4/8/2013

1

USE OF THE MMPI-2-RF IN POLICE & PUBLIC SAFETY

ASSESSMENTS

Yossef S. Ben-PorathKent State University

ybenpora@kent.edu

Disclosure

Yossef Ben-Porath is a paid consultant to the MMPI publisher, the University of Minnesota, and distributor, Pearson. As co-author of the MMPI-2-RF he receives royalties on sales of the test.

4/8/2013

2

Agenda

Brief Overview of the MMPI-2-RF

Assessing Public Safety Candidates

Fitness for Duty Evaluations

MMPI-2-RF Overview

Published 2008 Authors Ben-Porath & Tellegen

338 items Subset of MMPI-2 Item Pool Norms based on MMPI-2 normative sample MMPI-2 remains available and supported

4/8/2013

3

The MMPI-2-RF

Overall Objective: Represent the clinically significant substance of the MMPI-2 item pool with a comprehensive set of psychometrically adequate measures: Improve efficiency Enhance construct validity

Overall Strategy: First restructure the Clinical Scales (resulting in the

Restructured Clinical [RC] Scales) Then augment the RC Scales with needed additional

measures

MMPI-2-RF Scales

• 51 Scales • 9 Validity Scales• 3 Higher-Order Scales• 9 RC Scales• 23 Specific Problems Scales

• 5 Somatic/Cognitive• 9 Internalizing• 4 Externalizing• 5 Interpersonal

• 2 Interest Scales• 5 PSY-5 Scales

4/8/2013

4

MMPI-2-RF Documentation

Manual for Administration, Scoring, and Interpretation

Technical Manual

User’s Guide for Reports

Interpreting the MMPI-2-RF

4/8/2013

5

Assessing Public Safety Candidates

Assessing Public Safety Candidates

Issues:• Screening versus Selection• Assessment Targets• Interpretive Adjustments

4/8/2013

6

Screening versus Selection

Implications of Americans with disabilities Act (ADA)

Screening out typically done post conditional offer of employment/position

Selection cannot involve medical procedures that can identify disabilities (e.g., MMPI), unless exempted

Assessment Targets

Excessive Guardedness

Psychopathology

Undesirable Characteristics

4/8/2013

7

Assessment Targets

Excessive Guardedness• L-r• K-r

Psychopathology• H-O Scales• RC Scales• SP Scales• PSY-5 Scales

Undesirable Characteristics• Moderate elevations on certain substantive scales• Low scores on certain substantive scales

Interpretive Adjustments

4/8/2013

8

Identifying MMPI-2 Predictors of Police Officer Integrity and Misconduct

Martin SellbomKent State University

Gary L. FischlerGary L. Fischler & Associates, P.A.

Minneapolis, MNYossef S. Ben-PorathKent State University

Criminal Justice and Behavior (2007)

Range Restriction

Results from:• Pre-selection: Factors that restrict the range of

scores in the sample of candidates (e.g., stable work history, civil service exams)

• Selection: Reliance on predictor scores in screening out candidates

Results in:• Attenuated correlations

• If uncorrected, underestimate of predictive validity

• Low occurrence of elevated scores

4/8/2013

9

Means and Standard Deviations for RC Scales for Overall, Hired, and Employed Samples.

Correlations with Outcome Variables

4/8/2013

10

Correlations with Outcome Variables

Correlations with outcome variables

4/8/2013

11

Low Occurrence of Elevated Scores

As a result of pre-selection and selection effects, “clinically” elevated scores are rare• e.g. none of the individuals evaluated by their supervisors

scored above 60 on RC6

The correlation between RC6 and supervisor ratings reflects variance that occurs below T-score 60 on that scale

One way to assign meaning to lower (or any other) elevations is through Relative Risk ratios

Relative Risk Ratios (RRRs)

Indicate the relative likelihood of a characteristic being present in individuals who score above a given cutoff versus those who do not

Example: RRR=2 means those at or above a given cutoff are at twice the risk for having the predicted condition as those below the cutoff.

4/8/2013

12

4/8/2013

13

Interpretive Adjustments

Some guardedness expected• Lack of guardedness a red flag.

• How much is too much?

No adjustment for detection of psychopathology• Clinical cutoffs (T>65) apply

Undesirable Characteristics• Moderate elevations or low scores as defined in

reference to “local norms” or Comparison Groups

4/8/2013

14

MMPI-2-RF: Standard Comparison Groups

• MMPI-2-RF Normative (Men & Women)• Outpatient, Community Mental Health Center (Men & Women)• Outpatient, Independent Practice (Men & Women)• Psychiatric Inpatient, Community Hospital (Men & Women)• Psychiatric Inpatient, VA Hospital (Men)• Substance Abuse Treatment, VA (Men)• Bariatric Surgery Candidate (Men & Women)• Spine Surgery/Spinal Cord Stimulator Candidates (Men & Women)• Chronic Pain Patients (Men & Women)• College Counseling Clinic (Men & Women)• College Student (Men & Women)• Forensic, Disability Claimant (Men & Women)• Forensic, Independent Neuropsychological Examination (Men & Women)• Forensic, Pre-trial Criminal (Men & Women)• Forensic, Child Custody (Men & Women)• Forensic, Parental Fitness Evaluees (Men & Women)• Prison Inmate (Men & Women)• Personnel Screening, Law Enforcement (Men, Women & Combined)• Personnel Screening, Corrections Officer (Men, Women & Combined)• Personnel Screening, Clergy Candidates (Men, Women, & Combined)

4/8/2013

15

4/8/2013

16

4/8/2013

17

Law Enforcement Candidates:

Men

Law Enforcement Candidates:

Women

4/8/2013

18

Law Enforcement Candidates:

Men

Law Enforcement Candidates:

Women

4/8/2013

19

Law Enforcement Candidates:

Men

Law Enforcement Candidates:

Women

4/8/2013

20

Law Enforcement Candidates:

Men

Law Enforcement Candidates:

Women

4/8/2013

21

Law Enforcement Candidates:

Men

Law Enforcement Candidates:

Women

4/8/2013

22

Case Examples

4/8/2013

23

Case 4

22, year old, single male

Recently honorably discharged from military

4/8/2013

24

4/8/2013

25

4/8/2013

26

4/8/2013

27

Case 4

Low L-r – Potential red flag

Clinically elevated scores on RC4, AGG, DISC-r – Possible psychopathology

4/8/2013

28

Case 5

28 year old, married male

14 years of education

Successful six-year military service

4/8/2013

29

4/8/2013

30

4/8/2013

31

4/8/2013

32

Fitness for Duty Evaluations

Fitness for Duty Evaluations

Corey (2011) Fitness usually defined as a state of “unfitness”

IACP Guidelines define unfitness as being:unable to safely and/or effectively perform his or her duties due to a psychological condition or impairment

Role of MMPI-2-RF: Assist in assessment for psychological condition or

impairment that may render a police officer unfit for duty

MMPI-2-RF data do not address fitness per se (just as they don’t answer directly other psycho-legal questions)

4/8/2013

33

Fitness for Duty Evaluations

Corey (2011) notes the importance of assessing response styles in FFD evaluations But cautions that consideration should be given to

base rates of scale scores in individuals undergoing these assessments

MMPI-2-RF provides: Well-validated response style measures

Ability to generate and use FFD evaluee comparison group

4/8/2013

34

4/8/2013

35

4/8/2013

36

4/8/2013

37

4/8/2013

38

4/8/2013

39

4/8/2013

40

4/8/2013

41

Q&A