The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-IV (MCMI-IV) and Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory-II (MACI-II) in Legal Settings

Dissimulation in forensic psychiatric evaluations, a case-control study of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III

The possible tendency of subjects to decrease, hide, or omit symptomatic aspects of their mental functioning is one of the main problems in forensic psychological and psychiatric evaluations. We aimed at verifying the possible existence of significant differences in the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-III (MCMI-III) scales scores between a sample of dissimulators (n = 40) and their non-dissimulator counterpart matched by age, sex, and diagnosis. Cases and comparisons were retrieved from the archive of a single university forensic psychiatric centre between 2013 and 2022. Results showed statistically significant higher scores in the sample of dissimulators in the Desirability, Histrionic, Narcissistic, and Compulsive MCMI-III scales than in the comparison sample. Point biserial correlation test disclosed a strong positive correlation between the Desirability, Histrionic, Narcissistic, and Compulsive scales of the MCMI-III and being in the dissimulator group of subjects while a negative correlation emerged for all the other scales except drug dependence.

Key points

The forensic setting can affect a subject's behaviour.Dissimulation is a mechanism of minimization or concealment of a psycho-pathological condition.The MCMI-III can be a useful tool for a forensic psychiatrist or forensic psychologist in assessing dissimulation.

Personality Assessment in Legal Contexts: Introduction to the Special Issue

This special issue addresses a major gap in the literature by providing comprehensive, credible reviews of the psychometric evidence for and legal status of some of the most commonly-used psychological and personality assessment measures used in forensic evaluations. It responds to Neal and colleagues' (2019) call for research to improve the state of and access to knowledge about psychological assessments in legal contexts, and encourages critical thinking about forensic assessment in the spirit of improvement. These articles offer clarity about the strengths and weaknesses of a number of assessment instruments to inform psychologists' preparation for expert testimony, lawyers' preparation for direct and cross-examination, judges' evidence admissibility determinations, and scholars' future research. We assembled teams of authors with different perspectives and areas of expertise to review each tool fairly, including several adversarial collaborations. Articles on the Rorschach and R-PAS, MMPI-3, PCL-R, MCMI-IV and MACI-II, PAI and PAI-A, SIRS-2, HCR-20^V3, TSI and TSI-2, and the MacCAT-CA, ECST-R, and CAST*MR are included. To increase visibility, accessibility, and impact, this issue is published as free access, meaning the articles are available to download without charge. We anticipate these articles will be widely read and useful to scholars and practitioners in both psychology and law.