determined competency to stand trial?

TC

T.M. Cullen wrote on Jul 27^th, 2009 at 4:49am:

Can a person facing criminal charges be forced by the court to take the MMPI 2?  When is it used?  To determined competency to stand trial? TC

If you find a way to force someone to sit down and spend an hour and a half reading questions and bubbling in answers on a scantron sheet, please let me know ASAP ;D

The MMPI has little to do with comptency.  If there are questions about feigning of psychaitric illness in order to get out of the charges (and there often is), then yes, it often gets used (along with other measures) because there is so much research supporting the validity scales for this purpose. However, determining competency itself is acomplished via a very long and very thorough clinical interview detailing medical, occupational, academic, and psychiatric history, and of course, functioning and state of mind at the time of the offense, as well as inteviews with collateral informants who knew or were around the person at the time prior to the offense in question.  MMPI might be used to further document the extent of psychopathology, but unles it is grossly discrepant from what one gathers in the interview, it is of little consequence, clinically. However, if I have a long and well documented history of ligitimate psychiatric ilness via the medical records and the defendant is screaming about how aliens are inserting thoughts into his head, then no, I dont really need and MMPI at that point :)

TC

If the court orders the test, the one sure as hell better take it or he/she will be in violation of a court order. However, this test can be messed with just like the polygraph and, done right, psych1 or noone else can certify that it was messed with as in the case of the polygraph, done right, the polygrapher would be  only guessing that countermeasures are used. Unfortunately, the courts will go along with testmony of both professions knowing they are guessing.

Twoblock wrote on Aug 20^th, 2009 at 10:23pm:

TC and, done right, psych1 or noone else can certify that it was messed with

based on?

This is incorrect. I can and have argued that tests results were not valid based on evidence of exaggeration of symptomatology. My testimony is/was considered valid, both legally and scientifically. Opinions on response bias is legally permissable under frye and daubert standards of evidence admissability, and backed up scientifically by empirical research on the use of the MMPI in clinical and forensic samples. Statistics are your friend....my friend. :)

Twoblock wrote on Aug 20^th, 2009 at 10:23pm:

TC If the court orders the test, the one sure as hell better take it or he/she will be in violation of a court order.

Again, this is incorrect. Courts do not order MMPIs or any other psych tests for that matter.  A judge can request a psychological or neuropsychologial evaluation. The psychologist will determine what tests are needed and what tests are appopriate. There is no "court order" for psych evals, at least not in the sense that a person can be actively punished (contempt of court or jail) if they do not cooperate. If a person does not coperate with a psych eval as requested by the court, it is a detriment to his defense. As long as he is competent to stand trial,the law assumes a person is aware of the consequences. Again, this is because of the value the american justice system puts on individual freeedom. As long as a individual is judged to be legally competent (which is a relatively simple legal judgment that can be accomplished via informal assessment/interview, they are free do run their defense any way they see most fit. If that includes refusing a psych eval, so be it. Fine by us. They will not put the person in jail until they cooperate. The legal system (grand jury hearing, trial, sentencing, etc) will continue to move forward without it, just as it has for thousands of years before psychiatry existed.

Again, I would advise getting your facts straights before dissemenating false infomation.

NO IT ISN'T INCORRECT. If you, like polygraphers, were not so eager to defend your profession, you would take time to understand statements. I said "IF" the court orders. I didn't say they did or didn't. Now did I????

I personally know of two cases ( that refutes your statement) where the court ordered them into a state psych hospital for eval. and the judge was fully aware that MMPI (and other tests) were standard proceedure. I forget now the other two test that he specifically mentioned.

You should check with the legal profession before spouting disinformation.

I am a psychometrist, that is a professional psychological and neuropsychological examiner. I have given 100's of MMPI-2 and tests like it. If you feel the test is not an accurate estimate of your current level of functioning, fine. Ask for more testing, more data can often clear things up. I was a LEO way back in the day; I had a partner draw his weapon and jammed it in between my Kevlar vest and arm pit. Later testing proved him to be schizophrenic - paranoid type. I almost lost my life because of poor screening. Just be yourself if you are not floridly psychotic or a real asshole you will be fine. Don't freaking lie. We know when you lie and it often can trigger more testing geared towards people we suspect of trying to cheat. I do compensation and pension exams from time to time. Watching someone fake bad is almost as funny as watching someone lie who wants to enforce the rule of law.
Law enforcement is a sacred trust. If you think you have some issues that might flag you on the test. Go pay some out of pocket money and talk it over with a licensed therapist. You will learn about yourself and gain some people skills that will help you when the job gets hard… it will get hard sometimes. When you see what people are capable of on a daily basis it can wear you down. For those of you that make it and take your oath… when people start to lie to you on the street and it really pisses you off, think about the examiner and psychologist that did your assessment.

Your beautiful prose would be so much more profound were it all true.

Most department's selection processes are in the stone age, the psychologists they hire usually the lowest bidder. Police departments have an incredibly bad habit of dissecting their applicants into so much useless data and then judging the useless data.

Why is domestic abuse higher among those in the military and law enforcement? Why is alcohol abuse higher among those in the military and law enforcement? I attribute both to bad screening - 'job stress' isn't an excuse to beat your family, or drink incessantly.
(And I'm former military so save the 'bleeding heart liberal'  speech.)
I know the job is stressful, and I'm not trying to put down what you do - I want to do it, too!

Dumb questions on old psychological assessments and investigators who use 'lie detection' in lieu of actual background investigative work along with psychologists who have no clinical practice add up to a bad way to screen people, and after a department or two, this bad way to screen people encourages otherwise honest applicants to start lying.

Law enforcement SHOULD be a sacred trust. If/when their selection processes catch up to the 20th century, it might be.

Tom wrote on Oct 28^th, 2009 at 3:17pm:

I am a psychometrist, that is a professional psychological and neuropsychological examiner.

First of all, if you are a psychometrist, you are NOT a professional "neuropsychological examiner." You are a "psychometrist." You may be a good one, but touting yourself as a "proessional neuropsychological examiner" is a misrepresentation of your scope of expertise and practice. The competent and ethical practice of neuropsychology requires a doctoral degree in clinical psychology followed by a 2 year post-doc fellowship in clinical neuropsychology. http://www.div40.org/

Second, if you are admistering MMPIs as a "psychometrist" your interpretations and reports based on this assessment should be supervised by a doctoral level psychologist. If they arent, you are llikley in violation of state licensing laws and on a slippery ethical slope with the APA. "Psychometrist" does not equal "psychologist." Please see the ethical code below.

9.07 Assessment by Unqualified Persons
Psychologists do not promote the use of psychological assessment techniques by unqualified persons, except when such use is conducted for training purposes with appropriate supervision.

And from the slippery ethical slope you're on, you dare pontificate about "Sacred Trusts?"

Tom wrote on Oct 28^th, 2009 at 3:17pm:

We know when you lie and it often can trigger more testing geared towards people we suspect of trying to cheat. I do compensation and pension exams from time to time. Watching someone fake bad is almost as funny as watching someone lie who wants to enforce the rule of law.

I agree that watching unsophictated types try to malinger can sometimes be a excercise in hilarity. However, overall, your proclaimed certainty of "we know when you lie" concerns me, at least from a clincial practice standpoint. Let me explain.......

I've assessed hundreds of people. I publish research on symptom validity measures fairly frequently and I am often humbled by my inability to predict who will pass and who will fail SVTs. If I do think I've developed some exceptionally predictive powers, I'm concerned that I'm simply using 20/20 hindsight. In my role as psychologist, I am often humbled by what I dont know and by accepting the limitation of "clinical judgment." Meehl espoused this notion over 50 years ago, and we (as a profession) have been slow to change or paradigm. In sum, always approach the data with caution and humility.

In 1951, Jacob Bronowski, one of the physicists on the Manhattan Project, made a statement that I think is relevant to your 'certainty'

“One aim of the physical sciences has been to give an exact picture of the material world. One achievement of physics in the 20th Century has been to prove that that aim is unattainable…what physics has done is to show that …There is no absolute knowledge. And those who claim it, whether they are scientists or dogmatists, open the door to tragedy. All information is imperfect. We have to treat it with humility. That is the human condition, and that is what quantum physics says.” Bronowski The Ascent of Man, p. 353

I have a hard time believing that our science (psychology) is a more rigorous and objective science than physics.

I would like to know if anyone has been forced to take the MMPI-2 test for a custody evaluation.  If so what was the recommendation either way.  Im not nervous about taking the test myself, but I want to understand why they ask certain questions?  Some of the 75 questions that were posted seem ridiculous!  Like My hands and feet are usually warm enough?  What will that question prove?  Please give me some insight on why certain questions are asked, and what do they mean if answered yes or no?  Or where I can go to get a book that will help me understand what the meaning behind these questions are.

A complete psychological evaluation is usually standard in custody disputes, but no one is ever forced to do anything. However,  refusing a psych exam requires accepting the consequences of this decision. That is, failing to demonstrate that you are a psychologically heathy and appopriate to be a caretaker may adversly affect your case. If that is your choice, so be it.

Items were "emprirically keyed" to scales based on a differential endorsement by a certain clinical group (ie., those with certain disorders) in comparison to a normative group sample.

understand

Now that you have been thoroughly educated and you completely understand the second paragraph of psychobabble, you can now ace the test. What she is actually saying is that the interpretation of your answers is based on a specific group's data from a specific group of subjects and therefore biased by the testing group. If you refuse to take the test they will use that against you. If you take the test and it doesn't meet the requirement of the tester, they will use that against you. The test is useless.
You can take the test three times with three different testers and get three different analysis.

Twoblock wrote on Dec 5^th, 2009 at 4:17pm:

What she is actually saying is that the interpretation of your answers is based on a specific group's data from a specific group of subjects and therefore biased by the testing group.

Im not understanding the thought process that has lead to this conclusion, please elaborate.

If normal groups (non-patients) and clinical groups (patients) are unstatsifactory normative groups to you, what groups do you propose we use? I dont follow....

psych1 wrote on Dec 6^th, 2009 at 12:54am:

Twoblock wrote on Dec 5th, 2009 at 4:17pm: What she is actually saying is that the interpretation of your answers is based on a specific group's data from a specific group of subjects and therefore biased by the testing group. Im not understanding the thought process that has lead to this conclusion, please elaborate. If normal groups (non-patients) and clinical groups (patients) are unstatsifactory normative groups to you, what groups do you propose we use? I dont follow....

The MMPI-2 is an abomination and I don't say that lightly. I've examined all 567 questions in detail including the underlying code used for scoring. It is quite easy to manipulate and as most of the methodology used for scoring is already in the public domain, no amount of DMCA take-downs will prevent a determined applicant from accessing its content. 

What we have here is an 19th century tool up against 21st century technology. It is an insult to any intelligent person to be asked to answer a series of thinly disguised questions, which, on the face of it, could destroy his or her career for life.

This test does not play fair. One or two slips of the pen and you can be branded in an instant. IMHO anyone who attempts to manipulate it or usurp its functionality by getting into the coding is perfectly within their rights to do so. Psych 1 will no doubt disagree with that analysis.

So what is the alternative? The reality is, there is no alternative. Psychological testing is immutable and therefore inadequate and totally biased against the applicant.

There are too many variables. Someone smack bang in the middle of a reactive depression could raise their score through the roof on the Pd or ASP T scales but might yield a perfectly normative result several months later.

As for Faking (Good) and Faking (Bad) I've never read such unmitigated S**t in all my life. This is the MMPI's get out of Jail card. I won't go into the individual questions themselves because this is not what this post is about, but puhleezz, spare me the agony of having to explain myself.

The bottom line is, there is a lot of very good airline staff, correctional officers and parents who have been trashed by this outrageous test and the sooner the better it is binned the better for us all.

1. Endorsement of an item in the deviant direction is worth about 1.5 T score points. Therefore, "one or two slips of the pen" (whatever than means) would not lead to any clinically meaningful change in intepretation.

2. The mmpi is interpreted in layers and there are many more scales than just the 10 clinical scales. These are are all taken into acount. Its not a simple process and no one scale elevation is going to lead to any intepretation.  All the data must come together to support any interpretation from the mmpi including interview, history, etc. I can not understand why people continue to perserverate on the notion that the test in interpreted blindly without taking into acount history and situational factors. I have stated this over and over, yet people continue to perceive this.

3. Yes, MMPI scores can change from time period to time period and when one is depresed or not depresed. This is the whole reason the test was developed! Im not sure I understand why you think this is bad. If anything, it demonstrates that the test is senstive to changes in levels of psychopathology over time.We are ever evolving creatures.  Although pd could concievably change with levels of depression, I can not fathom a reason why the t score on ASP would? I mean the person is now torturing aninmals because they are depresseed? I dont think so.

I agree that the field of assessment of psychopathology and persoanlity has evolved at an embarrisingly slow pace. The MMPI could be better, but right now its the best we have and research shows that its does a good job at indentifying certain psychopathology. There is no (and i mean none) debate about this in the scientific community. However, you are correct that the current form has alot of variables and alot of "noise" when looking over the scales. Parsing out pathology from benign factors is indeed tough.  Interptetation is difficult and takes a skilled clinicain who has ample training in all aspects of clinical psychology.

psych1 wrote on Dec 30^th, 2009 at 8:47pm:

1. Endorsement of an item in the deviant direction is worth about 1.5 T score points. Therefore, "one or two slips of the pen" (whatever than means) would not lead to any clinically meaningful change in intepretation.

There are several key questions in the MMPI-2 which are loaded and re-worded in many instances, all of which have the potential to deliver a false diagnostic no matter how you interpret the final result. Your interpretations - with respect - are predicated on the interviewee answering truthfully or not as the case may be and this is my main point of contention.

The MMPI-2, in its current form, does not have sufficient safeguards built-in to mitigate against a reasonably educated attempt to deliver a positive or normative result.


Quote:

2. The mmpi is interpreted in layers and there are many more scales than just the 10 clinical scales. These are are all taken into acount. Its not a simple process and no one scale elevation is going to lead to any intepretation.  All the data must come together to support any interpretation from the mmpi including interview, history, etc.

I am all too familiar with the number of scales but as I said earlier the interpretation is only as good as the information you receive and that includes history taking. People will ideally want a favourable result. That's a given. How they achieve that is open to debate and even corroboration is not to be relied upon should we doubt them and especially in family law studies.



Quote:

I can not understand why people continue to perserverate on the notion that the test in interpreted blindly without taking into acount history and situational factors. I have stated this over and over, yet people continue to perceive this.

This is a generalised statement which presumably has been cushioned so as not to be direct. However I think it has already been answered above.


Quote:

3. Yes, MMPI scores can change from time period to time period and when one is depresed or not depresed. This is the whole reason the test was developed! Im not sure I understand why you think this is bad.

Well of course it's bad! Any analysis with so many variables cannot be trusted or relied upon. And especially in criminal and family law cases where there is so much at stake!


Quote:

If anything, it demonstrates that the test is senstive to changes in levels of psychopathology over time.

It certainly does no such thing! Let's face it, we're talking about a multiple series of questions that require a certain degree of literacy and self-awareness on the part of the subject taking the test. Add in some of the variables discussed earlier and this quickly becomes an exercise in futility. And please don't suggest history taking as an adjunct! I have observed perfectly capable interviewees who are able to conduct themselves verbally but put a pen in their hand and they become bumbling basket cases. Exam pressure, performance pressure, the desire to please, all of these internal factors can dramatically influence results.


Quote:

We are ever evolving creatures.

Correct! And we are also adaptive or mal-adaptive as the case may be when faced with an interrogative test that purports to make a judgement that not even the Lord himself would attempt.



Quote:

Although pd could concievably change with levels of depression, I can not fathom a reason why the t score on ASP would? I mean the person is now torturing aninmals because they are depresseed? I dont think so.

Counsellor, you've taken 1 question off a series in isolation and formed an opinion on that basis; what about these? [26,35,66,81,84,104,105,110,123,227,240,248,250,254,269,283,284,374,412,418,419].

Numbers aside, the harsh reality is, most applicants do not have the luxury of repeating this test. This is a one-hit wonder for many of them and it is prohibitively expensive for most.


Quote:

I agree that the field of assessment of psychopathology and persoanlity has evolved at an embarrisingly slow pace. The MMPI could be better, but right now its the best we have and research shows that its does a good job at indentifying certain psychopathology.

And this is why it should be banned without hestitation. The best we have is simply not good enough and especially when people's lives can be turned upside down by a series of heavily weighted questions.


Quote:

There is no (and i mean none) debate about this in the scientific community.

Well of course there isn't. Open transparency and the inherent limitations of these tests is hardly a topic for scientific debate and admission of guilt. The litigation that would ensue and the resultant cost of premiums would make it impossible for clinicians to operate. What we have instead is a protectionist attitude towards psychometric testing that is akin to the official states secret act. Let's face it, if there were serious question marks over the methodology used and the construct validity of the MMPI the judicial system would be swamped with appeals. So there is a lot at stake here including commercial interests.



Quote:

However, you are correct that the current form has alot of variables and alot of "noise" when looking over the scales. Parsing out pathology from benign factors is indeed tough.

That, with respect, is an understatement! But tough on who!?!



Quote:

Interptetation is difficult and takes a skilled clinicain who has ample training in all aspects of clinical psychology.

They are few and far between. In the absence of a skilled clinician your fate can just as easily rest in the hands of a spotty faced Phd with about as much clinical experience as a box of fairies.

The literature demostrates high senistivity and specifIcity of the mmpis validity scales (l, f, k, f, s f(p), FBS, RBS) for detecting malingering or false responding in both clinical and forenisc samples.

All doctoral programs in clinical psychology require courses and practica with the MMPI. I have never met a licensesd psychologists who conducted assessments that was not well trained in the instrument.

psych1 wrote on Dec 31^st, 2009 at 6:37pm:

The literature demostrates high senistivity and specifIcity of the mmpis validity scales (l, f, k, f, s f(p), FBS, RBS) for detecting malingering or false responding in both clinical and forenisc samples. All doctoral programs in clinical psychology require courses and practica with the MMPI. I have never met a licensesd psychologists who conducted assessments that was not well trained in the instrument.

It's an unfortunate reality, but as with so many in your profession, when confronted with what amounts to public outrage, you clam up and baton down the hatches at the first sign of controversy.

That counsellor, is a wholly inadequate response to the comments in my last post but as we both know your silence speaks volumes.


Quote:

I have never met a licensesd psychologists who conducted assessments that was not well trained in the instrument.

You've not met them all have you? Well neither have I but if we are to follow your thinking this automatically suggests that all of them are competent does it not?

That's another sweeping generalisation and utter nonsense as you and I both know. I know of several so-called experts who have been admonished by the Courts - including their peers - for submitting sub-standard reports. Tests that failed the most basic "test-retest-validity" requirements.

But let's not turn this into a post-mortem of ineptitude. What's at stake here are people's lives. Your revealing statements in response to my first post only add weight to the argument that the MMPI should be banned without and yet I am astonished that you continue to defend it.

Psych1, please, for the sake of all who are reading this, kindly, take a position here. There is very little importance to be attached to the construct validity of  l, f, k, f, s f(p), FBS, and RBS and I am not going to repeat myself.

This test is fallible and therefore the validity of its test results are without question wholly unreliable.

Please do not continue to defend the indefensible. Too many lives have been destroyed by members of your profession under the guise of "expert" opinion.

My purpose on this forum is to minimize the amount of false/misleading information disseminated to the public via clarifications and correction of false facts and info. I am in no way obligated to respond to every question, query, or point that is raised. I am not here to "convert" anyone or to argue endlessly about the validity of the mmpi with people who like to play amateur psychologist. If one chooses to ignore the scientific literature on the matter for fear of grand conspiracies and malfeasence, well, then thats your decision and a whole other issue unto itself. Morerover, I find it difficult to respond or take many of your arguments or points seriously because you provide no citations for opinions. For example, the construct validity of the validity scales have long been established in the literature, so am unclear on whether this statement is simply your personal opinion (in which case it is contradicted in hundred of peer-reviewed studies), or a pulled from some scientifically validated work. I assume it the former, since you seem to have some sort of distrust of the academic community. Since I put more stock in the findings of peer reviewed scientific literature than on any one persons opinion (especially when they are not educated and trained in clinical psychology), we will likely never agree on much. I'd suggest you make your peace with it.

By the way, we are not in a courtroom here and I am not an attourney, so why do you keep calling me counselor? ::)

psych1 wrote on Jan 1^st, 2010 at 3:24pm:

My purpose on this forum is to minimize the amount of false/misleading information disseminated to the public via clarifications and correction of false facts and info. I am in no way obligated to respond to every question, query, or point that is raised. I am not here to "convert" anyone or to argue endlessly about the validity of the mmpi with people who like to play amateur psychologist. If one chooses to ignore the scientific literature on the matter for fear of grand conspiracies and malfeasence, well, then thats your decision and a whole other issue unto itself. Morerover, I find it difficult to respond or take many of your arguments or points seriously because you provide no citations for opinions. For example, the construct validity of the validity scales have long been established in the literature, so am unclear on whether this statement is simply your personal opinion (in which case it is contradicted in hundred of peer-reviewed studies), or a pulled from some scientifically validated work. I assume it the former, since you seem to have some sort of distrust of the academic community. Since I put more stock in the findings of peer reviewed scientific literature than on any one persons opinion (especially when they are not educated and trained in clinical psychology), we will likely never agree on much. I'd suggest you make your peace with it. By the way, we are not in a courtroom here and I am not an attourney, so why do you keep calling me counselor? ::)

I agree with this.  I think sometimes we take outselves too seriously, especially on these type of forums.  I include mysef as well.               8-)

Twoblock wrote on Sep 6^th, 2008 at 2:08am:

MMPI doesn't destinguish between gay or straight, doesn't destinguish between this and that, doesn't tell you this or that. All posted on this thread. What the hell good is it? It's described with $100 words but with nickel meanings. It's not a pass or fail but a instrument, just like the polyhraph, where the operator holds a person's livelyhood in his unqualified opinion. Put all psychocologist together and you might have enough intelligence to score 45 on an IQ test. Also, just like the polygraph, MMPI is an instrument by which a lot of people make money. Also, just like the polygraph, it doens't have the usefulness of a Sears catalog or a corn cobb in an outhouse. All four will burn your ass.

I totally agree.  I was victimized by the MMPI-2  while my marriage was failing.  It later turned out there was fraud involved by the psychological association that administered the test because they were in collusion with a church; and for other reasons that were evident to a judge. The main psychologist has been conducting symposiums as far back as ’96 teaching clergy when to refer business to him!  I found that out by a simple Google search on his name in the city which we live. What isn’t apparent, but became so after a smoking gun letter was taken down from the witness stand, is this psychologist is also allowing unqualified clergy to ‘diagnose’ when referring business to him!  When I got wise to what was going on, all of these people ganged up on me and colluded with my husband to try to drive me crazy.  They did it in an attempt to make the results of their test look believable AND more importantly to cover their butts. The whole escapade was so deviant and outlandish, if I had gone to police and told what they were all doing. while they were doing it, I surely would have been deemed nuts.  Instead the whole fiasco played out on a witness stand.  The judge bought none of it.  My attorney exposed them all for the fools they are.  So what were these psychologists motivation for victimizing me?  Simple… Money!  We had a great PPO that would pay and pay for years for a serious mental diagnosis  Obviously, her husband wanted to get her help.  Interestingly enough they refused to hear about his bullying and his lies. How convenient huh?! 

My raw data from the MMPU-2 was re-entered by another psychologist and no abnormal results could be found.  I was also evaluated  by a psychiatrist and no abnormalities could be shown there either. I was awarded full custody of my children!  The whole mess cost thousands to defend and allowed the person who really needed the help to continue on with his pathological liar antics. I think it should be against the law for these types of test to be administered or used against a person during a divorce.  Additionally, I feel many of these psychologists are in fear for their careers anyway.  I feel they know that neuroscience will eventually necessitate the  MMPI-2, 3, and other test like it, go the way of the dinosaur.  If some psycho psychologist thinks they’re going to collude with another victimizer to destroy someone’s life by taking all they hold most dear, they out to be able to prove a disorder with solid evidence.  Solid evidence would be brain scan technology; not some flimsy archaic 567 true false exam.  The whole thing going on in psychology today for monetary gain, via bilking insurance companies, is so absurd that it would be laughable, if it wasn’t so criminal.

Hi Guys!

Long time no see!

I have a situation where a Psychologist handed me a MMPI-2 question book that had 2 and half pages where all the questions were actually answered in the book and not the form by somebody else!

Then the Doctor only wants me to do 400 questions and not 567, saying that the overlay scoring tools being used did not do the whole test!  I kid you not!!

So I beefed about the book being marked up while I was there and did all the rest of the tests too, no big deal.  But the Doc wanted me to change some of my answers! I said no. (Also I recorded the whole thing just in case it comes in handy!!)

So I finish the assessment and in 3 days I faxed a letter saying I withdraw Consent because of the sloppy testing.  Then I file an official complaint.

I get an answer back saying the Doctor is still not incompetent enough to loose their licence! go figure, so I am appealing.  Jeezz! I wrote a real good complaint with lots of supporting material but it was not enough!!

My question:  Is there any Study out there that determines how far wrong a MMPI-2 has to be botched before it is statistically invalid? 

So naturally I tested myself with an online MMPI-2 and then went to a different doctor to get it done!
This whole process over 18 months!

Gawd! It takes less time to overthow a country then it does to get rid of a quack!

Thanks guys!
;)

I have been following this website for a little while now, and have found it very enlightening. I applaud the courage of the site owner, and I have now decided to chime in as well. This site is the very definition of free speech, so keep up all the tough work, and don’t give in.

*** DISCLAIMER ***
The following is meant as a philosophical discussion only, and is not to be taken as advice, nor should it be considered factual information. The information contained in this post is for academic curiosity only, is meant for educational purposes, and should only be used for research and analysis objectives only.
*** DISCLAIMER ***

Asking “Why” and knowing “why” is the only real source of power. If you do not understand things, then you are truly powerless and easily manipulated.

I know because I must know. That is my purpose.

Q & A Session with Glavlit about MMPI:

Q: Glavlit, why are you discussing items that are supposedly “confidential”.  Isn’t this illegal, unethical, and breaking professionalism and secrecy laws in some way?

A: The information is not classified and has been public in many different forms for a great many years now.  What is really unethical and unprofessional is for a few self-selected individuals to form their own cabal and decide by their own associations that they know better and are in a position to judge others, not on their actions, but on them as a person and emotional being; passing this judgement by virtue of the subject’s ignorance, naiveté and gullibility.  That is the true definition of unprofessionalism and lack of ethics. Sort of like a modern day shaman’s guild. 

For example, if you break the law, the law is usually clear and the police and judge will make it clear as to what you did wrong. Almost anyone can objectively understand and agree on this. In psychology, only the test evaluator really knows what “law” you broke during the test and he/she shall pass judgement on to you, without you ever knowing what was perceived to have happened, and how it really came to be about.  There are no second chances, no transparency and no psych “parole”; if you fail, your application is over and you are forever labelled and condemned...that is until the next revision comes along...oops I guess there really was no such thing as condition X, now we’ll call it condition Y...and add sub-parts Y-2 and Y-4...and so it goes in psychology/psychiatry...


Q: What business do you have on here Glavlit and what is your true agenda?

A: This post is meant to be a stand-alone introductory, definite practical resource guide to the MMPI-2, for security services and intelligence job applicants. Think of it as a game, a game which you do not wish to lose, since the only one who will end up truly losing out is you, the applicant. Such is the case with both the polygraph exam process and the psychological exam process.

Ask yourself one question: if you cannot effectively deal with this grey area and set of challenges (poly and psych tests) from an information management and self-control perspective, then how will you be able to deal with the real-life job challenges and the real enemies and adversaries that will undoubtedly come along? Why you scored well is beside the point; this is a results oriented field. What truly matters are the end results.

Remember, reality is what you think and make of it…I think therefore I am…remember you only know and see what I am before you now, because I have thought it and became it, everything else is nothing more than an illusion.


Q: So what about this MMPI instrument and its well-established validity?

A: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Any testing method that relies primarily on a subject’s ignorance is not and cannot ever be scientifically valid.  As they say: junk in, junk out! Just like polygraphy, psychology is not a hard science; it's much more of an art, or a pseudo-science!


Q: Where can I find the full MMPI and MMPI-2 item (question) lists in less than a minute?

A: For anyone that is curious you can find the older MMPI by searching for the torrent here:

http://isohunt.com/torrent_details/110119673/mmpi?tab=summary

(You will need to download a torrent client for downloading; just go to http://www.utorrent.com/ ; uTorrent is the best client right now.)

This package contains all the older MMPI items in text files, but it is also a fully functioning program that will let you do the test, and then give you a graph at the end with the t-score profile results, also showing the lines for the cut-off scores...as in where you would be flagged if you score outside those and then be referred for a follow-up interview.  It really is a nice package with the application included, and it also has a nice little summary explanation both in the readme and with the help function, that explains what each category is, and what they indicate.  A very useful educational tool indeed.

The package is 276 KB so it is very small, but be sure to read the README.TXT first.

Then, you can compare the old test to the MMPI-2, and see how it has changed.  The modern and complete MMPI-2 item list can be found at:

http://geisel.narod.ru/mmpi2.htm

This is a fully functioning MMPI-2 applet that contains all of the items and has a very detailed report.  The report is the real McCoy; it includes all the modern/current scales and categories with broken down scores, as well as the statistical corrections; and even more importantly, the critical items are highlighted and referenced to their respective scales, and the answers are also shown.

The nice thing about this applet is that you can easily change any of the answers and rescore it.  The rescored profile will be shown right after the previously scored profile, thus you can tinker and experiment with the item response patterns, to see what happens. This really is as close to the real profile as you can get without a psychologist in the room. The only thing missing are the profile code interpretations, but those are mostly subjective anyway, and so would be worthless.


Q: But please, the questions are so strange and I just don’t know if I really love flowers or not, or what that is supposed to measure in the first place? This is all much too confusing for me and it is giving me a headache!

A: Well the questions are grouped in smaller units, according to different psychological issues or scales. 

Lucky for you there is a pdf for that! If you go and take a look at this...

http://soar.wichita.edu/dspace/bitstream/10057/1479/1/d07017.pdf

...you will find that starting at page 88, and scrolling down, in the Appendices, all the various scales and categories are shown seperately, clearly listing the item numbers with the phrases themselves; all also showing exactly what the expected responses are, including the always tricky negative responses. It’s certainly worth a look to see just how the various factors are constructed in terms of item response patterns. A very interesting and practical read indeed!


Q: But what about The Rorscach test?

A: On a related note, you can see all of The Rorscach test slides that are used here:

http://listverse.com/2007/12/08/top-10-inkblot-test-cards/

“Nobody agrees how to score Rorschach responses objectively. There is nothing to show what any particular response means to the person who gives it. And, there is nothing to show what it means if a number of people give the same response. The ink blots are scientifically useless.” (Bartol, 1983).


Q: But what about a real philosophical discussion on all these psychological assessment/testing issues, including lie detection?

A: Well, you can read a very enlightening and interesting essay on here:

http://www.guidetopsychology.com/testing.htm

It is well worth the read, I promise, and it’s not that long either!


Schast'ya i zdorov'ya!

Udachi i khoroshego nastroeniya!

Just a quick, but very important update to this mmpi2 thread. There is a document out there that is invaluable. It lists all of the MMPI-2 questions in order, and also lists under each question all the scales that they are used for. This outline easily allows for anyone to see exactly what scales are represented, by each question, and how the answers are scored, either way.

The document can be found here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24890675/Compendium-Involving-Organized-Crime-and-the-use-of-Psychiatry#fullscreen:off

Full-screen link is here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24890675/Compendium-Involving-Organized-Crime-and-the-use-of-Psychiatry#fullscreen:on

The MMPI discussion starts on page 126 of the document (or page 140 on the web viewer).

The full-item list, showing all the question items in order, with the respective answer possibilities, and all of the relevant scale associations, starts on page 196 of the document (which is page 210 on the web viewer). While the content/clinical scale item information is published in various textbooks, the real gem here is that all the associated scales and response possibilities are listed clearly, for each and every question. The other interesting tidbit here is that the L-Scale items are also clearly marked and listed in full, which would never be the case in regular textbooks; since newer textbooks only list the clinical/content scales, and even then only by item numbers.   

An interesting, rather short article (well-written and cogent), that gives a quick snapshot of the MMPI2, with a special emphasis on the validity scales and response distortion issues, can be found here:

ASSESSMENT OF SELF-REPORT RESPONSE DISTORSION BY MEANS OF THE MMPI-2

http://www.papelesdelpsicologo.es/english/1253.pdf

Here is the Abstract (Summary):

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 2, MMPI-2 is one of the best validated multi-scale measures for random responding, malingered psychopathology and defensiveness. The present paper presents in detail different possibilities, strategies and scales provided by the MMPI-2 for the detection of overreporting response style (F, Fb and F(p) scales, positive F-K index, and FBS and DsR scales), underreporting response style (L and K scales, negative F-K index, and S and Wsd scales), and random response style (cannot-say or “?”, F, Fb, VRIN and TRIN scales).


For a somewhat more philosophical and detailed discussion of validity issues, also see the following brief articles:

What is the K scale really about?
http://www.caldwellreport.com/ess_kscale.aspx

Assorted topics: brief comments and opinions
Topics: RC, Ho, AAS and APS, GM and GF, S, F(p), and non-gendered norms
http://www.caldwellreport.com/ess_assorted.aspx


Poka vsyo.

For further detailed invaluable information on the MMPI2 also see:

MMPI-2 Information
http://www.mmpi-info.com/mmpi-2/index.html

Bob's MMPI-2 Blog
News and Information on the MMPI-2
http://www.mmpi-info.com/blog/

MMPI-2 Faking to Look Good
http://174.120.151.7/~rmgordon/blog/?p=32

New Malingering Scales for the MMPI-2 (Better to look at external data)
http://174.120.151.7/~rmgordon/blog/?p=29

Hello Glavit!!

Interesting info you posted! Thanks!

In my previous posting I asked the question, how robust is MMPI-2 when a Doctor hands out an MMPI-2 Question Book where 2 full pages have had all the questions marked !! Then Expects me to 'ignore' it while I try to complete the test without undue influence!!!

Your thoughts or anyone else would be great!

Thanks

Mad Mikey!
;)

palerider wrote on May 23^rd, 2007 at 2:28pm:

Hilarious! ;D "Cheating" on an MMPI is rich. Haven't any of you heard of the "lie scale" on the MMPI? It's highly unlikely to consistantly pose as a different person throughout the entire test. Last I checked, they don't let you take the test home----and more importantly, they don't much care for an elevated lie scale on a test which asks questions like fear of water and love of your mama. This thread reminds me of why applicants for law enforcement need to be thoroughly interrogated and thoroughly researched. Cheating on a personality test??????    wow.

Well, I was just goofing around on google, and I stumbled upon this and up until this post I was wondering what was wrong with you people.
I am curious how you would "prepare" for a personality test. In a situation where you would memorize the mmpi just to prepare seems pretty neurotic. As straight forward as it is, yes those agencies use that test to weed out the applicants deemed not to fit what the job entails. You can want a profession but it may not be right for you. You cannot anticipate how you would react to aspects of your profession, because in the case of being a police officer, you wouldn;t know how you would react to the stress of the job so the mmpi is used as a screening tool to prevent putting a being in a situation where you would be unable to handle what you would theoretically doing for the rest of your life. Jobs in high stress or using delicate information require the applicants to be reliable. There is no cheating on the MMPI. You can't possibly prepare for it unless you knew what the screeners were going to do with the information interpreted. You also wouldn't know what would be good or not. Ex, you would think that people that want to be in law enforcement would have to have a strong sense of whats right. That may not be the case, they may want a personality that is non biased. The ability to perform as a judge isnt about doing whats right, like putting a murderer in jail just because YOU think they murdered someone, its about justice and the evidence is supposed to prove that the person is a murderer, not your gut instinct. So by trying to prepare youself by answering the way  you think they want you to answer and them not accepting it, vs. being yourself and admitting to things you think about and feel like a normal human and getting accepted. vice versa.

can you send me the questions to the MMPI-2 test please? :)

Hello Disgusted !

Unless you know exactly how the test works, you will shoot yourself in the foot trying manipulate the MMPI-2 Test.  It is designed to detect 'fake good' attempts, even a little bit and your're dead!!  There's a few counterintuitive questions, like 'do you swear ?' 'do you get mad?', etc......there's about 6 or so questions like that.

You need to answer 'yes' to these or you will blow the L Scale as a fibber. No one is supposed to be perfect, if you try to be the results will be invalid and the test trashed. If you want to be a cop or get custody of kids, you'll screw yourself, etc......

I've spent the last year or so to get the licence of a bad shrink revoked, lots of work, lots of books, lots of case law, I've got a technical background, so this is not to hard for me to work out, but it would be too much for a regular joe.

Just try an online test and be honest and see what happens! If you are trying to hide a real problem, you won't make it, sorry dude !

Good luck !

Mad Mikey
:D

If one was high on drugs,or drunk, would the test be valid? I assume they sometimes test prison populations, but many of those inmates might be coked up or wired on crystal meth.

If one were to honestly fake good,would taking a sedative or some such "happy pill" do the trick?

Hi  Pottergreen,

People that  are  high  when  doing the MMPI-2 would  likely test  as  invalid.  When you are high, careless  mistakes  are  detected in the  test.  So it does the prison inmate no good to be high.

Original clinical validation tests on MMPI using prisoners includes making sure they are not high compared to normal people that were already tested by other means and also not high.

A 'happy pill' may make you less critical when answering embedded ethical questions  used  for  the 'L'  scale, thus you will likely botch the test with a high 'L' score.   The  L scale kicks up easily even  when you are not trying to fool the  test  on purpose.

I did the MMPI-2  a while back and my 'L' scale raw score was a '6' (boarderline  high).

I  did the test again 8 months later on my own and scored and 'L' scale raw score of '7' (too high, invalid)

So last week I did it again, but marking my self 'hard' on the ethics questions.  I  scored a 'L' scale raw score of '5' (more then I expected,  but OK).

I tested  a crazy former girlfriend (undiagnosed  schizo) she scored an incredibly  low 'L' scale raw score of  just '2', incredibily honest!! Go figure!! Then  she blew the rest of the test:

Item    Raw  score       T score

D          37                   86
Pd         39                  100
Pa         24                  100
Pt          41                  88
Sc         62                  115 (!!) no sharp knives Pls!!
Ma        32                   88

I got my results confirmed at a hospital and treatment for her, but the Shrink that helped a
CPS steal her kids also prevented the kid's inherited problems from being treated!!  What an A-#@&*  !

So I am working to kick some Shrink butt!


So good luck dude!


see  ya,

Mad Mikey

:D

 

Quote:

http://geisel.narod.ru/mmpi2.htm This is a fully functioning MMPI-2 applet that contains all of the items and has a very detailed report.  The report is the real McCoy; it includes all the modern/current scales and categories with broken down scores, as well as the statistical corrections; and even more importantly, the critical items are highlighted and referenced to their respective scales, and the answers are also shown. The nice thing about this applet is that you can easily change any of the answers and rescore it.  The rescored profile will be shown right after the previously scored profile, thus you can tinker and experiment with the item response patterns, to see what happens. This really is as close to the real profile as you can get without a psychologist in the room. The only thing missing are the profile code interpretations, but those are mostly subjective anyway, and so would be worthless.

Keeping in mind they may be subjective, do you know where to find information as to what are the normal ranges?

Thanks

Guest can post in this forum now?  Since when?

I know the CIA and NSA use the MMPI-2 test.  There is a great interpretation of the MMPI-2 test here: http://falseallegations.com/mmpi-bw.htm
Look for the phrase "A T-score of 65 has proven to be the best cutoff for critical items", under "THE ADVENT OF THE MMPI-2" section.  This would mean that a T-score over 65 may raise a flag.  This is just a general basis, psychologists may have some other method of scoring. I think I read that the lower cutoff for an average T-score is around 35 or so.  So 35-65  is like average.  One of these scores also tests if you are lying and trying to manipulate the test. 

When I took the test at http://geisel.narod.ru/mmpi2.htm, most of my T-scores were between 35-65.  I got a score of less than 35 on the Mf Masculine-Femininity"scale, which is expected because I am a your typical masculine "Marlboro Man". lol.  I also had T-scores in the high 60s in Es Ego Strength and, Masculine Gender Role, and Hypomania (I expect this because I'm irritable and people can drive me nuts).  If you study your scores and the link I provided, it doesn't take a doctor to get the gist of it.   

wrote on Nov 20^th, 2010 at 12:35am:

Guest can post in this forum now?  Since when?

Guest posting has been enabled from time to time on this forum. It was most recently enabled on 19 November 2010. While registration has the advantage of allowing users to exchange private messages, to edit or delete their posts (within three days), and to receive notification of replies, we recognize that some may prefer not to register.

There is too much drilling down into the minutiae. The huge elephant y'all keep missing is this: the number of nuts screened out by this process isn't worth the number of decent people denied a job because of this testing scheme. If you think its not a large number, you're dead wrong. Add into it the families whose lives are torn apart thanks to OPINIONS taken as facts in a court of law, the time to look into psych testing under serious review. I fear ANY test that operators say, lay people (spelled you and me) can't understand how to score the test. Very wizard-of-oz'ish. I also fear a test that isn't repeatable, or can't have different scorers arrive at the same conclusion.
I don't see many recourses built into the process, either, jus a lot of "i-say-so".

Not speaking from personal experience, but I am curious about psychology without suffering any mental illness. This sort of test, because it is generally heralded as the best personality test, got me very interested. And the fact that the general public does not have very easy acess (lest the test be compromised) piqued my interest.

The thing that makes the test so hard to manipulate is that all the questions are standardized not only in the general population, but with populations known to have the given disorders for which the scales will detect. Furthermore, the questions have multiple overlapping validity scales that will show if you're faking, and even how you're trying to fake it.

You basically need two main things, and two side things to be able to know what is going on with the MMPI:

1. A set of all the questions. You can try googling around, and get lucky, but Pearson assessment searches routinely and asks posts to be taken down due to "copyright infringement" as release of the scales could invalidate their test. If you fail the search and are low on time, get one of the early editions of Development and Use of the Mmpi-2 Content Scales by James Butcher. Pearson asked this book to be reissued without the questions for obvious reasons, but if you can find an early edition, the list is in an appendix at the end. Note that the book is otherwise useless and not worth reading, you are just buying the early edition to have the questions.

2. A book explaining how to score it and which scales each questions tips off. Without the questions (and the book in question does *NOT* include them), the book is not useful. I found "MMPI-2: An Interpretive Manual" is EXTREMELY expensive but by far the most useful to explain you ever last question, every last test scale so you know the test as well as its creators. It is EXHAUSTIVE in its descriptions. You need lots of time to go question by question, scale by scale but depending on how much you know about psychology/mental health, it may only take a few weeks to know the test and how it works (for educational purposes, of course).

Good luck and have fun!

the reality is that this and other tests are purely subjective, it isnt only the paper test that gives results it is combined with a 1 on 1 with a psychologist and other important data, I am diagnosed with Axis 2 disorders yet if you look at my MMPI-2 there are no indicators at all for any disorder ... so really I dont think there is any real need to spend 2 hrs filling in this test when the subjectivity is so high

Scale Scale Description Raw Score K Score T Score % Answered
True  198   34.9
False  369   65.1
?  0   0.00
VRIN Variable Response Inconsistency 0  30 
TRIN True Reponse Inconsistency 9  50 
F Infrequency 2  44 100
Fb Backside F 0  42 100
Fp Infrequency Psychopathology 0  41 100
L Lie 6  62 100
K Correction 19  59 100
S Superlative Self-Presentation 31  57 100
Hs Hypochondriasis 0 10 40 100
D Depression 12  34 100
Hy Hysteria 19  43 100
Pd Psychopathic Deviate 15 23 51 100
Mf Masculinity-Femininity - Male 33  undefined 100
Mf Masculinity-Femininity - Female 33  57 100
Pa Paranoia 8  42 100
Pt Psychathenia 3 22 38 100
Sc Schizophrenia 3 22 42 100
Ma Hypomania 18 22 56 100
Si Social Introversion 13  35 100
D1 Subjective Depression 2  37 100
D2 Psychomotor Retardation 4  41 100
D3 Physical Malfunctioning 2  41 100
D4 Mental Dullness 0  38 100
D5 Brooding 0  37 100
Hy1 Denial of Social Anxiety 6  61 100
Hy2 Need for Affection 7  50 100
Hy3 Lassitude-malaise 0  39 100
Hy4 Somatic Complaints 0  37 100
Hy5 Inhibition of Aggression 4  54 100
Pd1 Familial Discord 0  38 100
Pd2 Authority Problems 4  61 100
Pd3 Social Imperturbability 6  64 100
Pd4 Social Alienation 3  44 100
Pd5 Self-alienation 2  43 100
Pa1 Persecutory Ideas 2  51 100
Pa2 Poignancy 1  40 100
Pa3 Naivete 4  45 100
Sc1 Social Alienation 1  42 100
Sc2 Emotional Alienation 1  49 100
Sc3 Lack of Ego Mastery, Cognitive 0  43 100
Sc4 Lack of Ego Mastery, Conative 1  44 100
Sc5 Lack of Ego Mastery, Defective Inhibition 0  40 100
Sc6 Bizarre Sensory Experiences 0  41 100
Ma1 Amorality 1  45 100
Ma2 Psychomotor Acceleration 4  45 100
Ma3 Imperturbability 5  62 100
Ma4 Ego Inflation 5  62 100
Si1 Shyness/Self-Consciousness 0  36 100
Si2 Social Avoidance 1  42 100
Si3 Self/Other Alienation 4  47 100
ANX Anxiety 2  40 100
FRS Fears 0  31 100
OBS Obsessivness 3  44 100
DEP Depression 0  34 100
HEA Health Concerns 0  32 100
BIZ Bizarre Mentation 0  39 100
ANG Anger 2  39 100
CYN Cynicism 8  48 100
ASP Antisocial Practices 7  42 100
TPA Type A 3  38 100
LSE Low Self-esteem 3  47 100
SOD Social Discomfort 1  35 100
FAM Family Problems 4  45 100
WRK Work Interference 2  37 100
TRT Negative Treatment Indicators 2  43 100
A Anxiety 3  39 100
R Repression 14  44 100
Es Ego Strength 42  66 100
MAC-R MacAndrew Alcoholism Scale-Revised 22  59 100
AAS Addiction Acknowledgement 2  50 100
APS Addiction Potential 24  52 100
MDS Marital Distress 1  42 100
Ho Hostility 10  41 100
O-H Overcontrolled Hostility 17  63 100
Do Dominance 18  56 100
Re Social Responsibility 22  53 100
Mt College Maladjustment 3  37 100
GM Masculine Gender Role 39  66 100
GF Feminine Gender Role 35  43 100
PK Post-traumatic Stress Disorder 2  40 100
PS Post-traumatic Stress Disorder 1  38 100
D-O Depression, Obvious 1  34 100
D-S Depression, Subtle 10  44 100
Hy-O Hysteria, Obvious 0  37 100
Hy-S Hysteria, Subtle 19  56 100
Pd-O Psychopathic Deviate, Obvious 2  41 100
Pd-S Psychopathic Deviate, Subtle 13  59 100
Pa-O Paranoia, Obvious 2  47 100
Pa-S Paranoia, Subtle 6  44 100
Ma-O Hypomania, Obvoius 6  49 100
Ma-S Hypomania, Subtle 12  59 100
dem Demoralization 1  41 100
som Somatic Complaints 0  36 100
lpe Low Positive Emotions 0  33 100
cyn Cynicism 5  48 100
asb Antisocial Behavior 4  52 100
per Ideas of Persecution 0  43 100
dne Dysfunctional Negative Emotions 3  42 100
abx Aberrant Experiences 0  39 100
hpm Hypomanic Activation 9  46 100
AGGR Aggressiveness 10  61 100
PSYC Psychoticism 1  41 100
DISC Disconstraint 16  66 100
NEGE Negative Emotionality / Neuroticism 4  38 100
INTR Introversion / Low Positive Emotionality 6  39 100
FRS1 Generalized Fearfulness 0  42 100
FRS2 Multiple Fears 0  30 100
DEP1 Lack of Drive 0  40 100
DEP2 Dysphoria 0  40 100
DEP3 Self-Depreciation 0  40 100
DEP4 Suicidal Ideation 0  45 100
HEA1 Gastrointestinal Symptoms 0  43 100
HEA2 Neurological Symtoms 0  39 100
HEA3 General Health Concerns 0  40 100
BIZ1 Psychotic Symptomatology 0  44 100
BIZ2 Schizotypal Characteristics 0  41 100
ANG1 Explosive Behavior 0  39 100
ANG2 Irritability 1  39 100
CYN1 Misanthropic Beliefs 6  51 100
CYN2 Interpersonal Suspiciousness 2  45 100
ASP1 Antisocial Attitudes 5  48 100
ASP2 Antisocial Behavior 2  61 100
TPA1 Impatience 0  34 100
TPA2 Competitive Drive 2  46 100
LSE1 Self-Doubt 0  39 100
LSE2 Submissiveness 2  51 100
SOD1 Introversion 1  40 100
SOD2 Shyness 0  35 100
FAM1 Family Discord 1  38 100
FAM2 Familial Alienation 0  41 100
TRT1 Low Motivation 0  41 100
TRT2 Inability to Disclose 1  46 100
Scale Scale Description Question Answer Question Text
LW5 Lachar-Wrobel Critical Items - Deviant Thinking and Experiences 427 True I have never seen a vision.
LW7 Lachar-Wrobel Critical Items - Antisocial Attitude 35 True Sometimes when I was young I stole things.
LW7 Lachar-Wrobel Critical Items - Antisocial Attitude 266 False I have never been in trouble with the law.
LW10 Lachar-Wrobel Critical Items - Sexual Concern and Deviation 62 True I have often wished I were a girl. (or if you are a girl) I have never been sorry that I am a girl.
LW10 Lachar-Wrobel Critical Items - Sexual Concern and Deviation 121 False I have never indulged in unusual sex practices.
LW11 Lachar-Wrobel Critical Items - Somatic Symptoms 57 True I hardly ever feel pain in the back of my neck.
Profile Elevation: 43.3
Answer Summary

wrote on Dec 2^nd, 2010 at 12:17am:

Not speaking from personal experience, but I am curious about psychology without suffering any mental illness. This sort of test, because it is generally heralded as the best personality test, got me very interested. And the fact that the general public does not have very easy acess (lest the test be compromised) piqued my interest. The thing that makes the test so hard to manipulate is that all the questions are standardized not only in the general population, but with populations known to have the given disorders for which the scales will detect. Furthermore, the questions have multiple overlapping validity scales that will show if you're faking, and even how you're trying to fake it. You basically need two main things, and two side things to be able to know what is going on with the MMPI: 1. A set of all the questions. You can try googling around, and get lucky, but Pearson assessment searches routinely and asks posts to be taken down due to "copyright infringement" as release of the scales could invalidate their test. If you fail the search and are low on time, get one of the early editions of Development and Use of the Mmpi-2 Content Scales by James Butcher. Pearson asked this book to be reissued without the questions for obvious reasons, but if you can find an early edition, the list is in an appendix at the end. Note that the book is otherwise useless and not worth reading, you are just buying the early edition to have the questions. 2. A book explaining how to score it and which scales each questions tips off. Without the questions (and the book in question does *NOT* include them), the book is not useful. I found "MMPI-2: An Interpretive Manual" is EXTREMELY expensive but by far the most useful to explain you ever last question, every last test scale so you know the test as well as its creators. It is EXHAUSTIVE in its descriptions. You need lots of time to go question by question, scale by scale but depending on how much you know about psychology/mental health, it may only take a few weeks to know the test and how it works (for educational purposes, of course). Good luck and have fun!

Everybody suffers from mental impairment/“illness” of one sort or another; the only question is to what degree and to what extent it affects ones daily life.

Here are a few more tidbits:

If you had only read the previous page (and only the previous page), you would have seen multiple references to the fully functioning MMPI-2 script which contains all the items and has an automatic detailed scoring scheme; all of which can be accessed in less than a few seconds: a total of one mouse click.

If you want to learn more about interpreting the results, then you will have to go to a college or local library and get one of these types of books:
MMPI-2: Assessing Personality and Psychopathology by John R. Graham
MMPI-2: A Practitioner's Guide by James Neal Butcher
Development and Use of the Mmpi-2 Content Scales (MMPI-2 Monograph Series) by James N. Butcher and John R. Graham
The MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF: An Interpretive Manual
...or similar...there are many more and always new ones coming out too. 

The MMPI-2 is used predominantly, and not so much the newer and relatively unproven MMPI-2-RF, in terms of federal security/intelligence agency testing.  But don’t forget, most likely there will still be an interview with a psychologist as well, so the 'real you' will still be 'probed' during the one-on-one session with the professional.

The last thing I should mention is that the Russian script with the questions is not perfect.  It is meant as an educational tool for those who are curious, and also as a starting point for those who wish to explore the test items.  That script does have a few built-in scoring errors (whether intentional or not), a few miss-keyed critical items, and it also does not have all of the possible score sub-categories.  But nonetheless, it is an excellent starting point, and a great learning tool!

Glavlit wrote on Dec 4^th, 2010 at 7:56pm:

The MMPI-2 is used predominantly, and not so much the newer and relatively unproven MMPI-2-RF, in terms of federal security/intelligence agency testing.  But don’t forget, most likely there will still be an interview with a psychologist as well, so the 'real you' will still be 'probed' during the one-on-one session with the professional.

Exactly.  The CIA uses this apparently, see these posts from a CIA applicant here and here.  And the NSA also must use this.  See this NSA applicant's story Interviewing With An Intelligence Agency, where his psychological exam is on pages 7-12, it looks like he took some version of the MMPI also.

Glavlit wrote on Dec 4^th, 2010 at 7:56pm:

If you had only read the previous page (and only the previous page), you would have seen multiple references to the fully functioning MMPI-2 script which contains all the items and has an automatic detailed scoring scheme; all of which can be accessed in less than a few seconds: a total of one mouse click.

While I did not read the last page (now I did, thanks), I was aware of that applet. You can copy/paste the questions so you have them. But even having the scales from the applet w/ all your results won't be a huge help.

The other concern is that sooner or later the applet will be banned....

The second book I recommended I found to be extremely helpful as it also gives multiple real examples of various scales, combinations etc. It also offers criticisms and examples of when test results where the validity scales are all "OK" still don't reflect the situation, and suggestions for how to view tertiary scales etc.

That's if you really want to get into it though, it is highly involved reading.

wrote on Dec 4^th, 2010 at 10:51pm:

Glavlit wrote on Dec 4th, 2010 at 7:56pm: If you had only read the previous page (and only the previous page), you would have seen multiple references to the fully functioning MMPI-2 script which contains all the items and has an automatic detailed scoring scheme; all of which can be accessed in less than a few seconds: a total of one mouse click. While I did not read the last page (now I did, thanks), I was aware of that applet. You can copy/paste the questions so you have them. But even having the scales from the applet w/ all your results won't be a huge help. The other concern is that sooner or later the applet will be banned.... The second book I recommended I found to be extremely helpful as it also gives multiple real examples of various scales, combinations etc. It also offers criticisms and examples of when test results where the validity scales are all "OK" still don't reflect the situation, and suggestions for how to view tertiary scales etc. That's if you really want to get into it though, it is highly involved reading.

Getting a copy of the questions is the easy part, getting a copy of the scoring software is basically impossible.  That is why the Russian script is so nice, because someone already did most of the tedious work of scoring it.  Anyone can save it and edit it very easily now.

There is at least one older free trial software that will give out a basic automatic interpretive report when the general T-scores are inputted.  Other than that one, getting a copy of the new and comprehensive Pearson software is basically impossible for non-authorized users.

There were other scripts on US servers that were quickly removed or closed down.  But this script is not only a gem, but also Russian.  Because it’s Russian, it’s not really going anywhere anytime soon.  It might be gone eventually, but in this case, not because someone banned it.

But yes, I know what you meant, and my post was in general, and not directed specifically towards you.  Indeed, it is an imperfect instrument that tries to simplify very complex situations. 

So it is all quite complicated indeed!

Here is one book you probably did not read, so take a look at it (it is rather interesting and has a whole chapter devoted to the MMPI story):
The Cult of Personality: How Personality Tests Are Leading Us to Miseducate Our Children, Mismanage Our Companies, and Misunderstand Ourselves
by Annie Murphy Paul

Hey,

Could you send me the rest of the questions too, please?

Do some of these questions seem REALLY odd to people? I hope they can rule out severely depressed and disturbed people that see things that don't exist etc. by other means than this test...

I believe the results on those tests are also based on the state of mind one is in while taking the test. Environmental chaos or illness or even over worked changes the state of mind you are in... Maybe that is why some pass it one time and are ruled out another time.

Please send me the rest of the test

Thanks

I too am extremely interested in the questions on the MMPI.  If you could email them to me, I would much, much appreciate it. 
Thanks,
Hope

You all need to learn how to read through posts before asking a question where the answer has already been provided.  The MMPI-2 test questions are here, as mentioned earlier in this thread:
http://geisel.narod.ru/mmpi2.htm

So you're an applicant for a law enforcement job.

AND you're *here* looking for ways to cheat on the *personality test* that is part of the application process.

That translates to both dishonest and stupid.

Just the way I like my law enforcement officers.

wrote on Jan 10^th, 2011 at 12:54am:

So you're an applicant for a law enforcement job. AND you're *here* looking for ways to cheat on the *personality test* that is part of the application process. That translates to both dishonest and stupid. Just the way I like my law enforcement officers.

Not sure to whom exactly you are replying to, but at any rate:

It’s not a true personality test per se. You also can’t really “cheat” on it either.

The one thing which truly “translates to both dishonest and stupid” is the MMPI itself!

The test items and the methodology of the MMPI are both dishonest and stupid. Kind of like the polygraph actually.

in New York State, they rely on John Wapner, who administers these tests in bulk, to the Albany Police Department, Fire Department, and many other agencies.

the problem is, John Wapner has never once purchased a psychometric examination himself and he also has no current and updated training in scoring the MMPI 2.  Additionally, for example, the other psychometric testing he is and has been responsible for with APD the booklets have the answers in them for the candidates they want.  Wapner illegally administers MMPI 2 tests, outdated Rorschack tests and TAT, for the NYS Dept. of Civil Service.  This john wapner is a friggen weezle.  If you have been victimized by him, there is a suit against him in Federal Court, Albany NY.
I have been on both sides, I was issued a test in 1990 that had the answers in it.  In 2007 post employment with OSC, who has Wapner issue these tests in bulk.  he also erases answers.  This guy should be reviewed by the APA.  He has mostly borrowed tests, and copied them.  He is a nut case.

wrote on Jan 3^rd, 2011 at 9:19pm:

You all need to learn how to read through posts before asking a question where the answer has already been provided.  The MMPI-2 test questions are here, as mentioned earlier in this thread: http://geisel.narod.ru/mmpi2.htm

I have just completed the Original MMPI test today. The web site you mentioned contains completely different questions than the MMPI!
This Russian site is a Fake!

For you job-seekers, I put the complete list of sample questions from my MMPI exam up online.

http://www.lulu.com/product/ebook/mmpi-2-questions/14601195

wrote on Feb 21^st, 2011 at 8:03pm:

wrote on Jan 3rd, 2011 at 9:19pm: You all need to learn how to read through posts before asking a question where the answer has already been provided.  The MMPI-2 test questions are here, as mentioned earlier in this thread: http://geisel.narod.ru/mmpi2.htm I have just completed the Original MMPI test today. The web site you mentioned contains completely different questions than the MMPI! This Russian site is a Fake!

The MMPI is a different test from the MMPI-2.  The questions on the Russian site posted above is for the MMPI-2 exam, and they are 100% accurate. 


wrote on Feb 27^th, 2011 at 7:16pm:

For you job-seekers, I put the complete list of sample questions from my MMPI exam up online. http://www.lulu.com/product/ebook/mmpi-2-questions/14601195

Yep, the 177 preview test questions shown on that site are the same from the site posted above. 

Remember folks, this is for the MMPI-2, not the original MMPI.  There is a huge difference.  See the wikipedia article about it here.

I dont think you should need to study for this test...... If you do..... Ummmmmmm? Only thing I hate about it is how long it is. The questions are simple lol just put what you feel fits you best..... Goodluck  ;)

Pls send me the remaining questions to complete the 567 of MMPI 2

did you know that Eisentien ( yes the great physiscits) could not pass an IQ test?  yep yep     so this and these sorts of tests are disqusting in that it all depends on who interpets them..... to bad this is how we decide who does or doesn't get a job.... :-/

Thank you for the test questions, I wish I had the answers, but with a little thinking, you can pass, just need to be consistant.