MMPI 2 First 75 Questions out of 567 Psych Exam

[Administrator]

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.

[Desprez]

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.

[hostage]

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

[T.M. Cullen]

Thank you comrade!

TC

[psych1]

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.

[JSP]

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.

[psych1]

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.

[JSP]

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.

[psych1]

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.

[Desprez]

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.

[psych1]

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.

[wildkoala]

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.

[romeo]

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

Thanks

[romeo]

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 ?

[psych1]

 ....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.