Accuracy of the MMPI-2 computerized Minnesota report in identifying fake-good and fake-bad response sets

E. Arthur Shores*, Jane R. Carstairs

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    13 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The present simulation study was designed to evaluate the accuracy of the computerized Minnesota Report in identifying faked response sets on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2). The Minnesota Report is being increasingly relied upon in forensic neuropsychological assessments to assist in identifying malingering. Three groups of 18 students were given different sets of instructions: fake-good, fake-bad, and the standard instructions. Of those participants instructed to fake-good, the classification rate was 94% with only one participant misclassified as providing a 'normal' profile. Of those participants instructed to fake-bad, 100% were correctly classified by the Minnesota Report. Of those who completed the MMPI-2 under standard instructions 78% were classified as having 'normal' profiles, whereas 22% were classified as faking-good. The value of the Minnesota Report in identifying fake-bad response sets was amply demonstrated, and it is such performances that may be helpful in detecting malingering in forensic evaluations.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)101-106
    Number of pages6
    JournalClinical Neuropsychologist
    Volume12
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1998

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Accuracy of the MMPI-2 computerized Minnesota report in identifying fake-good and fake-bad response sets'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this