Abstract
The recently released Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-3 (MMPI-3) includes a revised set of Validity Scales on which there is currently limited validity and clinical utility evidence for the detection of overreporting. The present study evaluated the MMPI-3 Validity Scales in the identification of such response bias. An analogue simulation design was used in which participants in an overreporting condition (163 undergraduate students) were instructed to feign mental health symptoms when responding to the MMPI-3 in the context of a compensation-seeking claim. Two comparison groups (657 undergraduate students and 223 community mental health patients) were instructed to respond to the MMPI-3 under standard instructions. The results indicated that those in the overreporting group generally had higher scores on MMPI-3 substantive scales than did genuine responding patients and students. In addition, results indicated that the criterion validity of the substantive scale scores was compromised in the context of overreporting. All MMPI-3 Validity Scales, particularly Fp (g = 1.29), F (g = 1.05), and RBS (g = 1.11), differentiated the overreporting group from patients with genuine psychopathology. Classification accuracies associated with the overreporting Validity Scale scores were evaluated and generally supported their utility in correctly classifying overreporters and patients. Overall, the findings generally support the validity and clinical utility of the MMPI-3 Validity Scales in the detection of overreporting.
Public Significance Statement The MMPI-3 is a new version of a frequently used psychology test. The current research validated scales used to detect when individuals overreport mental health problems in psychological evaluations.