The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory

Ria Manocha

Department of Psychology, Christ (Deemed to be University)

MPS 2511: Psychodiagnostic Lab - 1

January 11, 2024

 Introduction

Personality

Personality is a complex and multifaceted concept that refers to the unique set of
psychological traits and characteristics that define an individual's patterns of thought, emotion,
and behavior. It encompasses the enduring and relatively stable aspects of an individual's
psychological makeup that distinguish them from others. Various authors and psychologists have
proposed different definitions of personality and developed theories to explain its structure and
dynamics. Goron Allport defined personality as “the dynamic organization within the individual
of those psychophysical systems that determine his characteristic behavior and thought."

Different types of models explain personality through a variety of dimensions. The big
five personality traits gave 5 dimensions of personality such as Openness to Experience,
Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. According to the
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator personality can be defined in terms of Extraversion/Introversion,
Sensing/Intuition, Thinking/Feeling, Judging/Perceiving.

Theories of Personality

● Psychoanalytic Theory (Sigmund Freud)

Freud believed that personality is heavily influenced by unconscious conflicts. The id,
ego, and superego represent different aspects of the mind. The id is instinctual and seeks
pleasure, the superego represents morality, and the ego mediates between them.
Personality development occurs through psychosexual stages, and unresolved conflicts
can lead to psychological issues.

● Behaviorist Theory

Behaviorists like B.F. Skinner focused on observable behaviors rather than internal
mental processes. Personality is seen as a set of learned responses to environmental
 stimuli. Reinforcement and punishment shape behavior and the environment plays a
crucial role in determining an individual's actions and reactions.

● Humanistic Theory

Humanistic theorists emphasize the inherent goodness in people and the pursuit of
self-actualization. Personality is viewed as a reflection of one's self-concept—the way an
individual sees. Unconditional positive regard, or acceptance without judgment, is
essential for healthy personality development.

● Trait Theory

Trait theorists focus on identifying and measuring consistent patterns of behavior. The
Big Five personality traits (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness,
Neuroticism) provide a comprehensive framework. Personality is described in terms of
these broad traits, which help predict and explain individual differences.

● Social Cognitive Theory

Bandura's theory emphasizes the role of observational learning and the influence of social
factors. Personality is shaped by the interplay of personal factors (thoughts and beliefs),
behavior, and the environment. Self-efficacy, or the belief in one's ability to succeed,
influences the choices people make and the goals they set.

● Psychosocial Development Theory (Erik Erikson)

Erikson's theory emphasizes the importance of psychosocial stages across the lifespan.
Each stage presents a unique developmental task that contributes to the formation of
identity. Personality is viewed as an evolving entity shaped by the successful resolution
of these psychosocial challenges.

● Biological Trait Theory (Hans Eysenck):

Eysenck proposed that biological factors, particularly genetics and brain structure,
influence personality. The PEN model identifies three major dimensions—Psychoticism,
 Extraversion, and Neuroticism—that encompass various traits and describe individual
differences in behavior.

History of Personality Tests

The history of personality tests is rooted in ancient traditions that categorized individuals
based on temperament and bodily fluids. However, it gained more structure in the 19th century
with the advent of phrenology, a theory linking personality traits to skull shape. Sigmund Freud's
psychoanalytic theory in the early 20th century influenced the development of personality
assessments, focusing on unconscious motivations. The World War I era saw the emergence of
objective tests like the Woodworth Personal Data Sheet. Later, the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator
(MBTI) and the Big Five personality traits (OCEAN) gained prominence in the mid-20th
century, providing more comprehensive frameworks.

Types of Personality Tests

Personality tests come in various forms. Objective tests, such as the Minnesota
Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and the 16 Personality Factor Questionnaire (16PF),
involve structured responses. Projective tests, like the Rorschach inkblot test, use ambiguous
stimuli to reveal unconscious thoughts. Behavioral observations assess behavior in different
situations, while interviews provide a dynamic approach to understanding personality. Biological
tests explore the links between personality traits and biological factors.

Uses of Personality Tests

Personality tests serve diverse purposes. In employment, they aid in hiring decisions,
assessing candidates' suitability for specific roles and organizational culture fit. In clinical
settings, these assessments contribute to the diagnosis and treatment of mental health disorders.
Educationally, they help understand students' learning styles and preferences. In research,
psychologists employ personality tests to study human behavior, personality development, and
various psychological phenomena. Individuals may use these tests for personal development,
gaining insights into their strengths and weaknesses. In organizational settings, personality tests
facilitate team building and enhance collaboration. Additionally, counselors and therapists use
these assessments to tailor interventions and gain insights into clients' personalities. Despite their
usefulness, ethical considerations and awareness of cultural factors are crucial when using
personality tests.

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI)

Introduction

The MMPI test was developed by Clinical Psychologist Starke R. Hathway and
neuropsychiatrist J. Charley McKinley in 1937. Initially, they developed the test intending to
diagnose various psychiatric disorders and their severity. The test items were developed from the
list of questions which were supported by the people suffering from different psychiatric
disorders. Now the test is widely used in hospitals, organizations, and educational settings.

Development of the Test

Initially developed in the pursuit of creating a standardized tool for diagnosing mental
illness, the MMPI underwent a meticulous process of item generation, with researchers
compiling a vast pool of potential test items by eliciting responses from both psychiatric patients
and non-patient control groups. Through careful selection, the researchers established the first
version of the MMPI, the MMPI-1, in 1943, featuring ten clinical scales designed to assess
diverse psychological constructs. Normative data collection followed, drawing from a broad
sample to set a baseline for individual score interpretation. Over subsequent years, the MMPI
underwent revisions and updates, leading to versions such as the MMPI-2 in 1989 and the
MMPI-2-RF (Restructured Form) in 2008. These updates aimed to enhance psychometric
properties and maintain relevance. The MMPI's international adaptations in various languages
underscore its cross-cultural utility. In 2020, the MMPI-3 was introduced, incorporating updated
normative data and a revised item pool while preserving core clinical scales. The MMPI's
multifaceted applications in clinical, forensic, and occupational settings, as well as ongoing
research, attest to its enduring significance in the field of psychology, providing valuable insights
into personality and psychopathology.

Test Items

The MMPI test measures a lot of scales across various domains such as

Profile Validity Scales

1. Variable Response Inconsistency (VRIN): This is a method to detect random and

inconsistent responses. Such a score will show whether the profile is interpretative or not.
2. True Response Inconsistency (TRIN): This method helps us to detect whether the
participants are using Fixed Responding or not. Participants usually do that when they are
not reading the questions or cannot comprehend them. This section includes 20 questions
that are the opposite of each other.
3. Infrequency (F): This score helps us to understand whether the participants are
overreporting or exaggerating their problems. People who score high on this may appear
in a worse state than they are or are answering the questions without attention.
4. Back Frequency(FB): This scale aims to indicate shifts in an individual's responses
between the first and second halves of the test by incorporating questions that most
typical respondents do not endorse. Elevated scores on this scale may suggest a lapse in
attention, leading to random responses. Such high scores could also result from over or
underreporting, fixed response patterns, fatigue, or experiencing significant stress.
5. Infrequency Psychopathology (FP): This scale is designed to identify deliberate
overreporting in individuals with mental health disorders or those engaging in intentional
random or fixed response patterns.
 6. Lie (L): This scale serves as a validity measure focused on identifying individuals' efforts
to portray themselves positively. Those who attain high scores on this scale intentionally
aim to present the most favorable image of themselves, downplaying any shortcomings or
unfavorable traits.
7. Correction (K): This score helps us to understand whether the participant is intentionally
trying to show themselves positively by underreporting their problems.
8. Superlative Self Presentation(S): This scale was also employed to check underreporting.
It includes sub-scales that examine the test taker’s belief in human goodness, serenity, life
satisfaction, patience or denial of irritability, and denial of moral flaws.

Clinical Scales

1. Hypochondriasis: This scale was created to evaluate a neurotic preoccupation with bodily
functioning. Its items pertain to physical symptoms and overall well-being. Originally
this scale was formulated to pinpoint individuals exhibiting hypochondria.
2. Depression: Originally designed for depression identification, marked by low morale, a
lack of hope for the future, and overall dissatisfaction with one’s life situation. Elevated
scores may indicate depression, while moderate scores generally reveal more widespread
dissatisfaction with life.
3. Hysteria: Initially intended to spot those exhibiting hysteria or physical complaints in
stressful situations.
4. Psychopath Deviate: This scale originally measured social deviation, non-acceptance of
authority, and amorality. Despite the scale’s name, high scores are typically diagnosed
with a personality disorder rather than a psychotic disorder.
5. Masculinity-Feminity: Initially designed to identify “homosexual tendencies,” though
currently used to assess an individual’s identification with stereotypical male and female
gender roles.
6. Paranoia: Originally created to identify individuals with paranoid symptoms like
suspiciousness, feelings of persecution, grandiose self-concepts, excessive sensitivity, and
rigid attitudes. High scores may exhibit paranoid or psychotic symptoms.
 7. Psychasthenia: No longer used diagnostically, the scale’s symptoms now reflect anxiety,
depression, and obsessive-compulsive disorder.
8. Schizophrenia: This scale was developed for schizophrenia identification, encompassing
various areas such as peculiar thought processes, social alienation, family relationship
issues, concentration difficulties, impulse control challenges, self-worth and identity
questions, and potential substance abuse.
9. Hypomania: Developed to identify hypomanic characteristics, including elevated mood,
hallucinations, delusions of grandeur, accelerated speech and motor activity, irritability,
flight of ideas, and brief periods of depression.
10. Social Introversion: This scale was created later than the other scales, it assesses shyness
and the inclination to withdraw from social interactions and responsibilities.

Application of the Test

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) finds application across

various domains, serving as a crucial tool in clinical, forensic, and occupational contexts.
Clinicians utilize the MMPI for diagnosing mental disorders, tailoring treatment plans, and
gaining insights into personality structures. In forensic settings, it aids in legal cases by
evaluating individuals' psychological states for relevance in legal proceedings. Occupational
assessments involve using the MMPI for employee selection in high-stakes professions and
assessing workplace safety. In medical settings, it helps understand the psychological impact of
physical health conditions. The MMPI also serves as a valuable tool in psychological research,
contributing to the study of personality and psychopathology. Additionally, counseling and
rehabilitation aid therapists in treatment planning and outcome assessment. However, its
application requires expertise to ensure ethical and accurate administration and interpretation.
 Review of Literature

Litz, et al. (1991) aimed to determine the comparability of the MMPI-2 with the original
MMPI in assessing PTSD among Vietnam combat veterans. Results indicated highly significant
correlations between MMPI and MMPI-2 basic scales for the PTSD sample, with congruence in
2-point codes. The MMPI-2 effectively identified PTSD subjects from other groups, and there
was a strong association between MMPI and MMPI-2 regarding PK scores, despite minor
differences in raw scores. Overall, the findings suggest a high degree of comparability between
the two versions of PTSD assessment.

Allen and Coyne (1995) aimed to explore the entire spectrum of dissociative experiences
concerning MMPI-2 profiles. Results aligned with prior research, indicating that severe
dissociation correlated with elevated MMPI-2 scales associated with psychotic symptoms.
Surprisingly, the seemingly less problematic form of dissociation showed a slightly stronger
connection to MMPI-2 scores than more typical forms like depersonalization and amnesia.

Blanchard, et al. (2010) compared the efficacy of MMPI and the Personality Assessment
Inventory in detecting overreporting. The 52 participants, including college students simulating
fake bad responses under forensic or psychiatric scenarios and 432 psychiatric patients,
underwent both measures. Results revealed that the MMPI-2 F- K index and Fp scale were the
most effective individual indicators of faking bad, with the MMPI-2 scales proving superior as a
collective set.

Raskin and Novacek (2010), conducted research that aimed to create a description of
narcissistic personality traits within a nonclinical population using the Minnesota Multiphase
Personality Inventory (MMPI). Two groups, comprising 57 and 173 subjects, underwent testing
with both the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) and MMPI. The correlational analysis
revealed a consistent positive association between narcissism and MMPI mania, along with
validated negative relationships between narcissism and MMPI depression, psychasthenia, social
introversion, anxiety, repression, and ego control. Examining the seven NPI components in
relation to MMPI scales suggested varying degrees of psychological maladjustment. Narcissistic
Entitlement and Exploitativeness indicated the highest maladjustment, whereas narcissistic
authority reflected comparatively lower maladjustment.
 Methodology

Objective

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) was used to assess and
measure various personality traits, psychopathological symptoms, and clinical syndromes.

Participant’s Demographic Details

Name: RM

Age: 22 years

DOB: 24/10/2001

Gender: Female

Family Type: Nuclear

Education Qualification: Post Graduate

Background Information: The subject is from Delhi and she is pursuing her master's in clinical
psychology from Christ University, Bangalore.

Procedure/Administration

The subject or participant is asked to be seated comfortably and good rapport will be established.
Then the subject is given the answer sheet and question booklet and given the instructions.

1. Respond to each question with utmost honesty; this is crucial for accurate results and
optimal interpretation.
2. Ensure accurate marking on the answer sheet by shading the circle in the dark; be
cautious with the options to prevent scoring ambiguities.
 3. When faced with confusing questions open to multiple interpretations, respond based on
the interpretation most fitting for you at the present moment.
4. Make sure to answer all the questions.
5. After completion, take a few minutes to review your answer sheet for any missing
responses, incomplete erasures, or instances of double-answered questions.
6. Most importantly, maintain a relaxed demeanor, and if you have any doubts you can ask
the administrator.

Scoring and Interpretation

1. Scoring will be done using the stencil or scoring key provided by the author.
2. Find out the Variable Response Inconsistency (VRIN) scores and True Response
Inconsistency (TRIN) scores using the scoring procedure given by the authors.
3. Convert the raw scores with K correction into T scores and interpret the results.

Material Required

MMPI answer sheet, MMPI raw scores sheet, MMPI T-scores, MMPI profile validity sheet,
Pencil, Eraser

Precautions

Proper rapport must be established with the participant. Confidentiality of the participant
should be maintained. The instructions should be made clear to the participant. The participant
should be reassured that there are no right or wrong answers. The experiment should be done in a
noise-free and bright environment.
Ethical considerations

All the participants’ information should be kept confidential. The participant should
voluntarily participate in the experiment. Maintaining confidentiality of results and personal
information is essential, along with cultural sensitivity to prevent biases. Feedback and
debriefing should be offered, addressing concerns and providing support. The results should only
be used for intended purposes, minimize harm, and adhere to professional boundaries.

Test Results

Table 1

Clinical Scales Raw Score T-Score

VRIN 11 74

TRIN 9 50

Frequency 10 72

Back Frequency 9 77

Infrequent Psychopathology 3 65

Lie 2 42

Correction 9 37
Superlative Self Presentation 20 20

Hypochondriasis 14 55.5

Depression 25 62

Hysteria 28 65

Psychopathic Deviate 26 61.6

Masculinity-Feminity F 36 50

Paranoia 12 56

Psychasthenia 29 62

Schizophrenia 25 57

Hypomania 14 56

Social Introversion 31 54
 Analysis

Interpretation of the Validity Scales

The subject scored a T-score of 74 in Variable Response Inconsistency (VRIN). The profile is
valid however it is characterized by some inconsistent responses. This shows a little carelessness
and occasional loss of concentration while answering the test.

The subject scored a T-score of 50 in True Response Inconsistency (TRIN). This score suggests
that the profile is valid.

The subject scored a T-score of 72 in Infrequency. The scores suggest that there is some
exaggeration of existing problems. This suggests that the test taker somewhat accurately reported
several psychological problems and the exaggeration of problems could be a way of asking for
help.

The subject scored a T-score of 77 in Back Frequency. This shows that the subject’s responses
are valid.

The subject scored a T-score of 65 in Infrequency Psychopathology. This suggests that the
subject's responses are likely valid. This shows that the subject accurately tried to describe their
current mental health situation.

The subject scored a T-score of 42 in Lie. This shows the subject’s responses are valid.

The subject scored a T-score of 37 in K (Correction). This shows that the subject's responses
might be invalid. But since TRIN and Infrequency scores are normal. The profile can be still
interpreted.

The subject scored a T-score of 20 in Superlative Self-Presentation. This shows that the profile is
valid.
Interpretation of the Clinical Scales

The subject scored a T-score of 55.5 in Hypochondriasis. The subject's score falls within the
normal range, indicating a moderate level of concern about bodily symptoms and health.

The subject scored a T-score of 62 in Depression. An elevated score suggests a higher level of
depressive symptoms or a tendency towards negative emotions. She might be experiencing
feelings of sadness, hopelessness, or low energy.

The subject scored a T-score of 65 in Hysteria. Elevated scores on this scale may suggest a
tendency to express emotional distress through physical symptoms or dramatic presentations.
There might be a proclivity for seeking attention or exhibiting exaggerated emotions.

The subject scored a T-score of 61.6 in Psychopathic Deviate. The subject's scores are moderate.
This shows that she might be immature and a little self-centered in some situations. She might
also engage in superficial relationships and most of the time she is energetic and extroverted.

The subject scored a T-score of 50 in Masculinity-femininity. This shows no interpretation.

The subject scored a T-score of 56 in Paranoia. Scores within the normal range indicate a
moderate level of suspicion or interpersonal sensitivity. The individual may be cautious, guarded,
and distrustful in their interactions but is not excessively paranoid.

The subject scored a T-score of 62 in Psychasthenia. Moderate scores suggest moderate levels of
anxiousness, tenseness, and uncomfortableness. She might be prone to being indecisive,
meticulous, shy, and introverted.

The subject scored a T-score of 57 in Schizophrenia. This shows moderate scores which shows
the subject has limited interest regarding other people’s feelings. She might also show feelings of
infrequency.

The subject scored a T-score of 56 in Hypomania. Moderate scores suggest that the subject is
energetic, gregarious, and extroverted. She engages herself in rebellious activities and seeks
excitement in day-to-day life.
The subject scored a T-score of 54 in Social Introversion. The subject's scores require no
interpretation.

Introspective Report

The participant found the test intriguing, realizing that she provided conflicting responses
to similar questions. She also observed that her mood and emotions during the test significantly
influenced many of her answers.

Diagnostic Formulation

The subject’s MMPI profile provides a nuanced view of their personality considering both the
validity indicators and clinical scales. The VRIN score of 74 suggests occasional inconsistency
and lapses in concentration, while the TRIN score of 50 confirms the overall validity of the
responses. The Infrequency scale score of 72 indicates a potential exaggeration of existing
problems, possibly as a plea for help. The Back Frequency score of 77 validates the subject’s
responses, enhancing the reliability of the profile.

Moving to the clinical scales, the subject exhibits a moderate level of concern about bodily
symptoms and health, as indicated by the Hypochondriasis scale. The Depression scale suggests
a higher likelihood of depressive symptoms, encompassing feelings of sadness, hopelessness or
low energy. The Hysteria scale suggests a potential inclination to express emotional distress
through physical symptoms or dramatic presentations. This may indicate a tendency to seek
attention or exhibit exaggerated emotions. In Psychopathic Deviate, the subject had moderate
scores that suggest possible immaturity, self-centeredness, and engagement in superficial
relationships. The individual may display energetic and extroverted traits. The paranoia scale
indicated a moderate level of suspicion or interpersonal sensitivity, with the subject being
cautious, guarded, and somewhat distrustful in interactions. The Psychasthenia scores suggest a
moderate levels of anxiousness, tenseness, and uncomfortableness. Traits such as indecisiveness,
meticulousness, shyness, and introversion may be prominent. The Schizophrenia scale suggested
limited interest in other’s feelings and potential feelings of infrequency. The Hypomania scale
reflects energetic, gregarious, and extroverted traits. The subject may engage in rebellious
activities and seek excitement.

Overall, the subject’s personality appears complex, marked by valid responses with occasional
inconsistencies and potential exaggeration of psychological problems. The clinical evaluation
points towards a mix of depressive symptoms, emotional expression through physical symptoms,
moderate psychopathic deviation, cautious interpersonal behavior, anxiety, potential feelings of
infrequency, and a tendency for energetic and extroverted traits.

Recommendations by the Clinical Psychologist

As a clinical psychologist reviewing the MMPI results, I recommend a comprehensive clinical

assessment to delve deeper into the underlying factors influencing the subject’s reported
symptoms and personality traits. Emphasis should be placed on developing effective emotional
regulation strategies and interpersonal skills training to improve communication and foster
healthier relationships, especially considering the moderate paranoia scores.
 References

Allen, J. G., & Coyne, L. (1995). The dissociative experiences scale and the MMPI-2. The
Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 183(10), 615-622.

Blanchard, D. D., McGrath, R. E., Pogge, D. L., & Khadivi, A. (2003). A comparison of the PAI
and MMPI-2 as predictors of faking bad in college students. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 80(2), 197-205.

Friedman, A. F., Bolinskey, P. K., Levak, R. W., & Nichols, D. S. (2014). Psychological
assessment with the MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF. Routledge.

Litz, B. T., Penk, W. E., Walsh, S., Hyer, L., Blake, D. D., Marx, B., ... & Bitman, D. (1991).
Similarities and differences between MMPI and MMPI-2 applications to the assessment
of posttraumatic stress disorder. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57(2), 238-253.

Raskin, R., & Novacek, J. (1989). An MMPI description of the narcissistic personality. Journal
of Personality Assessment, 53(1), 66-80.