Introduction
Psychological examinations cover various aspects of a character and are helpful for specialists whose employment requires immediate interactions with people. I have selected tests from the Personality category for Assignment 1 and discussed the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–Adolescent–Restructured Form (MMPI-A-RF), the NEO Personality Inventory-Revised (NEO-PI-R), and the Million Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-IV (MCMI-IV). I anticipate working closely with diverse populations and cooperating with my clients’ families, so the three tests can be useful, as they are oriented toward different people. MMPI-A-RF seeks pathology in adolescents, NEO-PI-R reviews normal personality traits, and MCMI-IV concentrates on personality pathology and psychopathy assessment (Mohammadi et al., 2021; Costa & McCrae, n.d.; Stein, 2021). However, the appropriateness of each appraisal depends on multiple factors. To determine tests’ relevance for particular purposes, one should examine their reliability and validity.
Technical Review Article Summaries
Reliability indicates the adequacy of an assessment throughout a specified period. According to Urbina (2014), reliability aims to estimate that test scores are reasonably trustworthy based on the consistency and precision of the results. Cohen et al. (2021) state that this quality depends on the context, with its coefficient ranging from being not reliable at all (0) to perfectly reliable (1). When examining a test, one should consider the sources of error variance, which include test construction, referring to items sampling or content sampling, administration such as test environment, and scoring and interpretation (Cohen et al., 2021). Furthermore, reliability estimates can also vary, consisting of test-retest, split-half, alternative-forms, and other types (Cohen et al., 2021). For instance, test-retest reliability shows the correlations between the scores obtained from two administrations and may help to review whether scores will fluctuate over time (Urbine, 2014). Alternative-forms reliability is meant to evaluate the connection between a measure’s different forms that can be affected by errors, such as item sampling error (Cohen et al., 2021). Overall, reliability is an important technical quality that reflects the dependability of scores.
The validity of a test represents further aspects of its relevance. Validity determines if a test measures what it claims to measure within a certain context (Cohen et al., 2021). Content validity depends on an evaluation of test items’ subjects, topics, or content, whereas criterion-related is based on the connection of scores obtained on different tests or measures (Cohen et al., 2021). Criterion-related validity can be divided into concurrent, meaning how a score is linked to concurrently obtained criterion measure, and predictive validity, indicating how a score predicts some criterion measure (Cohen et al., 2021). Construct validity requires a more comprehensive analysis of associations between test scores and how the scores can be understood within a theoretical framework (Cohen et al., 2021). Validity is affiliated with the issues of bias and fairness. The former reflects prejudice, with intercept bias resulting in underprediction or overprediction of performance or outcomes and slope bias occurring in the presence of a weaker correlation (Cohen et al., 2021). In contrast, fairness demonstrates whether a test is employed impartially and equitably (Cohen et al., 2021). Validity is a quality that indicates the appropriateness of an assessment.
Semel, R. A., Pinsoneault, T. B., Drislane, L. E., & Sellbom, M. (2021). Operationalizing the triarchic model of psychopathy in adolescents using the MMPI-A-RF (restructured form). Psychological Assessment. 33(4), 311–325. Web.
The authors of the above article aimed to use the MMPI-A-RF to develop triarchic psychopathy scales to better understand psychopathic features in adolescents, which may contribute to future interventions. The research employed the triacrhic model that focuses on meanness, boldness, and disinhibition domains, which have correlates in behavior and core neurobiological systems. The participants were the MMPI-A-RF normative community sample and a large sample of juveniles adjudicated delinquent or unruly. As the authors sought to develop new triarchic scales, the study discusses validity and reliability, but this paragraph will concentrate on the latter. The article addresses reliability estimates by assessing internal consistency reliability with coefficient alpha, one of the most frequently used measures ranging from 0 to 1 (Cohen et al., 2021). Boldness showed internal consistencies of.75 for both community and juvenile court, meanness measured.70 and.75, and disinhibition estimated.73 and.77. Consequently, Urbina (2014) states that such indexes of score reliability as internal consistency can present indirect evidence of validity. The resulting triarchic scales indicated satisfactory internal consistency reliabilities in the two samples, with the juvenile sample’s scores demonstrating patterns of validity consistent with initial hypotheses.
Sharf, A. J., & Rogers, R. (2019). Validation of the MMPI-A-RF for youth with mental health needs: A systematic examination of clinical correlates and construct validity. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 42(3), 527-538. Web.
The overhead article concerns clinical correlates of the MMPI-A-RF, focusing on Restructured Clinical Scales to examine the test’s clinical utility for adolescents who require mental health care. The sample consisted of 66 juveniles aged 13 to 18, receiving outpatient psychological services or being in post-adjudication detention. The participants primarily reported experiencing depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder. The authors analyzed MMPI-A-RF’s reliability and validity but emphasized the latter discussing convergent and discriminant evidence. While convergent refers to correlations between similar constructs, discriminant evidence implies correlations of different traits (Cohen et al., 2021). The study aimed to establish construct validity using K-SADS-PL (Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia-Present and Lifetime Version) diagnostic sections, including depressive disorders, panic disorders, and alcohol and substance use. The authors relied on a standard specifying that correlations be greater than.20 to demonstrate validity. The research determined that more than 49% of the MMPI-A-RF RC items met the criterion, with, for instance, antisocial behavior showing strong convergent and discriminant validity. However, almost 95% of items achieved scaling success under another standard. The findings replicated and expanded upon previously identified correlations.
Bleidorn, W., Hopwood, C. J., Ackerman, R. A., Witt, E. A., Kandler, C., Riemann, R., Samuel, D. B., & Donnellan, M. B. (2020). The healthy personality from a basic trait perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118(6), 1207-1225. Web.
The above article explores the personality traits of the psychologically healthy person by utilizing the NEO-PI-R and examining the five-factor model (FFM) characterized by neuroticism, openness, extraversion, conscientiousness, and agreeableness. In particular, the researchers conducted several studies employing the NEO-PI-R in some of them. For instance, one study collected data from students in a Midwestern university to address reliability estimates focusing on test-retest reliability. Coefficient alpha ranged from.69 to.95 at the first assessment and from.76 to.96 at the second assessment after two weeks, but the average estimates were.86 both times. In another study, the authors concentrated on interrated consistency that reflects the degree to which different respondents give similar evaluations (Cohen et al., 2021). The authors gathered data from twins and two informant reports from their spouses and friends, with the mean cross-rater agreement being.48 at first appraisal and.47 at the 5-year follow-up. The estimates indicated sufficient concurrence between self- and peer-reported scores of a healthy personality. Overall, upon completing all the studies, the authors determined the features of healthy personality functioning, which can be described in terms of the NEO-PI-R.
Uliaszek, A. A., Al-Dajani, N., Sellbom, M., & Bagby, R. M. (2019). Cross-validation of the demoralization construct in the revised NEO personality inventory. Psychological Assessment, 31(2), 159-166. Web.
The authors of the overhead study aimed to cross-validate the demoralization construct in the NEO-PI-R, considering its usefulness within clinical contexts. Demoralization is referred to as a pervasive negative emotional construct within multiple medical conditions and is hypothesized to compromise the assessment of personality when using the NEO-PI-R. The study participants were 1930 adults from a university-affiliated mental health and addiction hospital. The article addresses evidence of validity to assess the presence of demoralization by operating two sets of analyses. The researchers discussed construct validity, concentrating on discriminant and convergent validity. The study examined differences in NEOdem (demoralization scale) across diverse psychiatric disorders and identified varying levels of NEOdem, with borderline personality disorder showing the highest rates (1.46) and pathological gambling demonstrating lower scores (.09). The authors state that the disorder specific relationships contribute to the construct validity of the demoralization subscale in NEO-PI-R.
Alareqe, N. A., Roslan, S., Nordin, M. S., Ahmad, N. A., & Taresh, S. M. (2021). Psychometric properties of the million clinical multiaxial inventory–III in an Arabic clinical sample compared with American, Italian, and Dutch cultures. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1-16. Web.
The search did not yield satisfactory articles on the MCMI-IV, especially within the US population, but the above study explores the test’s earlier version, MCMI-III, within Arabic clinical sample compared to Western cultures. Although statistical outcomes can vary, it may be helpful to assess different variations of a test to prepare for working with immigrant clients who used to receive clinical care in other counties. The authors and two bilingual psychology professors translated the MCMI-III to Arabian to evaluate the test in a non-Western psychiatric and clinical sample. The study discusses reliability estimates and internal consistency, with the acceptable standard value of reliability as.70 of Cronbach’s alpha. The researchers investigated 24 factors across four psychopathology classification domains and determined the mean scores ranging from.70 to.90. For example, Cronbach’s alpha was.87 for compulsive and.84 for narcissistic scales. The article suggests that the MCMI-III is psychometrically credible for analyzing such a foreign culture as Arabic.
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. Web.
The overhead study examines the Persian version of the MCMI-IV for clinical and research purposes, and its results may be valuable when working with non-resident clients whose primary language is not English. The data was collected from 400 adult outpatients and inpatients with one or more psychiatric complaints. The article addresses reliability and validity, but this paragraph will focus on the latter, as the authors discuss some types that were not described prior in this paper. Evidence was estimated by using Pearson correlation coefficient, content validity ratio, and Kappa agreement coefficient. Consequently, content validity was evaluated according to Million’s personality theory and Structured Clinical Interview and varied from.14 to.99. Criterion scores were based on concurrent validity, ranging from.13 to.40, and correlations between the MCMI-IV and the Brief Symptoms Inventory estimated convergent validity from -.35 for histrionic to.72 for persistent depression dimensions. The authors state that the high correlation of the scales confirms the convergent validity, while criterion validity indicates improvement from the test’s prior editions. Overall, the article concludes that the validity of the Persian version of the MCMI-IV corresponds with the original assessment.
Conclusion
To summarize, each test can be characterized by diverse validity and reliability scores. Firstly, the articles on the MMPI-A-RF indicate sufficient reliability for the review of juveniles and the test’s normative sample, but validity for youths with mental health needs varies. Nevertheless, as internal consistency can indirectly contribute to evidence of validity, the MMPI-A-RF exhibits relative trustworthiness and relevance and can be utilized within my specialization. Secondly, the research on the NEO-PI-R demonstrates adequate reliability in examining characteristics of the psychologically healthy individual. However, the results of demoralization validity suggest that the construct has the potential to compromise the assessment. Therefore, the NEO-PI-R is appropriate to my profession based on reliability, but one should be quite careful when administering and interpreting the test. Finally, the reliability of the MCMI-IV’s earlier edition is credible for assessing people who used to receive care within an Arabian clinical setting, and validity coefficients of the MCMI-IV’s Persian version have quite high correlates. While the two releases can be helpful when working with immigrant clients, it is difficult to evaluate the test’s current appropriateness with one’s specialization due to a lack of more suitable reports.
References
Cohen, R. J., Schneider, W.J., & Tobin, R. (2021). Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (n.d.). NEO personality inventory-revised. PAR. Web.
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.
Urbina, S. (2014). Essentials of psychological testing (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.