Equivalence of Laptop and Tablet Administrations of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form

Using the MMPI-2-RF, IOP-29, IOP-M, and FIT in the In-Person and Remote Administration Formats: A Simulation Study on Feigned mTBI

Our study compared the impact of administering Symptom Validity Tests (SVTs) and Performance Validity Tests (PVTs) in in-person versus remote formats and assessed different approaches to combining validity test results. Using the MMPI-2-RF, IOP-29, IOP-M, and FIT, we assessed 164 adults, with half instructed to feign mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) and half to respond honestly. Within each subgroup, half completed the tests in person, and the other half completed them online via videoconferencing. Results from 2 ×2 analyses of variance showed no significant effects of administration format on SVT and PVT scores. When comparing feigners to controls, the MMPI-2-RF RBS exhibited the largest effect size (d = 3.05) among all examined measures. Accordingly, we conducted a series of two-step hierarchical logistic regression models by entering the MMPI-2-RF RBS first, followed by each other SVT and PVT individually. We found that the IOP-29 and IOP-M were the only measures that yielded incremental validity beyond the effects of the MMPI-2-RF RBS in predicting group membership. Taken together, these findings suggest that administering these SVTs and PVTs in-person or remotely yields similar results, and the combination of MMPI and IOP indexes might be particularly effective in identifying feigned mTBI.

Evaluation of telehealth administration of MMPI symptom validity scales

INTRODUCTION

Telehealth assessment (TA) is a quickly emerging practice, offered with increasing frequency across many different clinical contexts. TA is also well-received by most patients, and there are numerous guidelines and training opportunities which can support effective telehealth practice. Although there are extensive recommended practices, these guidelines have rarely been evaluated empirically, particularly on personality measures. While existing research is limited, it does generally support the idea that TA and in-person assessment (IA) produce fairly equitable test scores. The MMPI-3, a recently released and highly popular personality and psychopathology measure has been the subject of several of those experimental or student (non-client) based studies; however, no study to date has evaluated these trends within a clinical sample. This study empirically tests for differences in TA and IA test scores on the MMPI-3 validity scores when following recommended administration procedures.

METHOD

Data were from a retrospective chart review. Veterans (n = 550) who underwent psychological assessment in a Veterans Affairs Medical Center ADHD evaluation clinic were contrasted between in person and telehealth assessment modalities on the MMPI-2-RF and MMPI-3. Groups were compared using t tests, chi square, and base rates.

RESULTS

Results suggest that there were minimal differences in elevation rates or mean scores across modality, supporting the use of TA.

CONCLUSIONS

This study's findings support the use of the MMPI via TA with ADHD evaluations, Veterans, and in neuro/psychological evaluation settings more generally. Observed elevation rates and mean scores of this study were notably different from those seen in other VA service clinics sampled nationally, which is an area of future investigation.

Comparability and Validity of the Online and In-Person Administrations of the Inventory of Problems-29

While the psychometric equivalence of computerized versus paper-and-pencil administration formats has been documented for some tests, so far very few studies have focused on the comparability and validity of test scores obtained via in-person versus remote administrations, and none of them have researched a symptom validity test (SVT). To contribute to fill this gap in the literature, we investigated the scores of the Inventory of Problems-29 (IOP-29) generated by various administration formats. More specifically, Study 1 evaluated the equivalence of scores from nonclinical individuals administered the IOP-29 remotely (n = 146) versus in-person via computer (n = 140) versus in-person via paper-and-pencil format (n = 140). Study 2 reviewed published IOP-29 studies conducted using remote/online versus in-person, paper-and-pencil test administrations to determine if remote testing could adversely influence the validity of IOP-29 test results. Taken together, our findings suggest that the effectiveness of the IOP-29 is preserved when alternating between face-to-face and online/remote formats.

Examining the Psychometric Equivalency of MMPI-3 Scale Scores Derived From the MMPI-3 and the MMPI-2-RF-EX

The current study evaluated the comparability of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–3 (MMPI-3) scale scores derived from the 335-item MMPI-3 to MMPI-3 scale scores derived from the 433-item MMPI-2 restructured form–expanded version (MMPI-2-RF-EX), an enhanced version of the MMPI-2-RF that was used to develop and validate the MMPI-3. To that end, we examined data from 192 college undergraduates who completed both the MMPI-3 and MMPI-2-RF-EX 1 week apart using a counterbalanced design. Across versions, mean T-scores and standard deviations, estimates of internal consistency, and standard error of measurement values, were highly similar, indicating no clinically meaningful differences across versions. We also compared between-version test–retest comparability values with within-version values calculated using a sample of undergraduates ( N = 318) who completed the MMPI-2-RF-EX twice over the same time interval, finding only marginal differences across the two samples. Finally, we computed column-vector correlations between MMPI-3 scores from both versions and several criterion measures, where results reflected no effect of test version on external validity. Overall, we determined that scale scores derived from either booklet are psychometrically interchangeable, indicating that MMPI-3 scale scores obtained from an administration of the MMPI-2-RF-EX can be applied when using the 335-item MMPI-3.