(none) JOURNAL HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Williams, J. E. Articles by Weed, N. C.

Relative User Ratings of MMPI-2 Computer-Based Test Interpretations

University of Northern Iowa, john.williams@uni.edu

Nathan C. Weed

Central Michigan University

There are eight commercially available computer-based test interpretations (CBTIs) for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2), of which few have been empirically evaluated. Prospective users of these programs have little scientific data to guide choice of a program. This study compared ratings of these eight CBTIs. Test users were randomly assigned to rate either a single authentic CBTI report on one of their clients or a single CBTI report generated from a modal MMPI-2 profile for their clinical setting. In all, 257 authentic and modal CBTI reports were rated by 41 clinicians on 10 dimensions. Each of the authentic reports received substantially higher ratings than the modal reports, with ratings of perceived accuracy and opinion confirmation best differentiating between authentic and modal reports. Automated Assessment Associates’ report received the highest overall ratings; reports published by Western Psychological Services, Pearson Assessments, and the Caldwell Report were also distinguished on one or more ratings dimensions.

Key Words: MMPI-2 • CBTI • computer • interpretation • Barnum