Comparison of the Wiener-Harmon subtle-obvious scales and the standard validity scales in detecting valid and invalid MMPI-2 profiles

The validity of the Wiener-Harmon Subtle-Obvious (S-O) scales has been widely debated despite increasing evidence suggesting that the scales have limited clinical utility. This study used valid MMPI-2 profiles of 49 psychiatric patients and profiles generated by 105 college students under fake-bad, fake-good, and standard instructions to examine whether the S-O scales can correctly classify faked and honest profiles. The S-O scales correctly classified high percentages of profiles, but further analyses showed that they added no information to that provided by L and F in classifying fake-bad, fake-good, and honest profiles. But other analyses showed that L and F provided substantial information not given by the S-O scales. The study also observed the paradoxical effect under the the fake-good instructions and reported evidence suggesting that a naysaying response bias is a cogent explanation of the effect

[1]  J. Graham,et al.  Detecting fake-good and fake-bad MMPI-2 profiles. , 1991, Journal of personality assessment.

[2]  M. J. Harris,et al.  Detection of malingering on the MMPI: A meta-analysis , 1991 .

[3]  T. Haywood,et al.  Sensitivity of MMPI Validity Scales to Motivational Factors in Psychological Evaluations of Police Officers , 1990 .

[4]  D. Schretlen.  A limitation of using the Wiener and Harmon obvious and subtle scales to detect faking on the MMPI. , 1990, Journal of clinical psychology.

[5]  Y. Ben-Porath,et al.  Failure of Wiener and Harmon Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) subtle scales as personality descriptors and as validity indicators. , 1990 .

[6]  J. Graham,et al.  MMPI-2 : Assessing Personality and Psychopathology , 1990 .

[7]  S. Hathaway,et al.  MMPI-2 : Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 : manual for administration and scoring , 1989 .

[8]  D. Schretlen.  The use of psychological tests to identify malingered symptoms of mental disorder , 1988 .

[9]  M. L. Rogers,et al.  A literature review of subtle-obvious items on the MMPI. , 1985, Journal of personality assessment.

[10]  J. Graham,et al.  The Utility of Subtle and Obvious MMPI Subscales Based on Scale-Specific Ratings. , 1984 .

[11]  R. Rogers.  Malingering or random? A research note on obvious vs. subtle subscales of the MMPI. , 1983, Journal of clinical psychology.

[12]  M. Fromuth,et al.  The relative predictive validity of subtle vs. obvious items on the MMPI Depression scale. , 1980, Journal of clinical psychology.

[13]  R. L. Greene.  The MMPI-2 : an interpretive manual , 1980 .

[14]  C. Hovanitz,et al.  Do face-valid items have more predictive validity than subtle items? The case of the MMPI Pd Scale. , 1979, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[15]  Roger L. Greene,et al.  An empirically derived MMPI Carelessness Scale. , 1978 .

[16]  P. Britton,et al.  CHAPTER 10 – The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory , 1966 .

[17]  F. Duff.  Item subtlety in personality inventory scales. , 1965, Journal of consulting psychology.

[18]  K. Keniston,et al.  Yeasayers and naysayers: agreeing response set as a personality variable. , 1960, Journal of abnormal and social psychology.

[19]  R. Buechley,et al.  A new test of validity for the group MMPI. , 1952, Journal of consulting psychology.

[20]  H. Gough.  The F minus K dissimulation index for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. , 1950, Journal of consulting psychology.