Introduction
Personality tests explore one’s character, but each appraisal has a specific focus. The three tests that I have selected are Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–Adolescent–Restructured Form (MMPI-A-RF), the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R), and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-IV (MCMI-IV). MMPI-A-RF examines pathology in adolescents, NEO-PI-R assesses such major domains of personality as extraversion and neuroticism, and MCMI-IV concentrates on personality pathology and psychopathy assessment (Mohammadi et al., 2021; Botwin, 1995; Stein, 2021). The publishers of the three tests have stated more precise purposes. In particular, MMPI-A-RF is meant to be used with adolescents to investigate psychopathology and personality (University of Minnesota Press [UPress], n.d.). NEO-PI-R is designed to provide a thorough examination of a normal character, and MCMI-IV aims to present clinical insights into one’s personality (Psychological Assessment Resources [PAR], n.d. a; Pearson, n.d. a). I anticipate that some part of my work would be connected to populations within a clinical environment, and the three tests can be helpful, as they are applicable in various settings for different age groups. Nevertheless, one should research the materials, scoring, and technology of the tests to determine their appropriateness.
Evaluation of Test Materials, Costs, and Administration Times
Firstly, to evaluate a test, it is crucial to understand such concepts as test utility, test development, item analysis. Test utility refers to the usefulness or practical value and is affected by psychometric soundness, costs, and benefits, with the latter being both economic and noneconomic (Cohen et al., 2021). Since all appraisals are nonidentical, a good test is a product of thoughtful development, which occurs in several stages, from conceptualization to revision (Cohen et al., 2021). For instance, the fourth stage concerns item analysis that depends on difficulty, reliability, validity, index of discrimination, and other considerations, such as fairness (Cohen et al., 2021). Moreover, items vary in their formats, with each presenting distinct advantages and disadvantages (Cohen et al., 2021). For example, a binary-choice item contains only two possible responses and is relatively easy to score, but some wordings can be interpreted differently by separate test-takers (Cohen et al., 2021). Overall, to examine if a test is appropriate and meets its intended purpose, one should consider multiple factors, including the test developer’s objectives and the practicality of testing.
MMPI-A-RF can be characterized by its items, costs, and administration. The test consists of 241 items given as true/false items of the binary-choice format (Stein, 2021). The inventory is available in computer form and as a printed booklet with a 1-page answer sheet, and the test’s foreign language edition has booklets and an audio CD in Spanish (Stein, 2021). The publisher for MMPI-A-RF is the University of Minnesota Press, but the test is distributed by Pearson Assessments, which offers varying information than the Mental Measurements Yearbook (MMY) (Pearson, n.d. b; Stein, 2021). MMPI-A-RF includes scoring templates, profile sheets, stimulus books, answer key sets, and manuals for administration, scoring, interpretation (Pearson, n.d. b; Stein, 2021). The costs begin from $132 for starter and complete kits, $34 for support materials, and $14 for test forms and reports (Pearson, n.d. b). Scoring software can be purchased separately from the publisher, with an annual license starting from $175 (Pearson, n.d. c). The standard administration time ranges from 25 to 45 minutes, but the assessment can be completed over several sessions (Stein, 2021). MMPI-A-RF seems to have sufficient and helpful materials at reasonable prices.
NEO-PI-R is described relatively thoroughly, but some of the publisher’s products seem debatable. NEO-PI-R includes 240 items in a selected-response format that requires choosing an answer, although neither publisher nor reviews specified the type (Botwin, 1995; Cohen et al., 2021; Juni, 1995; PAR, n.d. a). The inventory is available in computer and paper and pencil forms with two parallel versions, one for self-reports and the other for observer reports (Botwin, 1995; PAR, n.d. a). NEO-PI-R includes a manual, a carbonless answer sheet, a feedback sheet explaining the personality domains, the NEO software system, various booklets, and a checklist to assist clinicians in planning treatment (PAR, n.d. a). The manual costs $121 and contains information about NEO PI-R, NEO-PI-3, NEO-FFI-3, the prices for forms are about $105 per each, and the fees for booklets begin from $73 (PAR, n.d. a). The software system comes separately with modules for four editions of the test and prices starting from $1,130 (PAR, n.d. b). The average administration time for NEO-PI-R is 30-40 minutes (PAR, n.d. a). The inventory’s certain materials appear overpriced, as not every practitioner may need information about prior editions.
The publisher and the reviews for MCMI-IV present comprehensive descriptions of the test. MCMI-IV contains 195 true/false items in the binary-choice format with English and Spanish versions (Rouse, 2017; Person, n.d. a; Zachar, 2017). The assessment is available in computer and paper and pencil forms, which can be listened to in an audio CD recording (Rouse, 2017; Person, n.d. a; Zachar, 2017). MCMI-IV consists of online and print manuals, booklets, different answer sheets, and interpretive and profile reports (Rouse, 2017; Person, n.d. a; Zachar, 2017). MCMI-IV starter kit with a digital manual and three administrations costs almost $180, the prices for test forms and reports start from $23, and the fees for support materials begin from $68 (Person, n.d. a). Scoring software options and expenses are similar to MMPI-A-RF, as the two tests share a publisher (Pearson, n.d. c). The standard administration time is 25 to 30 minutes, regardless of the process being guided by the recording or completed individually (Person, n.d. a; Zachar, 2017). MCMI-IV costs seem adequate with the inventory’s materials, and the test characterizations moderately resemble those of MMPI-A-RF.
Furthermore, it may be helpful to concentrate on utility to evaluate the feasibility of test materials, item formats, costs, and administration times. A utility analysis concerns a tool’s usefulness and practical value but varies in its methods, with each requiring diverse data to yield distinct output (Cohen et al., 2021). Nevertheless, the analysis is applicable in determining whether the benefits of utilizing a test outweigh the costs (Cohen et al., 2021). Out of the three discussed inventories, NEO-PI-R is the most questionable, as the costs for manual and software can be perceived to be high considering that the materials have information that one may not need. Moreover, Juni (1995) has indicated problems in the format of NEO-PI-R items. In contrast, the reviews of MMPI-A-RF and MCMI-IV did not reveal any issues with the items, despite some disadvantages of the true/false binary-choice format (Cohen et al., 2021). The two tests also come with sufficient materials compared to the prices and can be completed relatively quickly. Assuming that I am likely to work with clients in a clinical setting, MMPI-A-RF and MCMI-IV appear practical and feasible in my specialization.
Evaluation of Scoring Procedures and Interpretation Guidelines
Scores and scoring procedures are essential parts of a test. Types of scores vary and include but are not limited to a raw score, which is unmodified accounting of performance, and a standard score, which is a converted raw score (Cohen et al., 2021). For instance, the raw scores of MMPI-A-RF are converted to non-gendered T scores (Stein, 2021). The test’s scoring procedure involves computerized and hand-scoring of 48 empirically validated scales (Pearson, n.d. b; Stein, 2021). The inventory has scoring and interpretative reports and guidelines, providing full scoring information, treatment considerations, and other relevant data (Pearson, n.d. b). Furthermore, the NEO-PI-R profile forms facilitate the conversion of raw scores into T scores (PAR, n.d. a). NEO-PI-R scoring procedures concern 30 scales, with the items being scored electronically and results interpreted by a professional report service instead of a guideline (PAR, n.d. a). MCMI-IV is characterized by base rate scores presented in a graph for all scales and has a profile and interpretive reports with a summary of results, possible diagnoses, and a treatment guide (Person, n.d. a). Practitioners can rely on the publishers’ advice when using the three tests.
The discussed inventories have certain distinctions in their scores and scoring procedures. MMPI-A-RF has four scoring and reporting options and a free interpretation webinar to assist clinicians (Pearson, n.d. b). However, Stein (2021) recommends prioritizing computerized administration and scoring because hand-scoring for the test is laborious, time-consuming, and prone to error. In addition to the above-mentioned NEO software, NEO-PI-R’s publisher offers a paid service that can score answer sheets and produce 7- to 8-page customized interpretive reports for each test-taker (PAR, n.d. a). MCMI-IV has three scoring alternatives, two types of reports, and several free webinars concerning the interpretation (Person, n.d. a). The publishers seem to present ways to simplify scoring and interpretative procedures, but when evaluating whether the benefits overweight the expenses, one should consider the costs of not using the services (Cohen et al., 2021). In a situation where I would need to employ a test, I would deem the scoring procedures feasible because they are necessary and can be done efficiently and without mistakes with the companies’ help.
Evaluation of Test Technology
Each of the three inventories relies on technologies for administration, scoring, and interpretation. The listed processes for MMPI-A-RF can be completed web-based and computer-based, enabling practitioners to organize test-takers information, generate scores, report results, and store and export data (Pearson, n.d. b). For example, the computer-based option is the previously noted software from the publisher and comes with a guide, online help, ongoing technical support information, and future software updates (Pearson, n.d. c). Since one company distributes MMPI-A-RF and MCMI-IV, the latter test can be utilized with the same technical assistance as MMPI-A-RF (Person, n.d. a). Furthermore, NEO-PI-R can be administered, scored, and interpreted through the NEO software system, and a professional report service helps to score and interpret the results within one business day (PAR, n.d. a). The publishers offer technologies to guide and aid practitioners, but every option appears to provide varying levels of control over the processes.
Technology has impacted psychological testing by offering services that facilitate procedures but also require more expenses, thus questioning the need and usefulness of an assessment. For the three discussed tests, technologies to administer, score, and interpret results are delivered by the publishers and as separate products from other materials. Therefore, while each service seems useful, assuming that I am likely to be an employee at a clinic or another organization, I would probably have access to those technologies only if provided by my employer. Overall, based on all the viewed elements, MMPI-A-RF and MCMI-IV are more appropriate to my specialization than NEO-PI-R, which raises certain questions. Nevertheless, it is noteworthy to remember that the practicality of a test greatly depends on the needs of a particular client.
References
Botwin, M. (1995). Review of the revised NEO personality inventory. In J. C. Conoley & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The twelfth mental measurements yearbook. Buros Center for Testing.
Cohen, R. J., Schneider, W.J., & Tobin, R. (2021). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Juni, S. (1995). Review of the revised NEO personality inventory. In J. C. Conoley & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The twelfth mental measurements yearbook. Buros Center for Testing.
Mohammadi, M. R., Delavar, A., Hooshyari, Z., Shakiba, A., Salmanian, M., Ghandi, F., & Farnoody, N. (2021). Psychometric properties of the Persian version of million clinical multiaxial inventory-IV (MCMI-IV). Iranian Journal of Psychiatry, 16(1), 43-51.
Pearson. (n.d. a). Millon clinical multiaxial inventory-IV. Pearson Assessments. Web.
Peasron. (n.d. b). Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory-adolescent-restructured form. Pearson Assessments. Web.
Peasron. (n.d. c). Q local scoring and reporting software. Pearson Assessments. Web.
Psychological Assessment Resources (n.d. a). NEO personality inventory-revised. PAR. Web.
Psychological Assessment Resources (n.d. b). NEO software system with NEO-PI-3, NEO PI-R, NEO-FFI-3, and NEO PDR modules. PAR. Web.
Rouse, S. (2017). Review of the millon clinical multiaxial inventory–IV. In J.F. Carlson, K. F. Geisinger, & J. L. Jonson (Eds.), The twentieth mental measurements yearbook. Buros Center for Testing.
Stein, S. (2021). Review of the Minnesota multiphasic personality inventory–adolescent–restructured. In J.F. Carlson, K. F. Geisinger, & J. L. Jonson (Eds.), The twenty-first mental measurements yearbook. Buros Center for Testing.
University of Minnesota Press. (n.d.). MMPI-A-RF overview. UPress. Web.
Zachar, P. (2017). Review of the millon clinical multiaxial inventory–IV. In J.F. Carlson, K. F. Geisinger, & J. L. Jonson (Eds.), The twentieth mental measurements yearbook. Buros Center for Testing.