Sample of An MMPI Report - Undergrad Level (Scoring Included)

Running Head: PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT OF AN EMOTIONALLY DISTRESSED PERSON
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF AN EMOTIONALLY DISTRESSED PERSON
Using MMPI-2
PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT OF AN EMOTIONALLY DISTRESSED PERSON
2
Introduction
The Concept of Personality
Personality is the unique way in which an individual thinks acts and feels throughout life.
It refers to our characteristic ways of responding to individuals and situations. The notion of
personality is used to explain behavioral differences between people and the behavioral
consistency of an individual. Certain words like shy, sensitive, quiet, concerned, warm etc. are
used to describe personality (Passer & Smith, 2013).
According to Gordon Allport (1961), personality is "The dynamic organization within the
individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his characteristic behavior and
thought."
Raymond Cattell (1950) gave the definition of personality as “personality is something that
permits a prediction of what a person will do in a given situation."
According to Sigmund Freud (1953), "personality is an individual's unique thoughts,

feelings, and behavior that persist over time and different situations” (Passer & Smith, 2013).
The characteristic features of personality are-
● It has both physical and psychological components.

● Its expression in terms of behavior is fairly unique in a given individual.
● Its main features don’t easily change with time.
● It is dynamic in the sense that some of its features may change due to internal or external
situational demands.
● Thus, personality is adaptive to situations (Passer & Smith, 2013)
Personality should not be confused with character or temperament. Both character and
temperament are a vital part of personality. Mischel states that a person's behavior is influenced
primarily by two things, Consistency Paradox and Person-Situation Interaction.
3
Consistency Paradox - means that a person's behavior seems consistent or the same every
time you see them, but in a given situation their behavior can change from consistent state to a
completely different state then use to. An example someone who consistently studies in the
beginning of senior year, then all of a sudden stops studying by the end of senior year and fails
classes.
Person-Situation Interaction - Mischel's meaning of this is that a person's can be

distinguished from a given situation, rather than just assuming how they act. An example would
be a man that has a temper tantrum when he gets the wrong order in a restaurant. A person could
tell that the man has a short temper, stressed, and maybe a mental problem
He explained that people do tend to act differently depending on situations given, that no
one person acts the same always. If someone with a stable behavior were to be taken out of a their
natural surroundings or environment then they will also shift into a different state off behavior;
Mischel gave five different person variables in which people will tend to act in a certain situation.
Approaches to Personality
There are following main approaches for the study of personality:-
Psychodynamic Perspective of Personality
The psychodynamic or psychoanalytic perspective had its beginnings in the work of

Sigmund Freud and still exists today. It focuses on the role of unconscious in development of
personality. It also focuses on the biological causes of personality differences. Freud based his
theory on careful clinical observation. It involves continuous conflict between the id and
counterforce’s of the ego and super ego. Freud believed that adult personality traits are modeled
by how children deal with instinctual urges and social reality during the oral, anal and phallic
stages.
Neoanalytic theorists modified and extended Freud’s ideas in important ways, stressing
social and cultural factors in personality development. Object relations theorists focused on the
mental representations that people form of themselves and of other people.
Humanistic Perspective to personality

4
Humanists such as Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow focused on things that make people
uniquely human, such as subjective emotions and the freedom to choose one's own destiny. They
embraced a positive view that affirms the inherent dignity and goodness of the human spirit (Passer
& Smith, 2013).
Carl Rogers believed that the forces that direct behavior are within us and when they are
not distorted by our environment, they can be trusted to direct us towards self- actualization. The
striving for fulfillment is called self-actualizing tendency. An important tool in human self-
actualizing is the development of image of self i.e. self-concept. He gave the concepts of ideal self
(perception of what one should be) and real self (one's actual perception of characteristics, traits,
and abilities). When the ideal and real self are very close and similar to each other, the person feels
competent and capable, but in case of mismatch anxiety and neurotic behavior arises (Passer &
Smith, 2013).
Abraham Maslow proposed that there are several levels of needs before achieving the
highest level of personality fulfillment. According to him actualization is the point that is seldom
reached at which people have satisfied the lower needs and achieved their full human potential.
The needs move on from the fulfillment of physiological needs to safety needs to belongingness
and love needs to esteem needs to cognitive needs to aesthetic needs to self- actualization needs
(Ciccarelli & Mayer, 2013).
Social-Cognitive Perspective to Personality
Social-cognitive theorists emphasized the importance of both of the influences of other

people's behavior and of a person's own expectancies on learning. Observational learning,
modeling, and other cognitive learning techniques can lead to formation of personality. One of the
more well-researched learning theories that include the concept of cognitive processes as
influences on behavior is the social- cognitive theory of Albert Bandera. He believed that three
factors influence one another in determining behavior: the environment, the behavior itself, and
personal or cognitive factors that the person brings into the situation from earlier experiences
(Ciccarelli & Mayer, 2013) (Passer & Smith, 2013).
Trait Approach to Personality

5
Trait approach focuses on the specific psychological attributes along which individuals
tend to differ in consistent and stable ways. Gordon Allport is considered the pioneer of trait
approach. Allport argued that the words people use to describe themselves and others provide a
basis for understanding human personality. He categorized traits into Cardinal (highly generalized
dispositions), central traits (less pervasive in effect but still quite generalized dispositions) and
secondary traits (least generalized dispositions) (Passer & Smith, 2013).
H.J.vEysenck proposed that personality could be reduced into two broad dimensions:
Neuroticism (associated with anxiety, moodiness, touchiness and restlessness) V/s Emotional
stability; the other dimension is gave that of extraversion V/s introversion. Paul Costa and Robert
McCrae examined all possible personality traits and gave five personality traits that came to be
known as the BIG FIVE FACTORS. These five factors are openness to experience, extraversion,
agreeableness, neuroticism and conscientiousness (Ciccarelli & Mayer, 2013).
Psychological Testing and Assessment
What is a Psychological Test?
A psychological test is a standardized procedure for sampling behavior and describing it

with categories or scores. Psychological tests have norms or standards by which the results can be
used to predict important behaviors. Following are the characteristics of a good psychological test-
Standardization
Standardization of procedures underlines uniformity in administration procedures and

scoring as well as establishing norms. Standardization has to be of procedure, scoring and norms.
Non-standard testing procedures can alter the meaning of the test results, rendering them invalid
and therefore misleading. Hence, a good psychological test is standardized.
Objectivity
Objectivity is the procedure which ensures that the test is administered and interpreted with
a minimum degree of personal opinion of the examiner. The items of the test should be constructed
in a manner that it eliminates all kinds of biases. However, in psychological measurement, since
6
human attributes are not always stable, some errors are bound to occur which should be reported
then.
Reliability
Reliability refers to the attribute of consistency in measurement. Reliability is best viewed

on a continuum ranging from minimal consistency of measurement to near perfect reliability of
results. There are various types of reliability – a test retest reliability, parallel form/ alternate form
reliability, split-half reliability, internal consistency reliability and inters rater/ inter scorer
reliability.
Validity
Validity is the extent to which the test measures what it claims to measure and whether it
can be used in making valuable predictions. It is vital for a test to be valid in order to be accurately
applied and interpreted. There are three types of validity – content validity, construct validity and
criterion- related validity.
Sample Behavior
The representative sample of behavior that is under consideration is known as sample of

behavior. The subject’s behavior is used to measure some attribute or to predict some specific
outcome. Behavior sample has two implications- firstly; a psychological test is not an exhaustive
measurement of all possible behavior that could be used in measuring or defining a particular
attribute. So instead of comprehensive testing, a psychological test attempts to proximate the
exhaustive procedure by collecting a systematic sample of behavior.
Secondly, the quality of the test is largely determined by the representativeness of the sample.
What is Assessment?
Assessment is the gathering and integration of psychology related data for the purpose of
making a psychological evaluation that is accomplished through the use of tools such as tests,
interviews, case studies, behavioral observation, and specially designed apparatuses and
measurement procedures.
7
Difference between Testing and Assessment
Objective
Typically, test aims to obtain some gauge, usually numerical in nature, with regard to
ability or attribute. On the other hand, assessment aims to answer a referral question, solve a
problem, or arrive at a decision through the use of tools of evaluation.
Process
Testing may be individual or group in nature. After test administration, the tester will
typically add up “the number of correct answers or the number of certain types of responses . . .
with little if any regard for the how or mechanics of such content” (Maloney & Ward, 1976, p.
39).
Assessment is typically individualized. In contrast to testing, assessment more typically

focuses on how an individual processes rather than simply the results of that processing.
Role of Evaluator
The tester is not key to the process; practically speaking, one tester may be substituted for
another tester without appreciably affecting the evaluation.
The assessor is key to the process of selecting tests and/or other tools of evaluation as well
as in drawing conclusions from the entire evaluation.
Skill of Evaluator
Testing typically requires technician-like skills in terms of administering and scoring a test
as well as in interpreting a test result.
Assessment typically requires an educated selection of tools of evaluation, skill in

evaluation, and thoughtful organization and integration of data.
8
Outcome
Testing yields a test score or series of test scores while assessment entails a logical
problem-solving approach that brings to bear many sources of data designed to shed light on a
referral question.
Steps in the Assessment Process
Following are the steps in the process of assessment-
First step in psychological assessment is to identify its goals as clearly and realistically as
possible.
Second step is the professional conducting the assessment, usually a psychologist or a

counselor for the appropriate selection of instruments to be used in gathering data, their careful
administration, scoring, interpretation and the judicious use of the data collected to make
inferences about the question at hand.
The last step in the process of assessment is through verbal or written report,
communicating the conclusions that have been reached to the persons who requested the
assessment, in a comprehensible and useful manner.
Assessment of Personality
Personality Assessment is a proficiency in professional psychology that involves the

administration, scoring, and interpretation of empirically supported measures of personality traits
and styles in order to refine clinical diagnoses; Structure and inform psychological interventions;
and increase the accuracy of behavioral prediction in a variety of contexts and settings (e.g.,
clinical, forensic, organizational, educational).
There two different approaches to studying personality: the nomothetic approach and the
idiographic approach.
9
The nomothetic approach to personality looks at what people have in common with each
other. It comes from the Greek word nomos, which means 'law and the nomothetic approach is
interested in finding patterns or laws of human personality. In the nomothetic approach, then, a
person's unique personality is a result of the combination of general traits that they display.
Nomothetic psychologists measure personality via psychometrics, or measuring traits using tests
or experiments. To them, a person can take a personality test and their score on different traits will
give an outline of who they are.
The idiographic approach is concerned with understanding the uniqueness of individuals

and the development of the self-concept. In this approach measurement of traits is seen as
inappropriate because one person’s responses may not be comparable to another’s. That is,
psychologists advocating idiographic approach believe that the individual is not just a collection
of separate traits, but is well-integrated organism. They hold that individual reacts as a system to
various situations with past experiences and future intentions contributing to present behavior.
Psychologists advocating idiographic approach believe that individual shape his personality
through learning.
Techniques of Assessing Personality
Personality of a person can be assessed using various types of methods:
Personality inventories
Personality inventories can be classified into three basic categories -
Theory guided tests
Theory-guided self-report inventories rely upon explicit personality theories for their
development. A good example of a Theory-guided inventory is the Edwards Personal Preference
Schedule (EPPS), a 210- item forced-choice instrument that attempts to measure Murray’s
manifest needs by self-report. Other examples include, Personality Research Form (PRF), Myers-
Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), The Jenkins Activity Survey and State- Trait Anxiety Inventory
(STAI).
Factor-Analytically Deprived Inventories

10
Assumptions shared by standardized personality tests, simply stated, are that humans
possess characteristics or traits that are stable, vary from individual to individual, and can be
measured. Factor analysis is a statistical procedure for reducing the redundancy in a set of inter-
correlated scores. One major technique of factor analysis, the principal-components method, finds
the minimum number of common factors that can account for an interrelated set of scores. Some
of the examples of Factor-Analytically Deprived Inventories are Catell’s Sixteen Personality
Factor Questionnaire (16PF), Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) and NEO Personality
Inventory-Revised (NEO PI-R).
Criterion-Keyed Inventories
In Criterion-Keyed Inventories, test items are assigned to a particular scale if, and only if,
they discriminate between a well-defined criterion group and a relevant control group. The essence
of the criterion-keyed procedure is to let the items fall where they may. Examples of criterion-
keyed tests are MMPI-2, California Personality Inventory (CPI), Million Clinical Multiaxial
Inventory-III (MCMI-III) and Personality Inventory for Children-2 (PIC-2).
Projective Techniques
Freud and other psychodynamic theorists emphasized the importance of unconscious

factors in understanding behavior. It should be possible to study people’s motives, emotions,
values, attitudes, and needs by somehow getting them to project these internal states onto external
objects. This potent idea is behind projective devices of all kinds. A basic principle is that the
more unstructured and ambiguous a stimulus, the more a subject can and will project his emotions,
needs, motives, attitudes, and values (Ciccarelli & Mayer, 2013). Projective tests present subjects
with ambiguous stimuli and ask for some interpretation for them. The assumption is that because
the meaning of the stimulus is unclear, the subject’s interpretation will have to come from within,
reflecting the projection of inner needs, feelings, and ways of viewing the world onto the stimulus
(Ciccarelli & Mayer, 2013).
G. Lindsey (1959) proposed a five-way classification of projective methods based on types

of response:
Association Techniques
11
These techniques require the subject to respond, at the presentation of a stimulus, with the
first thing that comes to mind. The most famous and important device of this kind is the Rorschach
inkblot test. There are 10 inkblots five in black ink on a white background and five in colored inks
on a white background. People being tested are asked to look at each inkblot and simply say
whatever it might look like to them. Using predetermined categories and responses given by people
to each picture (Exner, 1980); psychologists score responses on key factors, such as reference to
color, shape, figures seen in the blot, and response to the whole or to details. They are still
frequently used down to we diagnose mental disorders, and predict behavior (Watkins et al,. 1995;
Weiner, 1997). For example, people who see peering eyes and threatening figures in the inkblots
are likely to be viewed as projecting their own paranoid fears and suspicions onto the stimuli.
Word association methods are more promising. Emotionally tinged words are included with
neutral words, and subjects are asked to respond with the first word that comes to mind (Ciccarelli
& Mayer, 2013).
Construction Techniques
Here the focus is on the product of the subject. The subject is required to produce, to
construct, something at direction, usually a story or a picture. One such well-known method is
Thematic Apperception Test (TAT). TAT consists of 20 pictures, all black and white, that are
shown to a client. The client is asked to tell a story about the person or people in the picture, which
are all deliberately drawn in ambiguous situations. The story developed by the client is interpreted
by the psychoanalyst, who looks for revealing statements and projection of the client's own
problems onto the people in the pictures.
Completion Techniques
Supply the subject with a stimulus that is incomplete, the subject being required to
complete it as he wishes. Or the stimulus may be loosely structured. The responses of this
technique are simpler than those of association and construction measures, thus simplifying the
tasks of scoring and interpretation. Rotter’s Incomplete Sentence Blank is the best known of such
techniques.
Choice or Ordering Techniques

12
These methods requires simple responses: the subject chooses from among several
alternatives, as in multiple-choice item test, the item or choice that appears most relevant, correct,
attractive, and so on.
Expressive Techniques
The subject is required to form some sort of product out of raw material. But the emphasis
is on the manner in which he/she does this- the end product is not important. With the construction
methods, the content, and perhaps the style, of the story or other product are analyzed.
Projective tests are by their nature very subjective (valid only within the person's own
perception), and interpreting the answers of clients is almost an art. It is certainly not a science and
is not known for its accuracy. Problems lie in the areas of reliability and validity. Projective tests,
with no standard grading scales, have both low reliability and low validity (Gittelman-Klein, 1978;
Lilienfield, 1999; Wood et al., 1996). Projective tests may sound somewhat outdated, but many
practicing clinical psychologists and psychiatrists still use this type of testing (Butcher &Rouse,
1996; Camara et al., 2000). Some psychologists believe that the latest versions of these tests and
others like them still have practical use and some validity (Ganellen, 1996; Weiner, 1997),
especially when a client's answers on these tests are used as a starting point for digging deeper into
the client's recollections, concerns, and anxieties.
Other Approaches
Interview
An interview is a method that is designed to facilitate the passing of information between

the interviewer and the interviewee. Interviews differ in terms of the amount of structure in the
questioning; they could be either structured or unstructured. In a structured interview, the interview
is based on a schedule of questions which have been worked out in advance. In an unstructured
interview, there may be little or no pre-planning of the questions.
Some planning of the interview, is however, usually essential, and a structured approach
to question generating is advocated that begins with a statement of the problem, and moves through
the identification of themes, to the production of a more detailed set of questions. A number of
factors may, however, affect the outcome. These include, the effects of self-presentation by the
13
interviewer, variability in the respondent’s motivation, the existence of faking good and the
development (or not) of rapport with the interviewer.
Rating Scales
The rating scale is one of the oldest and most versatile of assessment techniques. Rating
scales present users with an item and ask them to select from a number of choices. The rating scale
is similar in some respects to a multiple-choice test, but its options represent degrees of a particular
characteristic.
A number of requirements should be met to maximize the usefulness of rating scales. One
is that they be reliable: the ratings of the same person by different observers should be consistent.
Other requirements are reduction of sources of inaccuracy in personality measurement; the so-
called halo effect results in an observer’s rating someone favorably on a specific characteristic
because the observer has a generally favorable reaction to the person being rated.
Behavioral Assessment
Objective observation of a subject’s behavior is a technique that falls in the category of

behavioral assessment. They objectively describe and count the frequency of a behavior, identify
antecedents, maintaining factors and consequences of the particular behavior. Their results help in
diagnosing and treatment of behavioral problems. In most cases, the clinician is interested in both
subjective and objective information. Subjective information includes what clients think about, the
emotions they experience, and their worries and preoccupations.
Objective information includes the person’s observable behavior and usually does not
require the assessor to draw complex inferences about such topics as attitudes toward parents,
unconscious wishes, and deep-seated conflicts. Such objective information is measured by
behavioral assessment. It is often used to identify behavioral problems, which are then treated in
some appropriate way. Behavioral observations are used to get information that cannot be obtained
by other means. Behavioral ratings are frequently used for assessment of personality in educational
and industrial settings. Behavioral ratings are generally taken from people who know the assessed
intimately and have interacted with her/him over a period of time or have had a chance to observe
her/him.
14
Neuropsychological Tests
They are used to measure a psychological function known to be linked to a particular brain
structure or pathway. Tests are used for research into brain function and in a clinical setting for the
diagnosis of deficits. They are administered to a single person working with an examiner in a quiet
office environment, free from distractions. They offer an estimate of a person’s peak level of
cognitive performance.
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory
The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory is a broad-band test designed to assess a

number of the major patterns of personality and psychological disorders. Hathway and McKinley
began working on the test in the late 1930s and in 1940 published their first article on the inventory.
They used empirical, criterion-keyed approach to development. It was first published in 1943 and
revised and re-standardized in 1989.
Development of the Original MMPI
The inventory was developed in a hospital setting at the University of Minnesota on groups
of patients and non-patients (visitors to the wars and clinics who volunteered to take the test during
the time spent waiting for friends or relatives receiving medical treatment.) These non patients
were representative of the adult population on the state of Minnesota during the 1930’s: mostly
married, ranging in age from 16 to 65 and averaging in the mid-thirties. Living in small towns or
rural areas, with an eight-grade education.
Hathaway and McKinley began working on the test in the late 1930’s and in 1940 published
their first article on the inventory (Hathaway & McKinley, 1940), initially called the Minnesota
Personality Schedule. In this article they summarized the steps they had followed in writing and
editing the items, having gained ideas for potential items from many sources, including a number
of texts on psychiatric interviewing and differential diagnosis, social and emotional attitudes, and
personality processes. Each item was written in the form of a statement of some personal
experience, belief, attitude or concern.
15
The content of the original items reflected the range of psychiatric, medical and
neurological disorders in which the investigators were interested. After considerable preliminary
work on the schedule, Hathaway and McKinley added new items to cover gender-role
characteristics and a defensive style of self-presentation. These additions brought the original
number of items to 550.
The first scale developed for the MMPI was based on a systematic contrast between the
answers given to the test statements by a group of carefully selected neurotic patients who
manifested a hypochondriacal disorder and the answers given by the non patients group of the
hospital visitors. Items that were answered differently by these two groups to a statistically
significant degree were identified and combined into a preliminary scale for hypochondriasis
(Hathaway & McKinley, 1940). Additional samples of hypochondriacal neurotics were then
collected, and the preliminary scale was cross-validated on these new cases to demonstrate that
this measure provided a dependable basis for separating patients from non patients.
Similar contrasts and cross-validation studies were carried out for other groups of neurotic
patients: psychastenia, depressive reaction, and hysteria. Three more scales were developed using
patients manifested psychotic disorders: manic-depressive psychosis, manic phase, paranoia, and
schizophrenia. Two scales rounded out the basic set of MMPI clinical scales: psychopathic deviate
and masculinity-femininity. Later a tenth scale, social introversion, developed at the University of
Wisconsin by L. E. Drake was added.
When the MMPI was first published in 1942, Hathaway and McKinley provided the user
with three indicators of the validity of the answers of any given test taker: the number of items in
the inventory that were left unanswered (Cannot Say score), a measure of defensive role playing
(L scale), and a measure of extremely deviant or random responding to the test (F scale). These
indicators helped the test users evaluate the possibility that the test recorded was spoiled or marred
by the respondents’ failure to comply in one fashion or another with the test instructions. Later a
fourth validity indicator, the K (correlation) scale, was added to appraise the possibility that the
test taker had answered the MMPI with a more subtle but pervasive tendency either to cover up
(high scores) or to exaggerate (low scores) his or her problems and difficulties.
16
Data from the non patient group of Minnesota men and women were used to develop test
norms; raw scores were converted into linear T scores for the validity and clinical scales. These
norms were used in MMPI profiles throughout the United States as well as in many other countries.
In addition, alternative sets of norms were developed for adolescents, college undergraduates, and
elderly individuals. Each employed the scale composition in the standard profile, although the
composition in the standard profile, although the K-scale corrections were not used in the
adolescent norms.
Need for Revision
After 1950, the basic format of the MMPI was set. Acceptance of the test grew steadily in
the United States and in translation throughout the world. In a number of non clinical settings into
which it had been introduced, concerns arose about some items dealing with sexual adjustment,
bodily functions, and religious matters. Although these topics were relevant to the medical and
psychiatric evaluation for which the test was originally developed, they were often viewed as
unnecessarily intrusive and objectionable in these other contexts. As American culture changed,
concerns were also expressed about sexist wordings, outmoded idiomatic expressions, and
references to increasingly unfamiliar literary meanings and recreational activities. More important,
growing evidence that people were endorsing some of the items in substantially different ways
made the need for contemporary national norms apparent. Hathaway and McKinley had planned
to collect data from a substantially large number of individuals for their non patient samples
(2,500+), but funding limitations in the period of economic depression forced them to settle for
less than a third of their goal (724). Although cross validation groups were available to them for
the various criterion groups of patients, it was not possible to obtain a cross validation group of
non patients. Therefore, the norms were established on the derivational sample alone, a likely result
was the many of the raw score means and standard deviations used in the T score transformations
for the basic scales were set too low. Another factor lowering the Hathaway/ McKinley norms was
the number of items omissions allowed in the original normative sample. As a result of artificially
low raw scores, T scores on the original MMPI were set too high. The samples were also limited
by inadequate representation of adults from different regional areas, cultural settings, and ethnic
and racial groups. A nationwide sampling program was needed to remedy these limitations in the
original test norms.
17
Development of MMPI-2
In the early 1980s the University of Minnesota Press and its MMPI consultants initiated a
project to re-standardize the MMPI. An experimental test booklet designated AX (adult
experimental) was developed. All the original 550 items were retained and 154 provincial items
were added, bringing the item total to 704. Some of the new items were alternate versions of
existing items, introduced to determine whether they would continue improvements over the
original items. But most of the additions were provided to provide better coverage of topics and
areas of concern than did the original item pool: family functioning, eating disorders, substance
abuse, readiness for treatment or rehabilitation, and interference with performance at work.
Collateral forms were created to gather biographic and supplementary information about
the sample of adults whose response would be used to establish the new test norms. Supplementary
information included a measure of significant recent changes in the individuals’ lives, and for those
who were willing to be examined in conjunction with their spouses or live in partners, a measure
of the spouses’ and partners’ perception of each other and of the degree of satisfaction they were
experiencing in their relationships.
Individuals between the age of 18 and 90 were contacted through a variety of methods,
most by direct mail from directories and advertising lists. The sample was drawn from
communities in seven states: California, Minnesota, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia
and Washington. Over 2,900 individuals were initially tested inclusion in the re-standardization
sample. Examination of the completeness and validity of the test records and background
information reduced the total number to 2,600.
Description of the Scales
Validity Scales
Measures of inconsistent responding
VRIN Scale and TRIN Scale
VRIN (Variable Response Inconsistency) Scale and TRIN (True Response Inconsistency)
Scale scales, fashioned after similar indicators developed by Tellegen (1982, 1988), complement
18
the original MMPI validity indicators. Neither scale reflects particular item content, as do measures
of the tendencies to fake good or dissimulate poor psychological functioning. Rather, VRIN and
TRIN scores provide and index of the test takers tendency to responds to items in ways that are
inconsistent or contradictory.
Measures of infrequent responding
F (Infrequency) Scale
The F scale is made up of 60 items endorsed infrequently by the original MMPI normative
sample. Elevated scores on this scale indicate that the respondent provided a large number of
infrequent and therefore unlikely answers to the MMPI-2 items. Individuals, who respond
randomly to the MMPI-2, either intentionally or unintentionally, produce an unusual number of
infrequent responses to the test, resulting in elevated scores on the F scale. To determine whether
an elevated score on F is a product of random responding, the VRIN scale should be examined. If
it is elevated beyond score 79, the profile is marked by excessive random responding and is,
therefore, invalid and un-interpretable. If the VRIN score falls within normal limits, random
responding can be ruled out as a reason for elevation on the F scale. Next, the TRIN scale should
be examined. If it is elevated beyond 79T in either the true or false direction, fixed responding may
be the primary reason for the elevation on F, and the profile should be considered invalid or un-
interpretable. If both VRIN and TRIN are within normal limits, the interpretation then needs to
differentiate between genuine reporting of severe psychopathology and faking bad as sources of
elevation on F.
FB (Back F) Scale
The FB Scale captures infrequent responding to the latter parts of the test and assists in
identifying changes in the respondent’s approach to the MMPI that occurs over the course of the
test administration. Because the FB scale is similar in concept and design to the F scale, the FB
scale is also sensitive to random or fixed responding, severe psychopathology, and over reporting
of symptoms. In addition, elevations may reflect a change in the test taker’s approach to the test if
F is within normal limits and the T score on FB is substantially higher than the F scale score.
FP (Infrequency-Psychopathology) Scale
19
The FP Scale provides a measure of infrequent responding that is less sensitive than F to
the presence of severe psychopathology. If F is elevated in a non random profile, and the FPT
score is greater than 99, the profile is marked by significant over reporting of psychopathology
and is therefore likely invalid owing to faking bad. If on the other hand, FP is below T score 70,
the elevated score on F likely reflects accurate reporting of sever psychopathology and,
consequently, provided that they are no questions about protocol validity, the profile may be
interpreted.
Measures of defensiveness
L (Lie) Scale
Hathaway and McKinley developed the L Scale to assess the likelihood that the test taker
approached the instrument with a defensive mindset. The scale’s items provide the respondent the
opportunity to deny various minor faults and character flaws that most individuals are quite willing
to acknowledge as being true of them. Although the L scale can reflect deceit in the test taking
situation, it should not necessarily be viewed as a measure of any general tendency to lie, fabricate,
or deceive others on the part of individuals in their day to day activities.
K (Correction) Scale
The K scale was developed to assess an individual’s level of defensiveness in responding

to the MMPI-2 items and to correct for the effect this response style has clinical scale scores. It
was designed to identify a less blatant form of defensiveness that is reflected in elevations on L.
Individuals who produce to the MMPI-2 items. This, in itself, does not indicate that there are
problems that are being covered up. However, an elevated score on K means that that it is not
possible to rule out the presence of psychopathological difficulties based on the MMPI-2 profile.
S (Superlative Self-Presentation) Scale
The S scale was developed by Butcher and Han (1995) using a modification of the
empirical scale development approach. Initially, items were included in a provisional scale only if
they empirically discriminated between a group of extremely defensive job applicants and
members of the MMPI-2 normative sample. The scale was then refined using item and content
analyses designed to ensure scale homogeneity. Although the S and K scales are highly correlated
20
and both are measures of defensiveness, the K scale items are restricted to the first part of the test,
whereas the S scale items are spread throughout the test.
The Clinical Scales
Scale 1 (Hs: Hypochondrias)
This scale was developed using a group of neurotic patients who showed an excessive
concern about their health, presented a variety f somatic complaints with little or no organic basis,
and rejected repeated assurances that there was nothing physically wrong with them. Some of the
items comprising this scale reflect particular symptoms or specific complaints, but many others
reflect a more general bodily preoccupation or a self centered focus.
Scale 2 (D: Depression)
This scale was developed using psychiatric patients with various forms of symptomatic
depression, primarily with depressive reactions or in a depressive episode f a manic-depressive
disorder. Some items comprising this scale reflect the feelings of discouragement, pessimism, and
hopelessness that characterize the clinical status of depressed individuals. Other items cover a
variety of symptoms and behaviors, like somatic complaints, worry or tension, denial of hostile
impulses, and difficulty in controlling one’s own thought processes. The items of scale 2 are
divided into five Harris-Lingoes content subscales.
D1: Subjective Depression: High scores on this subscale report that they feel unhappy or
depressed, lack energy for coping with the problems of everyday life, and are not interested in
what goes on around them. They feel inferior, lack self confidence, and are uneasy in social
situations.
D2: Psychomotor Retardation: High score on this subscale report that they lack energy to
cope with everyday activities, feel emotionally immobilized, and avoid their people. They are
denying hostile or aggressive impulses or actions.
21
D3: Physical Malfunctioning: High score on this subscale express preoccupation with
their own physical functioning deny good health and report a variety of specific somatic
complaints.
D4: Mental Dullness: High scores on these subscales indicate lack of energy to cope with
problems f everyday life and report tension and difficulties with concentration, attention and
memory. They lack self confidence and feel inferior. They also report getting little enjoyment out
of life and may have concluded that life is no longer worthwhile.
D5: Brooding: High scores on this subscale report lack of energy to cope with problems
and may have concluded that life is no longer worthwhile. They also report that they brood, cry,
ruminate, and they feel that they are losing control of their thought process.
Scale 3 (Hy: Hysteria)
This scale was constructed using patients who exhibited some form of sensory or motor
disorder for which no organic basis could be established. Some of the items reflect specific
physical complaints or disorders, but many other items involve a denial of problems in one’s life
and denial of social anxiety. The items of scale 3 are divided into five Harris-Lingoes content
subscales.
Hy1: Denial of Social Anxiety: Items on this subscale have to do with social extroversion,
feeling comfortable interacting with other people, and not easily influenced by social standards
and customs.
Hy2: Need for Affection: High scores on this subscale describes strong needs for attention
and affection from others, as well as fears that these needs will not be met if they are honest about
their feelings and beliefs. They describe others as honest, sensitive, and reasonable, and deny
having negative feelings about other people.
Hy3: Lassitude-Malaise: High scores on this subscales report feeling uncomfortable and
not in good health. They also report feeling weak and fatigued and having difficulties concentrating
and sleeping. They may also express feeling of unhappiness.
22
Hy4: Somatic Complaints: High score on this subscales report multiple somatic
complaints. They deny expressing hostility toward other people.
Hy5: Inhibition of Aggression: High scorers on this scale deny hostile and aggressive
impulses. They report feeling sensitive about how others respond to them.
Scale 4: (Pd: Psychopathic Deviate)
This measure was developed using individuals who were referred to a psychiatric service
for clarification of why they had continuing difficulties with the law even when they suffered no
cultural deprivation and despite their possessing normal intelligence and a relative freedom from
serious neurotic or psychotic disorders. Other items reflect a lack of concern about most social and
moral standards of conduct, the presence of family problems, and an absence of life satisfaction.
The items on Scale 4 are divided into five Harris-Lingoes content subscales.
Pd1: Familial Discord: High scores on this subscale describe their current families and/or
their families of origin as lacking in love, understanding and support. They feel that their families
are or have been critical and have not permitted them adequate freedom and independence.
Pd2: Authority Problems: High scores on this subscale express resentment of societal and
parental standards and customs, have definite opinions about what is right and wrong, and stand
up for their own beliefs.
Pd3: Social Imperturbability: These subscales include items having to do with feeling
comfortable and confident in social situations, having strong opinions about many things, and
defending one’s opinions vigorously.
Pd4: Social Alienation: High scorers on this subscale express feelings of alienation,
isolation, and estrangement. They seem to believe that people do not understand them and that
they get a raw deal from life.
Pd5: Self-Alienation: High scorers on this subscale describe themselves as uncomfortable

and unhappy. They do not find daily life interesting or rewarding. They may express guilt, regret
and remorse for past deeds.
23
Scale 5 (Mf: Masculinity-Femininity)
This scale was constructed using men who were upset about homoerotic feelings and
confused about gender roles. Similar efforts to develop a measure of gender-role divergence in
women were not successful, but scale 5 subsequently was used for both men and women.
Scale 6 (Pa: Paranoia)
This scale was developed using patients primarily showing some form of paranoid
condition or paranoid state, but few individuals with a fully developed paranoia were available for
this effort. Some items deal with frankly psychotic behaviors, and other items on this scale cover
such diverse topics as sensitivity, cynicism, asocial behavior, excessive moral virtue, and
complaints about other people. The item on Scale 6 is divided into three Harris-Lingoes content
subscales.
Pa1: Persecutory Ideas: High scores on this subscale describe the world as a threatening
place, and they feel misunderstood and unfairly treated.
Pa2: Poignancy: High scores on this subscale are indicating that they are higher strung
and sensitive than other people. They feel lonely and misunderstood and may seek out risky or
exciting activities to make they feel better.
Pa3: Naivete: High scores on this subscale have unrealistically optimistic attitudes about
other people. They present themselves as trusting, having high moral standard, and not having
hostile or negative impulses.
Scale 7 (Pt: Psychasthenia)
This scale was constructed primarily using patients sowing obsessive, compulsive rituals,
or exaggerated fears. The diagnosis used for such patients at the time the scale was developed was
psychasthenia, but the more contemporary label would be obsessive-compulsive disorder. Some
of the items in this scale, deal with uncontrollable or obsessive thoughts, feelings or fears and
24
anxiety, and doubts about one’s own ability. Unhappiness, physical complaints, and difficulties in
concentration are also represented in this scale.
Scale 8 (Sc: Schizophrenia)
This scale was constructed using psychiatric patients who were manifesting various forms
of schizophrenic disorders. Other topics covered include social alienation, poor family
relationships, sexual concerns, difficulties in impulse control and concentration, and fears, worries
and dissatisfactions. The items on Scale 8 are divided into six Harris-Lingoes content subscales
Sc1: Social alienation, high score on this subscales report feeling mistreated,
misunderstood and unloved. In extreme cases they may also may believe that others are trying to
harm them physically.
Sc2: emotional alienation, High scorers on this scale report feeling of fear depression
apathy and at times they may wish they were dead. score is devoid of further analysis due to lack
of interpretative data on moderate score.
Sc3: lack of ego mastery, cognitive, High scorers on this subscale suggest report strange
thought processes, feelings of unreality, and difficulties in concentration and memory. They may
at times feel they are losing their minds
Sc4: lack of ego mastery, conative, high scores on this sub scale feel that life is a strain
and they may feel depressed. They also report worrying excessively and responding to stress by
withdrawing into fantasy and daydreaming. They may at times wish they were dead.
Sc5: lack of ego mastery, defective inhibition, High scorers on this subscale feel that they
are not in control of their emotions and impulses. They may report as being restless and hyperactive
having periods of laughing or crying that they cannot control, and having episodes during which
they do not know what they are doing and cannot later remember what they have done.
Sc6: bizarre sensory experiences, high scorers on this subscale may feel that their bodies
are changing in strange and unusual ways. They may report skin sensitivity and unusual sensory
experience and may have hallucinations, and unusual thought contact, idea of external reference.
25
Scale 9 (Ma: Hypomania)
This scale was used using patients in the early stages of a manic episode of manic-
depressive disorder. Other items cover topics such as family relationships, moral values and
attitudes, and physical or bodily concerns.
Ma2: psychomotor acceleration: high scorer on this subscale report accelerated speech,
thought processes and motor activities. They may feel tensed, restless, and excited. They are easily
bored and may seek out risk excitement or danger as a way of overcoming the boredom.
Ma3: Imperturbability: high scorers on this subscale deny social anxiety. They report
feeling comfortable interacting with other. They profess little concern about the onions, values,
and attitudes of other.
Ma4: Ego inflation: high scorers on this sub scale are expressing unrealistic evaluations
of their own abilities and self-worth. They may feel resentful when other make demands on them.
Scale 0 (Si: Social Introversion)
This scale was developed by L. E. Drake (1946) using sample of college students who
scored at extremes of the social introversion and extroversion scale on the T-S-E (Thinking-Social-
Emotional Introversion) Inventory. Only women were used to develop the scale, but its use has
been extended to men as well.
Si1: shyness/ self-consciousness, high scorers on this subscale report feeling shy around
others, easily embarrassed, ill at ease in social situations and uncomfortable in new situations.
Si2 social avoidance, high scorers express great dislike and avoidance of group activities
and being in a crowd. They also report avoidance of contact with other people.
Si3: alienation-self and other, high scorer on this subscale describe themselves as having
low self-esteem and low self-confidence. They may be self-critical questioning their own judgment
and feeling incapable of determining their own faith. They also report nervousness, fearfulness,
inductiveness and suspiciousness of others
26
Standardization
The project to re-standardize the MMPI began in 1982, and the MMPI-2 was published in
1989, along with new test materials that consisted of hand-scoring templates, new answers and
profile sheets, new test booklets, and different computer-scoring options. The MMPl-2 is not
intended for use with adolescents. It was recognized by the MMP1-2 committee that adult norms
would not be applicable to an adolescent form (Archer 1984). A separate revision of the test was
conducted for the sole purpose of developing an adolescent instrument derived from the MMPI-2
and was named MMPI-A (Adolescent).' The test was released in 1992 A normative sample
representative of the general teenage population was recognized as important for standardizing the
MMPI-A, and a shorter version of the test was also considered to be an improvement given that
the basic validity and clinical scales were essentially uncompromised. The MMPZ-A manual
contains derailed information on this instrument.
To summarize, the MMPI—2 re-standardization project ensured continuity with the

original MMPI by minimizing changes in the composition of the original validity and clinical
scales (Archer. 1997). This meant leaving the K-correction factor intact. A contemporary sample
of norms replaced earlier outdated norm with new clinical data collected concurrently to assess the
validity of new and modiﬁed scales. Items were replaced or modified in accordance with the
mission of modernizing the language in the test. New scales were created in order to measure
contemporary clinical problems and for this reason new items replaced many rarely scored or
obsolete items. An improved metric replaced linear T scores to allow test interpreters to more
accurately compare scale scores with each other. The re-standardization project was successful in
meeting its goal of maintaining continuity with the original test. Despite initial concerns about the
MMPl—2 revision, practitioners generally have adopted the modiﬁed test.
Applications
It is routinely used in the clinical assessment of psychiatric inpatients, consumers of

psychiatric outpatient and psychotherapy services, and in college counseling centers. It is also
commonly used in the course of psychological/psychiatric consultation to general medical services
to detect previously undiagnosed mental disorders or identify problems in adjustment that may
adversely influence treatment adherence, response, and recovery. It may be a component in test
27
batteries assembled for the evaluation of neuropsychological function and status. Is also used in
screening and selecting personnel for employment, especially for positions involving high levels
of stress and responsibility or occupations in which concern for public safety is a central
consideration.
The MMPI-2 often figures in criminal forensic proceedings for pretrial assessments of
competence to stand trial and ability to aid and assist representative counsel, in sanity evaluations,
and in the classification of adjudicated offenders. It is often used to diagnose and plan treatment
of persons being seen as patients in psychiatric inpatient or outpatient services and clinics, and for
clients receiving or being evaluated for psychotherapy by licensed mental health practitioners.
Limitations
Given are a few limitations of the MMPI:
The original criterion groups are now quite dated. The confounding of categorical and
dimensional models of measurement, leads at times to inferential ambiguities regarding the
probability versus the severity of disorder. There is considerable item overlap between scales,
thereby increasing their inter-correlations and attenuating their discriminate validity. The high
average educational and socioeconomic attainment of the re-standardization sample may not
adequately represent the lower education and economic status of most consumers of mental health
services. The number of scales and the complexity of a few of them, makes hand-scoring
inconvenient, cumbersome, and time-consuming.
For maximal accuracy and utility of results, the test requires a ninth-grade level of reading
ability and at least a moderately cooperative attitude toward taking the test. The interpretive
process and set of procedures and checks are considerably more subtle, complicated, and
demanding than the appearance of the inventory suggests
Literature Review
MMPI has been continually used in the various fields of psychology testing and for other
purposes. Hedlund, James L.; Cho, Dong W.; Powell, Barbara J (1975) compared the use of 2
MMPI short forms, the MMPI-168 and the Mini-Mult, with the complete MMPI using 2,721
psychiatric inpatients and 634 outpatients. The estimated Full Scale MMPI scores for both short
28
forms showed very high relationships with actual Full Scale scores, and the degree of profile
agreement for the 3 highest scales was also quite high, although comparisons of the MMPI-168
and Mini-Mult demonstrated a number of significant differences which affect profile
interpretation.
Another Research that used MMPI was that of Ph. D., Professor Charles J. Long (1981)
who administered the MMPI as part of a comprehensive pain evaluation to 44 patients who were
receiving surgery for low back pain. Surgical outcomes then were determined after 6 to 18 months,
and the patients were grouped as surgery success (22) or surgery failures (22). MMPI profiles were
examined for each group, and while there was a significant difference on the Hs scale, no other
mean scores were discriminative. In contrast, when patients were divided into subgroups based
upon MMPI profile configurations, a strong relationship existed between subgroup MMPI profile
and surgery outcome.
Method
Preliminaries
Name: Miss P.
Age: 19 Years.
Gender: Female
Educational qualifications: B.Com, 3rd year.
Socio-economic background: Middle class family.
Presenting Symptoms:
P has had previous interventions for clinical depression and was in therapy for 1 year. She
is quiet and introverted and doesn’t socialize much with anyone. She spends her time in college or
at her coaching center. Sometimes she shows aggressive tendencies that do not match her behavior.
She is a very emotional person and escapes into day dreaming and fantasy.
29
Materials Required
1. MMPI-2 Booklet
2. MMPI-2 Answer Sheet
3. MMPI-2 VRIN-TRIN Recording Sheets
4. Harris-Lingoes Sub-scale Score Record
5. Profile for Validity and Clinical Scales
6. MMPI-2 Scoring keys
7. A consent letter
8. Two sharpened pencils
9. A screen
10. .A consent letter
11. Two sharpened pencils
12. A screen
Procedure
The test was responded by subject P aged 19 years old female doing her B. Com honors in
Indraprastha College for women. She is not very close to her family and has a strained relationship
with her mother. She has one younger sister. Due to her fathers’ work they have moved around
north India constantly affecting her relationships and her academics. The MMPI was administered
on the respondent with her full consent. The materials required for administering the test were the
MMPI-2 answer sheet and booklet, pencil, eraser, and a consent form.
The time and place was set according to the convenience of the respondent. The test was
conducted on 4th August in her hostel room. It was made sure that the room was well lit and devoid
of any disturbance and noise. Before the administration of the test, rapport was formed and it was
made sure that she was comfortable and understood and was then asked to sign the consent form.
The participant was debriefed about the test, about the manner in which she was supposed
to answer the test, the number of items, etc. It was made known to her that the test she was taking
was one that would help her know more about herself and hence was encouraged to answer each
question truthfully. She was also asked to answer all of the questions and to avoid leaving
30
unanswered questions. After giving the instructions and making sure she understood all the
instructions, she was asked to take the test.
It took 1 and a half hour, including a 10 minute break for the respondent to complete the
test. After the test was taken, she was asked to write an introspective report and was thanked for
her time and cooperation. Lastly, the respondent was given the assurance that all her information
will be kept confidential and the full result will be handed over to her once the report was finalized.
Introspective report
I looked forward to giving this psychology test, although it was very long. I had tried my
best to be honest and answer all of the questions truthfully. It had very interesting questions and I
had to think hard for some of them. I got a little tired because it was so long, but over all I enjoyed
giving this psychology test.
Behavioral observation
The respondent looked forward to taking the test and formed rapport easily. She understood
all the instructions and started the questionnaire. She was quiet the whole time and asked the
meaning of only a few questions. By qs302, she took a break for 10-15 minutes, where we talked
about her likes and dislikes. She then continued the test. During the second half she was a little
restless; this could be the reason for her high scores in FB.
Scoring
For the scoring of the MMPI- 2 response sheet the hand scoring method was used. The
responses of the subject were scored using semi-transparent templates that were placed over the
answer sheet. Before scoring, it was made sure that all the omitted and double marked items were
identified and crossed out as cannot say response. For all the scales except the VRIN and TRIN
scales, the raw scores were obtained by placing the answer key for each scale over the answer
sheet and counting the total number of items endorsed in each different template. This total was
then entered in the appropriate space on the answer sheet and later marked on the profile sheet
with male norms.
31
For the VRIN and TRIN, the following steps were followed, using the completed answer
sheet, the VRIN and TRIN recording grid, VRIN-1 and VRIN-2 or TRIN-1 and TRIN-2 answer
keys. First the item pair responses were transferred from the answer sheet to the recording grid.
The VRIN grid consisted of 49 pairs of items and the TRIN grid consisted of 20 pair of items.
Likewise, the answer keys-respectively was placed over the recording grid. A ‘+1’ was added for
unmatched pairs in the VRIN recording grind and a ‘-1’sign was denoted for matched pairs in the
TRIN recording grid and was. Similarly, the VRIN and TRIN total were entered in the appropriated
space in the answer sheet and this number was the entered on the appropriate line on the profile
form (female).
The raw scores obtained were plotted on the MMPI-2 validity and clinical scales profile.
The profile were organized into two sets, validity indicators and clinical measures (the ‘cannot
say’, was reported below the profile). Before plotting the clinical scales, special attention was
required for certain raw scores below which there were blank spaces labeled ‘k’ to be added, these
appeared below scales Hs, Pd, Pt, Sc and Ma. K of a specific proportion provided in the table of
the profile sheet was added to these five basic scales (1, 4, 7, 8, and 9) to correct for defensiveness.
The appropriate fractions of K to be added are .5K to Hs, .4K to Pd, 1K to Pt, 1K to Sc and .2K to
Ma. These factions were entered in the spaces on the line below and added with the raw score.
Results and Data Analysis
On the basis of the raw scores of all the validity and clinical scales, the profile was plotted
and an ‘x’ mark was placed at raw-score point of each scale. After plotting the elevation of each
scale, the validity sales were connected with a line so were the clinical scales with a second line.
The raw scores were then transformed into T scores each of which was established first by an
estimate by referring to the corresponding T score values in the left and right-hand column and
then cross checked from table A-3 page 66-67. Finally, the raw scores of the Harris and Lingoes
sub scales of elevated clinical scales (clinical scales above 64) were obtained in a similar manner
and the plotted in the Harris- Lingoes subscales score record to establish their T scores.
To further facilitate the interpretation and to reduce the very large number of potential
profiles to a more reasonable number, a coding system was used to record in an efficient and
concise manner the most important aspects of the profile and to summaries the profile. The Welsh
32
coding system was used instead of the Hathaway coding system as it is more comprehensive. For
coding, first each clinical scale was assigned a number: Hs,1; D,2; Hy,3; Pd,4; Mf,5; Pa,6; Pt,7;
Sc,8; Ma,9; and Si,0; then were arranged from most elevated to least elevated, with each number
followed by a symbol representing its elevation.
Results
The results for the validity and clinical scales, along with Harris Lingoes are as follows-
Table 1: Validity Scales
Serial Scale Raw Score T Score Descriptive Code

Number category Symbol
1. Cannot say 5
2. TRIN 5 50 Valid -
3. VRIN 9 50 Valid -
4. F 15 89 Valid as VRIN ‘
and TRIN scores
are not elevated
5. FP 13 93 Likely valid -
6. FB 2 57 Valid -
7. L 2 42 Valid :
8. K 3 30 Valid due to #
presence of
severe
Psychopathology
9. S 15 37 Valid -
Table 2: Clinical Scales
S.no Scales Raw Score T Score Description Code

33
1 Hypochondriasis (Hs) 21 67 High -

2 Depression (D) 34 79 High ‘
3 Hysteria (Hy) 31 70 High ‘
4 Psychopathic Deviate (Pd) 28 63 High -
5 Masculinity-Femininity (Mf) 35 52 Average /
6 Paranoia (Pa) 18 78 High ‘
7 Psychasthenia (Pt) 36 66 High -
8 Schizophrenia (Sc) 38 69 High -
9 Hypomania (Ma) 16 43 Average :
0 Social Introversion (Si) 51 74 High ‘
Table 3: Harris Lingoes for elevated T scores
Sub scales Raw scored T scores
Depression
D1 19 77
D2 7 57
D3 10 100
D4 9 79
D5 8 78
Hysteria
Hy1 2 40
Hy2 1 <30
Hy3 13 91
Hy4 11 81
Hy5 2 31
Psychopathic Deviate
Pd1 6 74
Pd2 3 53
34
Pd3 2 41
Pd4 11 86
Pd5 9 77
Paranoia
Pa1 6 75
Pa2 6 72
Pa3 4 45
Schizophrenia
Sc1 11 81
Sc2 4 57
Sc3 6 80
Sc4 8 80
Sc5 3 59
Sc6 5 63
Social Introversion
Si1 12 68
Si2 7 69
Si3 13 72
The Welch Code:
2603’8174-5/9:F”-/L:K#
Interpretation and Discussion
The objective is to construct a profile of an emotionally distressed person on various

dimensions of MMPI-2 and carry out the analysis of the same.
Demographic Background
35
The respondent is a 19 year old B.Com student in her final year, studying in Indraprastha
College for women. She currently resides in the college hostel with one roommate. She ----- but
since her father in an engineer, they have lived around north India and have constantly shifted
states. Currently her family resides in Haryana. She belongs to a nuclear family and has a younger
sister who is 8 years younger to her. She has a strained relationship with her mother due to lack of
understanding and trust from both sides. Her relationship with her father is good, but they are not
very close. Due to this lack of communication and trust between her and her parents, her overall
outlook towards her family is more negative than neutral. She has a normal sibling relationship
with her younger sister, whom she considers too young to understand her and hence doesn’t talk
to her about her personal problems.
Due to moving around a lot during her academic years, she could not have a rooted
education but has been changing schools almost every 2 years. The longest she stayed in one school
was from 7th grade to mid-10th grade in Ludhiana, Punjab. Since her fathers’ work takes them to
remote places, she has suffered academically, not being able to get proper education with respect
to choosing the subjects she wanted. She is currently study B.Com honors in Indraprastha College
for Women in Delhi.
Socially, she has a few friends and keeps in touch with a few more from her previous
schools. The respondent has low self-esteem and low self-worth and misinterprets her relationships
which affect her concentration and attention. She has been in one long distance relationship that
lasted 3 month. She is sexually not active and is heterosexual.
During last year April, she had a panic attack the night before her practical’s and was taken
to Sant Parmanand Hospital in Civil Lines, where she was diagnosed with lung infection. When
the panic attack happened again, she was taken to St Stephens Hospital where they diagnosed it as
a panic attack. Due to stigma behind mental illness, her family took her back. They gave her normal
medication. Then she returned to her hostel. One night before the exams, she cried due to
exhaustion and she felt ‘fed up’. The constant concern and pestering of her roommate made her
retaliate with aggression. The next day she went to the psychiatry branch of St Stephens hospital
to meet with the psychiatrist. Despite her parents’ reluctance, she met with a psychiatrist and
psychologist for a year. She was diagnosed with clinical depression. She would meet the
36
psychiatrist for her medication and then meet her psychologist who helped her with psychotherapy.
This April she stopped her sessions due to family pressure and till today feels the need to continue
but hesitates to confront her parents about this.
Validity Scales
Cannot Say (?)-
Omissions score is not a scale in the usual sense; it is a simple count of the number of items
that were either left unanswered or were marked both true and false by the test taker. A test taker
may omit a large number of items for a variety of reasons. Individuals experiencing severe
pathology may find the task of answering the items difficult; poor readers may have difficulty
comprehending some of the more complex items; some may avoid answering items they feel are
too revealing of their particular problem. All of these instances may lead to the omission of
excessive number of items. The participant has omitted 5 items. Since the number of items omitted
is between 0-10, the profile is valid and the omitted items will be examined.
Measures of Inconsistent Responding
VRIN (Variable Response Inconsistency) Scale
The members of each VRIN item pair have either similar or opposite content; each pair is
scored for the occurrence of an inconsistency in the response of the two items. The raw score on
the VRIN scale is the total number of item pairs answered inconsistently. The respondents’ VRIN
score is 50 and hence indicates that the profile is probably valid. The respondent was able to
understand and respond to the items in a consistent manner.
TRIN (True Response Inconsistency) Scale
The TRIN scale unlike VRIN, is made up exclusively of item pairs that are opposite in
content. The respondent obtained a T score of 50, thus making her profile valid and nullifying the
chances of intentional random responding.
Measures of Infrequent Responding

37
The MMPI-2 has tree measures of infrequent responding, designed to alert the interpreter
to the presence of an unusual pattern of answers to the test items and its probable causes. There
are, essentially, three non-mutually exclusive reasons why an individual may provide a relatively
large number of infrequent responses to the MMPI-2: (1) random or fixed responding, (2) accurate
description of severe pathology, and (3) faking bad, a deliberate effort to portray oneself as an
overly negative manner.
F (Infrequency) Scale
Individuals who responded randomly to the MMPI-2, either intentionally or

unintentionally produce and unusual number of infrequent responses to the test, resulting in
elevated scores on the F scale. The respondent scored a T score of 89. According to Table 8 of the
MMPI-2 manual, the respondent may have exaggerated but the profile is likely to be valid. To
determine whether an elevated score on F is a product of random responding, the VRIN scale
should be examined. Since the respondent has a VRIN of T score 50, random responding can be
ruled out. Next, the TRIN scale should be examined. If it is elevated beyond 79T in either the true
or false direction, fixed responding may be the primary reason for the elevation on F, and the
profile should be considered invalid and un-interpretable. The respondents TRIN falls under the
normal limits hence fixed responding is not the cause of the elevation of the F scale. Since the
VRIN and TRIN are within normal limits, one now needs to differentiate between genuine
reporting of severe pathology and faking bad as sources of elevation on F.
FB (Back F) Scale
The FB scale captures infrequent responding to the latter part of the test and assists in
identifying changes in the respondents approach to the MMPI-2 over the course of the test
administration. Because it is similar in concept and design to the F scale, the F B scale is also
sensitive to fixed responding, severe psychopathology, and over-reporting of symptoms. In
addition, elevation may reflect a change in the respondents’ approach to the test if it is within
normal limits and the T score on FB is substantially higher than the F score. T scores on FB should
only be used to determine whether a substantial change has occurred in the individuals’ approach
to the MMPI-2. The respondent scored a T score of 93, in a clinical setting it can be considered
valid, and in a non-clinical setting the profile should be considered invalid. Whenever a significant
38
change is indicated by the pattern of scores on FB and F, caution should be exercised in interpreting
scales that have items in the latter part of the test, primarily the MMPI-2 content scales.
FP (Infrequency-Psychopathology) Scale
The FP scale provides a measure of infrequent responding that is less than sensitive than F
to the presence of severe pathology. FP can assist in differentiating elevations on F that are product
of genuine psychopathology from those that result from over-reporting, after random and fixed
responding have been ruled out based on the VRIN and TRIN scales. If F is elevated in a non-
random profile, and the FP T score is greater than 99, the profile is marked by significant over-
reporting of psychopathology and is therefore likely invalid owing to faking bad. If on the other
hand, FP is below T score 70, the elevated score on F likely reflects accurate reporting of severe
psychopathology and, consequently, provided that there are no other questions about protocol
validity, the profile may be interpreted. The respondent scored a T score of 52 and hence according
to table 12 of the MMPI-2 manual, the profile is likely valid and the respondent has accurately
described current mental health status.
Measures of Defensiveness
In completing the MMPI-2, some individuals provide an overly positive self-presentation.

Such a defensive test taking approach may distort the respondents’ scores on the clinical, content
and supplementary scales. The MMPI-2 defensiveness scales are designed to alert the interpreter
to the presence and degree of defensiveness in a test protocol.
L (Lie) Scale
The scales items provide the respondent the opportunity to deny various minor faults and
character flaws that most individuals are quiet willing to acknowledge as being true to them. It
serves as an index of the likelihood that a given test protocol may be distorted by this particular
style of responding to the inventory. The respondent scored a T score of 42 and hence the profile
is likely valid.
K (Correction) Scale
39
The K scale was developed to assess an individuals’ level of defensiveness in responding

to the MMPI-2 items and to correct for the effect this response style has on clinical scale scores. It
was designed to identify a less blatant form of defensiveness than is reflected in elevations on L.
Individuals who produce elevated scores on the K scale are unlikely to report significant
psychological problems in response to the MMPI-2 items. The respondent scored a T score of
below 30 and hence according to table 16 of the MMPI-2 manual, the profile may be invalid and
suggest that the respondents’ characteristic defenses are not working effectively or have
deteriorated and she may to be likely self-critical and over endorse pathological items.
S (Superlative Self-Presentation) Scale
The S scale is below 69 (T score 41) and hence according to table 18 of the MMPI-2, the
profile is valid. This may suggest that the respondent was able to comprehend and understand the
test.
Clinical Scales
The respondent has T scores greater than 65 in 8 of the clinical case suggesting significant
psychopathology. Since his validity scales suggest that the profile is valid, one will go ahead with
interpretation of the clinical scales.
Hs scale 1 comprises of items that reflect particular symptoms or specific complains, but
most of it reflects a more general bodily preoccupation of self-centered focus. Concerns center on
health and somatic functioning. These concerns tend to persist despite disconfirming medical
opinion and negative findings from diagnostic procedures, with the latter bringing not relief but a
continued conviction of illness and decreased confidence in the physician who ordered them.
Patients with bona fide illnesses generally score near T-60, the respondent attained a T score of 67
on scale 1 (Hs) suggesting somatic complaints that may be general and vague or specific to a
particular system. The respondent complains of headaches, mostly originating from the back of
her head and trembles or shivers in her hands. She may develop these symptoms mainly during
stress.
The scale 2 of 57 items measure symptomatic depression, a general attitude characterized
by poor morale, hopelessness, general attitude characterized by poor morale, hopelessness, general
dissatisfaction with life. The items also deal with various aspects of depression, such as denial of
40
happiness and personal worth, psychomotor retardation, lack of interest, social withdrawal,
physical complaints and excessive worry. She obtained a T score of 79 on scale 2 (D) which is
high, supporting her previous diagnosis of clinical depression. High scores may therefore portray
her as depressed, worried and a pessimistic person. She might have feelings of pessimism and
hopelessness and may be preoccupied with guilt, death, suicide and has feelings of unworthiness
and inadequacy. She shows marked feelings of insecurity, inadequacy, and inferiority. She might
try to avoid unpleasantness and might make concessions in order to avoid confrontation. Scale 2
is rarely elevated in isolation, and its interpretation is highly dependent on its patterns of
combination with other scales.
Under this scale, there are 5 other Harris Lingoes sub scales. She scored high for D1
(Subjective depression), D3 (Physical malfunctioning), D4 (Mental dullness), and D5 (Brooding)
with the T score of 77, 100, 79 and 78 respectively. High scores on these subscales report that they
feel unhappy or depressed, lack energy for coping with the problem of everyday life, and are not
interested in what goes on around them. They feel inferior, lack self-confidence, and are uneasy in
social situations. She expresses preoccupation with her own physical functioning, denies good
health, and reports a variety of specific somatic symptoms, like headaches, tremors and body pains.
She lacks energy to cope with problems of everyday life and reports tension and difficulties with
concentration, attention and memory. High scorers lack self-confidence and feel inferior. They
also report getting little enjoyment out of life and may have concluded that life is no longer
worthwhile. They also report that the brood, cry, ruminate, and may feel that they are losing control
of their thought process.
The items in scale 3 (Hy) measure two broad areas: specific somatic complains and denial
of psychological or emotional problems and of discomfort in social situations. This scale identifies
persons who are prone to respond to life stresses by developing conversion-like symptoms, such
as fits (e.g., absences, fainting, blackouts, and pseudo-seizures), abdominal pain, and stress
vomiting; amnesia, fugue, and somnambulism; paralysis; contractures (e.g., writer’s cramp);
tremors; speech irregularities (e.g., aphonia/ mutism, stammer, stutter, lisp, whispering, or other
mannerisms/ affectations); spasmodic movements; awkward or impaired gait; episodic weakness
and fatigue; anesthesia, deafness, blindness, and blurred or tunnel vision; and cardiac crises (e.g.,
palpitations). The respondent has T score of 70, which is higher than average. The high score
41
implies that she has extreme somatic complaints, and reacts to stress by developing somatic
symptoms, which may subside once the stress subsides. The respondent has various somatic
complains of frequent headaches occurring in various parts of the skull, especially at the back of
the head. She has tremors in the right hand and sometimes in her left. Scale 3 also has 5 Harris
Lingoes subscales out of which she has high scores for the subscales Hy3 (Lassitude-Malaise) and
Hy4 (Somatic Complaints) with scores on 91 and 81 respectively. High scorers on these subscales
report feeling uncomfortable and complain of ill health. The respondent also report feeling weak
and fatigued and has difficulties concentrating and sleeping. She expresses feelings of
unhappiness. She complains of multiple somatic complaints and they deny having hostility towards
other people.
The 50 items of scale 4 (Pd) reflects a primary dimension ranging from constricted social
conformity to antisocial acting-out impulses. Like scale 3, it is a characterological scale and
assesses general maladjustment, failure to appreciate the interpersonal side of life, complaints
about family and authority figure in general, social alienation, and an emotional shallowness
toward others. The respondent has a T score of 66 on scale 4 indicating rebellious behavior toward
authority, and family problems. People in this T score level are usually impulsive, impatient,
irritable, hostile, and they may feel bored empty and/ or depressed. The respondent has family
problems with regard to her relationship with her mother. Out of the 5 Harris Lingoes scales, she
displayed high scores for subscales Pd1 (Familial discord), Pd4 (Social alienation), and Pd5 (Self-
alienation) with 74, 86 and 77 being the respective scores. As a high scorer on these subscales, the
respondent describes her family as lacking in love, understanding and support. She feels that her
family is critical and have not permitted her adequate freedom or independence. She expresses
feeling of alienation, isolation and estrangement. She also seems to believe that other people do
not understand them and that she gets a raw deal from life. High scorers also describe themselves
as uncomfortable and unhappy. They do not find daily life interesting or rewarding. They may
express regret, guilt, and remorse for past deeds.
This 56-item scale 5 (Mf) measures the extent to which the patients endorses or identifies
with culturally stereotype masculine or feminine interest patterns as well as vocational choices,
aesthetic interest, and activity-passivity dimension. The scale is also an inadequate estimate of
42
tendencies towards overt or latent homosexuality. The respondent scored an average T score of 52
on scale 5 which falls on the moderate side of the profile.
The scale 6 (Pa) measure ranges from obvious psychotic content, such as delusion of
persecution and ideas of reference, to interpersonal hypersensitivity, suspiciousness, and moral
self- righteousness. Because of the obvious content of most of the items, this scale is easier to fake
than most. For this scale she has a T score of 78 indicating psychotic symptoms, including
disturbing thinking and delusions of persecution. Scale 6 is sensitive to a pattern of felt
vulnerability caused when one feels oneself to be mercilessly and relentlessly opposed by hostile
forces, or subject to facing such opposition suddenly and without warning. High scorers feel
trapped, as if they’ve been pushed into a corner, their back to the wall, and without a leg to stand
on, or potentially so; they feel as if they face annihilation if they fail to stand what little ground
they believe they have left, and shame, humiliation, and defeat if they do stand their ground. These
patients maintain a strong focus on rationality, ethics, and morality as they try to apply their minds
to the threats and dilemmas they face, knowing that their own physical strength cannot save them.
Their speech may magnify the power and size of the forces arrayed against, their corruption, or
their ruthlessness, savagery, and heartlessness. They are likewise inclined to claim greater strength,
resources, and knowledge to oppose such forces than they actually possess or even feel they
possess. There is a general tendency to equate resolution, tenacity, and certainty with strength,
whereas equivocation, flexibility, and doubt are equated with weakness. They exhibit a drive to
elevate the self as the arbiter of what is fair, righteous, good, honorable, and moral as a way of
laying claim to a higher form of strength or insight to compensate for physical vulnerability.
However, the patient’s focus typically is not on physical vulnerability but on a sense of
identity, will, and autonomy. The high Scale 6 scorer demands to be treated as a full citizen with
inalienable rights and a good name, and dreads being reduced as a locus of action and free choice
to the status of a cipher or slave.
The items on scale 6 are divided into 3 Harris Lingoes content subscales out of which she
has high T scores for Pa1 (Persecutory Ideas) and Pa2 (Poignancy) with respective scores of 77
and 75.High scores on these subscales are indicating that they are more high strung and sensitive
than other people. She usually feels lonely and misunderstood and she might seek out risky or
43
exciting activities to make herself feel better. High scorers also describe the world as a threatening
place. Most of the time she feels misunderstood and unfairly treated.
Scale 7 (Pt) consist of 48 items reflecting chronic or trait anxiety, general dissatisfaction
with life. They are indecisive, have difficulty with concentration, self-doubt, and rumination and
have agitated concerns about themselves and show aspects of obsessive compulsive personality.
She obtained a T score of 66 indicating moderate anxiety and depression. She usually feels fatigue,
exhaustion and has insomnia. She might have intruding thoughts, have difficulty in concentrating,
and fears of losing one’s mind.
The scale 8 (Sc) is the longest scale on the MMPI-2 with 78 items. It taps dimensions of
schizoid mentation, feelings of being different, feelings of isolation, bizarre thought processes, and
peculiar perceptions, poor family relationships, sexual identity concerns, and a tendency to
withdraw to wish-fulfilling fantasy. Its performance in the clinic for the individual assessment of
patients is less reliable for several reasons, including its sensitivity to various depressive
phenomena, particularly depressive cognition and feelings of helplessness, hopelessness, and
worthlessness; to thought disturbance and disorganization in mania; to various personality
disorders, especially borderline and schizotypal disorders, in which vulnerability to psychotic
episodes and interpersonal alienation are relatively severe; to PTSD and other severe and
potentially disabling anxiety disorders that adversely impact identity and self-esteem; and to
efforts to minimize or exaggerate psychopathology for various instrumental purposes.
Nevertheless, Scale 8 provides essential insights into a variety of psychopathological conditions
by way of its implications for the individual’s sense of identity and self-esteem, cognitive and
behavioral organization, pattern of relating to others, and quality of ordinary experience. The
respondent obtained a T score of 69 indicating that she might have unusual beliefs, have eccentric
behaviors, is socially withdrawn and indulges in excessive fantasy or daydreaming. She has
generalized fears, tend to feel anxious, sad and blue most of the time and has somatic complains.
Most patients who score high on Scale 8 experience the self as damaged, alienated, estranged,
afflicted, or defective. They also tend to experience the material world as alien and beyond their
ken. They feel presented with challenges that seem perversely antagonistic and frustrating. From
social customs and conventions to finding one’s way from here to there; from managing financial
44
affairs to performing assigned duties; from attending to the repair of broken or malfunctioning
appliances to making social arrangements; from waiting in line to replacing exhausted
commodities, patients tend to find the ordinary experience of living strewn with pitfalls, the
avoidance of which requires that their range of communication and behavior be contracted to a
point that is consonant with the need to avoid both social gaffes and offenses, and problems
encountered in the material world that exceed their capacity to cope and resolve.
Their words and actions may feel awkward, stilted, and out of place, as if the product of
miscues. Whether kindly or hurtful, their expressions are experienced as tinny and mechanical,
and seem to create echoes instead of resonances. They are perplexed by the apparent effortlessness
of others’ words and actions, which seem to have a harmony and an integrity to which the patient
feels unable to aspire. Thus, the self is felt to be ill-equipped and incompetent for transactions with
the world and other people. Where others seem engaged and excited, the patient feels untouched
and strangely indifferent. Eventually this alienation leads to self-contempt and inchoate rage.
The items on scale 8 are divided into 6 Harris Lingoes content subscales. The respondent
has high scores in the subscales Sc1 (Social alienation), Sc3 (Lack of ego mastery, cognitive), and
Sc4 (Lack of ego mastery, conative), with the respective T scores of 81, 80 and 80. High scorers
on these subscales report feeling mistreated, misunderstood, and unloved. In extreme cases they
may believe that others are trying to harm them physically. Although high scorers may be reporting
that they feel lonely and empty, they also indicate that they avoid social situations and interpersonal
relationships whenever possible. High scorers also report strange though processes, feelings of
unreality, and difficulties in concentration and memory. They might at times feel like they are
losing their minds. The respondent feels that life is a strain, and she feels depressed. She also
reports worrying excessively and responding to stress by withdrawing into fantasy and
daydreaming.
The respondent scored an average T score of 49 for scale 9 (Ma). The items on this scale
are a direct measure of energy level with elevations further suggesting hypomanic
symptomatology, including flight of ideas, elevated mood, increased motor activity etc. leaving us
with no interpretation into this scale. Since she has an average T score for this scale, the Harris
Lingoes content subscales do not need to be interpreted.
45
Scale 0 (Si) which consists of 69 items assesses the introversion extroversion dimension,
with high score indicative of introversion. The respondent attained a T score of 74. This high score
suggest that the person is introverted, shy, socially inept, and may have a tendency to withdraw
from competitive situations. High score on this scale may also illustrate her as a person who lacks
self-confidence, threatened by intimacy, feels uncomfortable- especially around members of the
opposite sex and someone who is overly sensitive to what others think.
Interpretation of the profile on the basis of elevation, phase and slope
After plotting the profile of the respondent, the profile was reviewed. It was made evident
to the tester by the manner in which the scores were scattered, that the profile is high ranging
profile with a majority of the scales being above 65.n
The patterning and relationship among the scales of Hs1, D2 and Hy3 shows a 231 pattern
of neurotic triad designated as an inverted ‘v’. The pattern and relationship between Pa6, Pt7 and
Sc8 also clearly shows a pattern of a psychotic triad as the profile shows elevation of the scales.
In order to determine the slope of the graph, the mean of the neurotic triad and psychotic tetrad
were evaluated. Since the mean of the neurotic triad (m=72) is greater than the mean of the
psychotic tetrad (m=71) and the means are almost identical, the profile, is neither positive nor
negative.
Profile Patterns and code types
The clinical scales are rarely elevated in isolation, making profiles with multiple peaks the
rule, at least in clinical settings. Because of the standard error of measurement and the extensive
co-variances among the clinical scales, the selection of the particular code-type and how many
elevated scales to include in the code-type (Spike vs. two-point vs. three-point, etc.) under which
to commence actuarial interpretation is not always obvious.
For further interpretation and analysis of data the relationship or combination of certain
scales need to be looked up, this leads to the development of profile analysis (i.e., code type) as
the main interpretive mechanism of MMPI-2 data. The standard procedure for this analysis is to
interpret profiles according to the highest clinical scales above a T score of 65 provided that both
scales are within 10 T points of each other. A code type is referred to by writing the number of
46
two scales involved with the most elevated one first. It should also be noted that each interpretive
statement, while applying to most patients, does not apply to every patient who obtains the
particular code type. Each interpretative statement is a probability that might or might not apply
to a specific patient. Also when multiple code types are interpreted in a single profile, the highest
two point code types receive more weight than the lower pairs if there are any contradictions.
According to P respondents’ code types that occurred each yielding about some unique
interpretative manner.
2-6-8 (Depression-Paranoia-Schizophrenia)
This code type suggests the probability of an early stage psychosis in a patient who may
be experiencing more severe emotional difficulties than the profile ordinarily would suggest. There
is a reservoir of anger and hostility present that is not entirely masked by the depressed feelings.
Unlike most depressed patients who are unable to express their anger overtly, these patients are
openly hostile, aggressive, and resentful towards others. The respondent has reacted aggressively
in the past towards her roommate and towards her mother. There might have been more hostile
encounters in the past, but has not been recorded in her demographic. Patients with this code type
also adopt a chip-on-the-shoulder attitude in an attempt to reject others before they are rejected.
Also, they read malevolent meaning into neutral situations and jump to conclusions on the basis
of insufficient data. Paranoid trends are rather pronounced, sometimes in the point where paranoid
ideation is psychotic in nature. The respondent can be said to be paranoid when it comes to the
motives of her friends and people around her.
This code type also suggests depression with accompanying anxiety and agitations leading
to a fear of losing control of hostile or aggressive impulses. Suicidal ideation is likely and the
potential for self-destructive behavior is high. Occasionally, the clinical picture may include
hysterically determined somatic symptoms of an atypical variety. They complain of concentration
and thinking difficulties and may show a formal thought disorder consistent with schizophrenic
disorder. The potential inherent in intimacy for subsequent rejection results in their reluctance to
become involved with others. The respondent might not be leaning toward schizophrenia, but she
does complain of loss of concentration, and thinking difficulties that distract her when she is left
alone or during lectures and especially at night. This code type represents a chronic level of
47
adjustment of marginal quality so that the prognosis for intervention and subsequent change is
poor. Most of these patients receive a diagnosis of major depression, schizophrenia or
schizoaffective disorder. Under stress they are likely to occupy themselves with secretive fantasy
accompanied by loss of capacity to recognize reality. She is likely to be resentful of demands posed
on her and described as moody, irritable, and unfriendly.
2-3-1 (Depression-Hysteria-Hypochondriasis)
This combination gives us somatization in the context of anxiety, insecurity, depression,

and helplessness, with inhibition, moodiness, unhappiness, irritability, especially somatically
focused anxiety and apprehensions of serious illness, physical breakdown, and declining health.
Preoccupation with somatic symptoms may obscure signs of depression, such as fatigue, disturbed
sleep, pessimism, and dysphoria. Tend to be over-controlled and sub-assertive, passive, dependent,
immature, and avoidant. The respondent has problem with concentration and attention sometimes,
and she feels tired all the time even after an 8 hours of sleep, she experiences body aches and
tremors in her hands. She describes herself as being restless and moody sometimes and prefers her
own company.
The combination of 2-3 is much more frequent in women. It is associated with so-called
atypical depression/hysteroid dysphoria, episodic dysphoric mood with crying and unhappiness;
health concerns, fatigue, exhaustion, anxiety, insecurity, emotional over-control, and over-
reactiveness to stresses. She may complain of problems with memory, concentration, and
judgment, but without gross cognitive disruption. She has disturbed sleep and loss of sexual
interest. She has excessive emotional control or constriction; feels “bottled up.” She is also overly
sensitive to criticism and rejection, but strongly inhibited in expressing aggression, anger, and
mistrust. This interpretation supports her medical history of clinical depression. She has confessed
of majority of the symptoms stated above.
6-7-8 (Paranoia-Psychasthenia-Schizophrenia)
This combination suggests pervasive but poorly differentiated distress with severe cognitive
and behavioral disorganization, regression, and disability. Anxiety is expressed as dread or panic
whereas depression is expressed in apathy; the respondent has attitudes of helplessness,
48
hopelessness, and worthlessness; and suicidal ideation. She has chronic feelings of inadequacy and
inferiority. She may manifest psychotic symptoms include gross thought disorder; hallucinations;
pervasive but loosely structured delusional and bizarre preoccupations; as well as moderate to
severe impairment of attention, concentration, memory, and judgment. She is severely alienated
from both interpersonal and material worlds with suspiciousness and hostility, and bland but
pervasive apprehensiveness and incomprehension, respectively. She may spend majority of time
in fantasy and daydreaming, often with sexual, violent, religious, or supernatural preoccupations.
Most of the time, she feels misunderstood, despised, and mistreated by others and
anticipates further unfriendliness, mistreatment, and rejection and becomes angry for no apparent
reason. She is quick to feel threatened and attacked and may become unpredictably assaultive. She
has experience neglect (love) from her mother and as she lives away from home, she experiences
loneliness and alienates herself from others. She constantly feels inadequate and finds that her
friends avoid her or some to her only as a last resort.
2-7 (Depression-Psychasthenia)
This code type suggests depression, worry, and pessimism, with accompanying anxiety,
tension, nervousness, and a pervading lack of self-confidence. Psychic conflicts may be
represented in hypochondriacal tendencies and somatic complaints. The respondent constantly
complains of body aches and headaches. These patients are guilt ridden, intropunitive, generally
fearful, and obsessively preoccupied with their personal deficiencies, Patients respond to
frustration with considerable self-blame and guilt. They worry excessively, are vulnerable to both
real and imagined threat, and anticipate threats before they occur. Socially they tend to be rather
docile and dependent, and find it difficult to be assertive when appropriate.
2-3 (Depression-Hysteria)
These patients typically show greater immaturity, feelings of inadequacy and insecurity,
and inefficiency in living. Depression as well as lowered activity levels, feeling of helplessness
and self-doubt is evident. The respondent shows aspects of insecurity and self-doubt in her
behavior when talking about the affection of her friends and family. Initiative is lacking in these
49
patients and they are likely to rely on others to take care of them. Her friends and roommates view
her as rather passive, docile, and dependent. Feelings of social inadequacy are evident, resulting
in a tendency to keep social contacts to a minimum.
6-3 (Paranoia-Hysteria)
Patients with this code type are seen as angry, bitter individuals who are repressing their
own hostile aggressive impulses. The respondent is hypersensitive to criticism, experience
considerable anxiety and tension, and frequently has somatic complaints. When scale 6 is higher
than scale 3 by 5 or more T points, such patients strive for social power and prestige, even to the
point of ruthless power manipulation.
6-4 (Paranoia-Psychopathic deviate)
Patients obtaining this code type are likely to accentuate their complaints by a tendency to
be self-dramatic and hysteroid. They are extremely sensitive to criticism, mistrust the motive of
others, tend to brood and harvest grudges, and feel they are not receiving the appropriate treatment
they deserve. These patients have difficulty in psychotherapy because denial is prominent and their
basic mistrust of the motives of others precludes their acceptance of constructive criticism and
attempts to help them. During her initial months with her therapist, psychotherapy did not help
her, but instead affected her more adversely. Towards the later months of her therapy, she started
opening up more and with psychotherapy had started to show improvements.
8-3 (Schizophrenia- Hysteria)
Patients obtaining this code type typically have major thought disturbances to the point of
disorientation, difficulty with concentration, and lapse of memory. Regression and autistic
tendencies may be present, and thinking may be delusional in nature. The most common diagnosis
is schizophrenia, but somatoform as well as hysterical disorders should be considered. Supportive
psychotherapy seems to have limited impact.
Conclusion
The respondent is a 19 year old student who is living away from home. She was previously
diagnosed with clinical depression but had stopped therapy due to the mental stigma attached to
50
mental health. She indulges in excessive day dreaming and fantasy when she cannot cope with
reality. She has shown aggressive tendencies in the past towards her roommate and her mother.
She also has constant somatic complaints, complaining of headaches, body aches and tremors in
her hands. She is socially insecure and has low self-worth. She feels misunderstood and doesn’t
trust many people. Her defensive systems are very high, making it difficult for her to trust people
even when they have good intent towards her. He profile is high ranging, suggesting sever
psychopathology. Her FB scale was elevated (91) indicating that she may be faking bad, but overall
her profile is valid. Her profile is neither positive or negative in nature because the mean of the
neurotic triad and psychotic tetrad are almost similar (m=T72, m=T71 respectively). The
interpretation of her profile suggests that she is suffering from major depression and excessive
somatic complaints. She shows schizoid tendencies with hints of personality disorders.
51
References
Balducci, C., Alfano, V., & Fraccaroli, F. (2009). Relationships between mobbing at work and MMPI-2
personality profile: posttraumatic stress symptoms, and suicudal ideation and behavior. Violence and
Victims, 24(1), 52-67.
Buss, D. M. (2005). The handbook of evolutionary psychology. New York: Wiley.
Butcher, J. N., Graham, J. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Tellegan, A., & Dahlstrom, W. G. (2001). MMPI-2
manual for administration, scring and interpretationd. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Cohen-Swerdlik. (2009). Psychological Testing and Assessment: An Introduction to Tests and

Measurement. McGraw-Hill.
Dean, A. C., Boone, K. B., Kim, M. S., Curiel, A. R., Martin, D. J., Victor, T. L., . . . Lang, Y. K. (2008).
Examination of the Impact of Ethnicity on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Fake Bad
Scale. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 22(6), 1054-1060.
Diener, E., & Seligman, M. (2004). Beyond money: Toward an economy of well-being. Psychological
Science in the Public Interest, 5, 1-31.
DiLalla, L. F. (2004). Behavior genetics principles: Perspectives in developmmenet, personality, and

psychopathology.Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Dyer, C. (2006). Research in Psychology: A Practical Guide to Methods and Statistics. Wiley.
Gregory, R. J. (2013). Psychological Testing (4th ed.). Pearson.
Hecker, J. E., & Thorpe, G. L. (2005). Introduction to Clinical Psychology : Science, Practices, and
Ethics. Pearson.
Matthiesen, S. B., & Einarsen, S. (2001). MMPI-2 configurations among victims of bullying at
work. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10(4), 467-484.
McKinley, J. C., & Hathaway, S. R. (1942). A multiphasic personality schedule (Minnesota) :IV. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 26, 614-624.
Passer, M. W., & Smith, R. E. (2013). Psychology The Science of Mind and Behavior. Mc Graw Hill
Education.
Rajah, M. N., & McIntosh, A. R. (2005). Overlap in the functional neural systems involved in semantic
and episodic memory retrieval. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 470-482.
52
Appendices

Sample of An MMPI Report - Undergrad Level (Scoring Included)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sample of An MMPI Report - Undergrad Level (Scoring Included)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running Head: PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT OF AN EMOTIONALLY DISTRESSED PERSON

PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF AN EMOTIONALLY DISTRESSED PERSON

The Concept of Personality

According to Sigmund Freud (1953), "personality is an individual's unique thoughts,

The characteristic features of personality are-

● It has both physical and psychological components.

Person-Situation Interaction - Mischel's meaning of this is that a person's can be

There are following main approaches for the study of personality:-

Psychodynamic Perspective of Personality

The psychodynamic or psychoanalytic perspective had its beginnings in the work of

Humanistic Perspective to personality

Social-Cognitive Perspective to Personality

Social-cognitive theorists emphasized the importance of both of the influences of other

Trait Approach to Personality

Psychological Testing and Assessment

What is a Psychological Test?

A psychological test is a standardized procedure for sampling behavior and describing it

Standardization of procedures underlines uniformity in administration procedures and

Reliability refers to the attribute of consistency in measurement. Reliability is best viewed

The representative sample of behavior that is under consideration is known as sample of

Difference between Testing and Assessment

Assessment is typically individualized. In contrast to testing, assessment more typically

Assessment typically requires an educated selection of tools of evaluation, skill in

Steps in the Assessment Process

Following are the steps in the process of assessment-

Second step is the professional conducting the assessment, usually a psychologist or a

Personality Assessment is a proficiency in professional psychology that involves the

The idiographic approach is concerned with understanding the uniqueness of individuals

Techniques of Assessing Personality

Personality of a person can be assessed using various types of methods:

Personality inventories can be classified into three basic categories -

Theory guided tests

Factor-Analytically Deprived Inventories

Freud and other psychodynamic theorists emphasized the importance of unconscious

G. Lindsey (1959) proposed a five-way classification of projective methods based on types

Choice or Ordering Techniques

An interview is a method that is designed to facilitate the passing of information between

Objective observation of a subject’s behavior is a technique that falls in the category of

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory is a broad-band test designed to assess a

Development of the Original MMPI

Need for Revision

Description of the Scales

Measures of inconsistent responding

VRIN Scale and TRIN Scale

Measures of infrequent responding

The K scale was developed to assess an individual’s level of defensiveness in responding

S (Superlative Self-Presentation) Scale

The Clinical Scales

Scale 1 (Hs: Hypochondrias)

Scale 2 (D: Depression)

Scale 3 (Hy: Hysteria)

Scale 4: (Pd: Psychopathic Deviate)

Pd5: Self-Alienation: High scorers on this subscale describe themselves as uncomfortable

Scale 5 (Mf: Masculinity-Femininity)

Scale 6 (Pa: Paranoia)

Scale 7 (Pt: Psychasthenia)

Scale 8 (Sc: Schizophrenia)

Scale 9 (Ma: Hypomania)

Scale 0 (Si: Social Introversion)

To summarize, the MMPI—2 re-standardization project ensured continuity with the

It is routinely used in the clinical assessment of psychiatric inpatients, consumers of