Diagnosing personality disorders: an examination of the MMPI-2 and MCMI-II.

Citation data:

Journal of personality assessment, ISSN: 0022-3891, Vol: 65, Issue: 1, Page: 21-34

Publication Year:
1995
Usage 1360
Abstract Views 824
Full Text Views 516
Link-outs 20
Captures 79
Exports-Saves 75
Readers 4
Citations 11
Citation Indexes 11
Repository URL:
https://works.bepress.com/holly_hills/3; http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/mhlp_facpub/84
PMID:
16367644
DOI:
10.1207/s15327752jpa6501_2
Author(s):
Holly A. Hills
Publisher(s):
Informa UK Limited
Tags:
Psychology; Medicine; Environmental Science; Health Law and Policy; Law; Medicine and Health Sciences; Mental and Social Health; Psychiatric and Mental Health
article description
Personality disorders are highly prevalent in clinical populations and affect outcomes across all forms of intervention. This investigation examined the diagnostic efficiency of two widely used, self-report measures of personality disorder (MMPI-2; Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989; MCMI-II; Millon, 1987), as compared to a structured interview (SCID-II; Spitzer et al., 1987) diagnosis. The measures were administered to 150 residential and outpatient volunteer subjects. Persons with primary organic or psychotic-spectrum disorders were excluded from participation. Results were variable across disorders measured, with low to moderate levels of diagnostic agreement observed. The MCMI-II appears to be a more sensitive measure, whereas the MMPI-2 is more specific. The two self-report measures demonstrated greater convergence with each other than with the interview measure. Both the MMPI-2 and MCMI-II were more accurate at identifying the absence of a given disorder. Although overall diagnostic powers exist at acceptable levels. the results suggest that diagnoses generated by self-report versus interview are not interchangeable.