Automation Techniques in Personality Assessment: A Frontier in Behavioral Science and Medicine

1964 ◽  
Vol 03 (01) ◽  
pp. 34-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. S. Pearson ◽  
W. M. Swenson
Keyword(s):  
Personality Assessment ◽  
Mayo Clinic ◽  
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Electronic Computer ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Routine Test ◽  
Medical Consultant ◽  
Mmpi Profile

A program is described for the development and implementation of a scoring and interpretation technique for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory through the use of an electronic computer. Depending upon the configural pattern of the MMPI profile, the computer automatically draws from a statement library of over 70 descriptive statements a personality summary of the salient characteristics of the patient. This summary is used by the medical consultant in dealing with his patient.The technique has been used on over 20,000 patients at the Mayo Clinic and is currently a routine test in the medical sections. The program has undergone many modifications since its inception in 1961.The process is described whereby the current library of descriptive statements was developed and some of the difficulties involved. It summarizes the authors’ subjective feelings about this method of personality evaluation as well as the opportunities for future research and expansion in this area.

Personality Testing in Law Enforcement Employment Settings

2004 ◽  
Vol 31 (6) ◽  
pp. 649-675 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jorge G. Varela ◽  
Marcus T. Boccaccini ◽  
Forrest Scogin ◽  
Jamie Stump ◽  
Alicia Caputo
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Job Performance ◽  
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Personality Testing ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Enforcement Officer ◽  
Law Enforcement Officer ◽  
Design Characteristics

Meta-analysis was used to (a) assess the overall validity of personality measures as predictors of law enforcement officer job performance, (b) investigate the moderating effects of study design characteristics on this relation, and (c) compare effects for commonly used instruments in this setting. Results revealed a modest but statistically significant relation between personality test scores and officer performance. Prediction was strongest for the California Psychological Inventory and weaker for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory and Inwald Personality Inventory. Effect sizes were larger for studies examining current job performance, as opposed to future job performance. Implications for using personality tests in the law enforcement officer hiring process are discussed, and recommendations for future research are provided.

The Generalizability of Overreporting Across Self-Report Measures: An Investigation With the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2–Restructured Form and the Personality Assessment Inventory in a Civil Disability Sample

Assessment ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 555-574 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam H. Crighton ◽  
Anthony M. Tarescavage ◽  
Roger O. Gervais ◽  
Yossef S. Ben-Porath
Keyword(s):  
Head Injury ◽  
Personality Assessment ◽  
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory ◽  
Personality Assessment Inventory ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Validity Scales ◽  
Cognitive Complaints ◽  
Validity Scale ◽  
Scale Scores

Elevated overreporting Validity Scale scores on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2–Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) are associated with higher scores on collateral measures; however, measures used in prior research lacked validity scales. We sought to extend these findings by examining associations between elevated MMPI-2-RF overreporting scale scores and Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) scale scores among 654 non–head injury civil disability claimants. Individuals were classified as overreporting psychopathology (OR-P), overreporting somatic/cognitive complaints (OR-SC), inconclusive reporting psychopathology (IR-P), inconclusive reporting somatic/cognitive complaints (IR-SC), or valid reporting (VR). Both overreporting groups had significantly and meaningfully higher scores than the VR group on the MMPI-2-RF and PAI scales. Both IR groups had significantly and meaningfully higher scores than the VR group, as well as lower scores than their overreporting counterparts. Our findings demonstrate the utility of inventories with validity scales in assessment batteries that include instruments without measures of protocol validity.

scholarly journals A critical review of psychological instruments used in police officer selection

2013 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 737-751 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Lough ◽  
Kathryn Von Treuer
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory ◽  
Selection Process ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
General Process ◽  
Psychological Screening ◽  
Content Type

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to critically examine the instruments used in the screening process, with particular attention given to supporting research validation. Psychological screening is a well-established process used in the selection of employees across public safety industries, particularly in police settings. Screening in and screening out are both possible, with screening out being the most commonly used method. Little attention, however, has been given to evaluating the comparative validities of the instruments used. Design/methodology/approach – This review investigates literature supporting the use of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), the California Personality Inventory (CPI), the Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI), the Australian Institute of Forensic Psychology's test battery (AIFP), and some other less researched tests. Research supporting the validity of each test is discussed. Findings – It was found that no test possesses unequivocal research support, although the CPI and AIFP tests show promise. Most formal research into the validity of the instruments lacks appropriate experimental structure and is therefore less powerful as “evidence” of the utility of the instrument(s). Practical implications – This research raises the notion that many current screening practices are likely to be adding minimal value to the selection process by way of using instruments that are not “cut out” for the job. This has implications for policy and practice at the recruitment stage of police employment. Originality/value – This research provides a critical overview of the instruments and their validity studies rather than examining the general process of psychological screening. As such, it is useful to those working in selection who are facing the choice of psychological instrument. Possibilities for future research are presented, and development opportunities for a best practice instrument are discussed.

MMPI Short Forms: A Clinical Perspective

1981 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 627-631 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jack D. Edinger
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Significance ◽  
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Standard Form ◽  
Personality Inventory ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Clinical Perspective ◽  
Short Forms ◽  
Clinically Significant ◽  
Substantial Interest

Although numerous studies have compared Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) short-form scores with scores obtained from the standard MMPI, recent (1980) reports by Butcher, Kendall, and Hoffman and Newmark, Woody, Ziff, and Finch suggest that a substantial interest in such comparisons may remain. It is questionable, however, whether further studies of this nature are warranted. In fan, such studies have only limited clinical significance and may, at times, lead to inaccurate conclusions about available short forms. The purpose herein is to demonstrate the limited utility of research in which short forms are evaluated purely in terms of their prediction of standard form results. Further, a number of more clinically significant questions in regard to MMPI short forms are presented hopefully as a catalyst for future research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document