Equivalency of computer-assisted and paper-and-pencil administered versions of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2

Abstract The literature on computer-assisted and paper-and-pencil administered Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventories (MMPIs) was reviewed. Both computer-assisted and paper-and-pencil administered formats for the MMPI-2 were then investigated. Results found the two formats to be quite comparable. Neither the validity nor the clinical scales differed by format in terms of means and standard deviations. Groups also showed homogeneity of variance across formats. Test-retest reliabilities between the two formats were significant and compared favorably with those reported for repeated paper-and-pencil testings. Stability of high-point codes appeared comparable with past research. Equivalence concerning the presence or absence of clinical elevations across the two formats appeared quite good, showing 92–97% agreement. Subjects expressed preference for the computer-assisted format, reporting more comfort with its pace and that they found it more interesting, less difficult, and more enjoyable. Results suggested that the absence of an overt ‘cannot say’ option may be the optimum presentation choice for this scale.

[1]  N. Allen,et al.  Computerized and Written Questionnaires: Are They Equivalent? , 1994 .

[2]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[3]  David M. White,et al.  A comparison of computer administration with standard administration of the MMPI , 1985 .

[4]  Y. Ben-Porath,et al.  Computers in personality assessment: A brief past, an ebullient present, and an expanding future , 1986 .

[5]  Harold F. O'Neil,et al.  Equivalent Validity of a Completely Computerized MMPI , 1974 .

[6]  M. E. Lambert,et al.  Equivalence of computerized and traditional MMPI administration with substance abusers , 1987 .

[7]  A E Uecker.  Comparability of two methods of administering the MMPI to brain-damaged geriatric patients. , 1969, Journal of clinical psychology.

[8]  Lawrence G. Space,et al.  The computer as psychometrician , 1981 .

[9]  Ronette L. Kolotkin,et al.  Effects of Computerized Administration on Scores on the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory , 1977 .

[10]  G. Mellsop,et al.  The reliability of a micro-computer administration of the MMPI. , 1986, Journal of clinical psychology.

[11]  G. Glass,et al.  Statistical methods in education and psychology , 1970 .

[12]  T. Vansickle,et al.  Comparing paper-pencil and computer-based versions of the strong-campbell interest inventory , 1993 .

[13]  Paul J. Hofer.  Developing standards for computerized psychological testing , 1985 .

[14]  L. Cronbach.  Essentials of psychological testing , 1960 .

[15]  K. L. Moreland.  Computer-assisted psychological assessment in 1986: A practical guide ☆ , 1985 .

[16]  T. H. Harrell,et al.  Equivalency of Microtest computer MMPI administration for standard and special scales , 1988 .

[17]  C. G. Watson,et al.  Do computer-administered Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventories underestimate booklet-based scores? , 1992, Journal of clinical psychology.

[18]  A. Beck,et al.  Use of the computer-administered Beck depression inventory and hopelessness scale with psychiatric inpatients , 1994 .

[19]  Marc D. Schwartz.  Using Computers in Clinical Practice: Psychotherapy and Mental Health Applications , 1984 .

[20]  J. Butcher,et al.  Computerized Psychological Assessment: A Practitioner's Guide , 1987 .

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

[22]  J. Sampson.  An Integrated Approach to Computer Applications in Counseling Psychology , 1983 .

[23]  W. Cottle.  Card versus booklet forms of the MMPI. , 1950, The Journal of applied psychology.

[24]  G. L. MacDonald.  A study of the shortened group and individual forms of the MMPI. , 1952, Journal of clinical psychology.

[25]  C. G. Watson,et al.  Comparability of computer- and booklet-administered Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventories among primarily chemically dependent patients. , 1990 .

[26]  David Schuldberg,et al.  The MMPI Is Less Sensitive to the Automated Testing Format than It Is to Repeated Testing: Item and Scale Effects , 1988 .

[27]  L.Michael Honaker,et al.  The equivalency of computerized and conventional MMPI administration: A critical review☆☆☆ , 1988 .

[28]  R. R. Hart,et al.  Computer-Assisted Psychological Assessment. , 1986 .

[29]  Douglas N. Jackson,et al.  Computer-based personality testing☆ , 1985 .

[30]  D. Schuldberg.  Varieties of Inconsistency Across Test Occasions: Effects of Computerized Test Administration and Repeated Testing , 1990 .

[31]  H. O'Neil,et al.  Complete automation of the MMPI and a study of its response latencies. , 1972, Journal of consulting and clinical psychology.

[32]  Robert W. Bell,et al.  Computerized versus standard personality measures: Equivalency, computer anxiety, and gender differences , 1994 .