minnesota multiphasic personality...

Meehl, P. E. (1950). Using the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory in counseling. St. Paul: Advisement and Guidance Section, Vocational Rehabilitation and Education Division, Veterans Administration.

#019

USING THE

MINNESOTA MULTIPHASIC PERSONALITY INVENTORY IN COUNSELING

A SUMMARY OF SELECTED NEW RESEARCH RESULTS

by

Dr. Paul E. Meehl Assoc. Professor of Psychology & Psychiatry

University of Minnesota and VA Consultant

Supplement on Subtle and Obvious Keys by Dr. Daniel N. Wiener

Chief, Advisement & Guidance VA Center, Fort Snelling

Supplement on Back and Brain Injury Keys by Dr. William Hales

Chief Clinical Psychologist VA Hospital, Minneapolis

Based upon lecture to Minnesota VA Psychologists on March 18, 1950

Edited and reproduced in Advisement & Guidance Section, VRED VA Center, Fort Snelling, St. Paul, Minnesota

July, 1950

MEEHL: MMPI IN COUNSELING

ii

MINNESOTAMULTIPHASICPERSONALITYINVENTORY

ResearchResultsforCounselors

WiththepermissionofDr.PaulE.Meehl,andDr.DanielN.Wiener,thefollowingpagesofselectednewresearchresultsontheMinnesotaMultiphasicPersonalityInventoryhavebeenreproducedforusewithanadvancedcourseinPsychologicalBasesofCounseling,taughtbyDr.MiltonE.Hahn,DeanofStudentsandProfessorofPsychology,UniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles.

ThesematerialswerebaseduponalecturetotheMinnesotaV.A.Psychol-ologists,March10,1950.ThenoteswereeditedintheAdvisementSection,VRED,FortSnelling,St.Paul,Minnesota,andoriginallyreproducedbytheSt.PaulDepartmentofEducation,August,1950.

ItemListsandNormsfornewkeyshavebeenomittedfromthepresentedition.

CreditforthematerialsinthemanualisgiventoDr.PaulE.Meehl,AssociateProfessor,Psychology&Psychiatry,UniversityofMinnesota,andV.A.Consultant.TheSupplementonSubtleandObviousKeysisbyDr.DanielN.Wiener,Chief,Advisement&Guidance,V.A.Center,FortSnelling.TheSupplementonBackandBrainInjuryKeysisbyDr.WilliamHales,ChiefClinicalPsychologist, V.A.Hospital,Minneapolis.

OriginalcopywasnotproofreadbyPaulMeehl.Thepresentversionwas lightlyeditedtocorrecttypographicalerrorsandimprovepunctuation. —LeslieJ.Yonce-Meehl,March2020.


iii

CONTENTS

PREFACE..................................................................................................................iv

INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................1

PROBLEMOFCRITERTON.................................................................................1

DIRECTIONSOFRECENTBASICRESEARCH.............................................4

FREQUENCIESOFCODEDPROFILES............................................................6

INTERPRETATIONSOFCODEDPROFILESOFABNORMALS...............9

INTERPRETATIONSOFCODEDPROFILESOFNORMALS.................12

NEWKEYS...............................................................................................................14

NEWAPPROACHESTOPROFILEANALYSIS............................................19

PROPOSALFORCONFIGURALSCORING...................................................23

MMPIRESULTSFORSPECIALGROUPSANDBEHAVIOR..................26

CAUTIONSANDCONCLUSIONSRETESTINTERPRETATION..........30

THESUBTLEANDOBVIOUSKEYS...............................................................34


iv

PREFACE

Despitepastindifferenceandhostilityofpsychologiststoit,personalitytestingseemstobeheretostay.Howsoimportantanaspectofhumanbehaviorcouldforsolongbeoverlookedincounselingmaysomedaybeanalyzedinabookonfolkloreinpsychology.

Themostwidespreadpresentobjectiontotheuseofpersonalitytestsinvocationalcounselingprogramsseemstostemfromtheirassociationwithseriousemotionaldisturbance.Theassumptionisthatoneshouldattempttomeasurepersonalityonlywhenaseriousnervousdisorderisseenorsuspected.Thiswouldseemtobeasreasonableasgivingaptitudeorinteresttestsonlywhenhighdegreesofabilityorinterestareseenorsuspected—ifitwerenotforthemanyinadequaciesofthepersonalityteststhemselves.Generallyspeaking,thesparsevaliditydatawhichareavailableonpersonalitytestsaredevotedtodistinguishingbetweenrelativelymaladjustedoremotionallydisturbedgroups,andso-callednormals.

TheMinnesotaMultiphasicPersonalityInventory,whichisthesubjectofthismanual,hasmanythingstocommenditsuseincounseling.Inthelatestgroupform,itiseasilyadministeredandscored,itisbaseduponunesotericterminology,anditissolidlyconstructedintermsofcarefullydefinedsamplesandempiricaldifferentiations.Butmostimportant,thereisagrowingbodyofdataonitsusewithnormalpopulationstowhichDrs.HathawayandMeehlareunceasinglyaddingbasicdata,andcontributingsearchinghypothesesandsyn-theses.Livingconstantlywiththetest,theirfactsandspeculationsarecontin-uallyprovidingbasesforbothmorespecificandbroaderinterpretations.Theirtirelessandfruitfulworkwiththetest,whichDr.Meehl’sexpositionwellillustrates,providesnourishmentinsuringitsgrowthinscopeandcorrectionofdeficiencies.Exactlythosedeficienciesofthetestmostcommonlycited—inuseofpsychiatricnosology,inmethodsofprofileanalysis,inapplicationtonormalgroupsandcommonbehavior—arethemajorfocusofDr.Meehl’slecture.

Itwasextremelydifficulttoeditthelectureastranscribedfromarecorder,tomakerelativelysmoothreading,whileattemptingtopreservetherareflavorofDr.Meehl’sverbalbehavior.Thismanualrepresentsacompromisewhichisneitheraswell-organizedasaworkwhichwouldhavebeenoriginallywritten


v

forpublication,noraszestfulastheoriginalspeech.ItisissuednowtomeetthewidespreaddemandfromourcounselingstaffforareferenceforMMPIinterpretation.

ThisisnotabasicmanualontheuseandinterpretationoftheMultiphasic.Itassumesafairlysophisticatedreader—onewhohasreadthetestmanual,knowsthegeneralcontentandinterpretationoftheoriginalscales,andhasusedthetestextensively.Itissparseindescribingmuchofthepublishedlitera-ture,andisheavilyweightedwithhypotheses,tentativeresearchfindings,andsuggestionsforfutureresearch.Itendsinthemoodofmostcounselorswhoareusingitextensivelynow:hopeful,critical,andvigorousinthepursuitofmoreinformation.

WearegratefultoDr.Meehlforgivingthelectureandpermittingustopub-lishthismanual.Hewouldundoubtedlyhavecorrectedcertain,wehopeminor,errorswhichhaveprobablycreptin,butwasunabletoreviewthisedition.Wearegrateful,too,forDr.Hales’contributiontotheprogramandmanual.

Thepublicationofthislecturedoesnot,ofcourse,indicateanexclusiveendorsementofthetestinthefieldofpersonalitymeasurement.TheVAencouragestheuseofmostofthewidely-usedpersonalitytests,dependinguponindividualcounselorpreference,andorganizationandcounseleeneeds.IthappensthatmoredataonuseoftheMMPIisavailableinthisarea,throughvariousorganizationsandconsultants,thanforothertests.Itishopedthatsimilarmanualscanbeissuedonotherpersonalityteststomeetthegrowingrequestfromcounselors,whenevertheyuseanypersonalitymeasure,formoreinformationinthismostvitalandcomplexareaofbehavior-interpretation.

—D.N.Wiener

INTRODUCTION

Asyoumightpossiblypredict,eventhoughmytopicofficiallywassupposedtobeRecentResearchinPersonalityMeasurement,Iwanttotalkaboutacertaintestofabout550itemswithwhichIhavesomeconnection.ButalthoughIamgoingtousetheMinnesotaMultiphasicPersonalityInventoryasabasisfortalking,andtellyousomethingsthathavenotbeenpublishedaboutit,Iwanttouseittoillustratesomeprettygeneralquestionsandproblemsinthefieldofpersonalitymeasurement.ManyofthethingsIamgoingtosay,Iamsureyouwillseeimmediately,arenotatallcon–finedtotheMultiphasic,buthaveageneralapplicationtoallstructuredpersonalitytestsandtomanyprojectivepersonalitytests.

PROBLEMOFCRITERIONBeforeIgotoanyconcretedata,Iwouldliketosaysomethingaboutcertain

aspectsofourgeneralapproachtoMultiphasicresearchwithwhichyoumaynotbefamiliar.Thefirstthingisthatthesedayswearetendingtostartwiththetest,sortpeopleonthebasisofit,andthentakeagoodlookatthepeopletoseewhatkindofpeopletheyare.This,ofcourse,isdifferentfromthewayinwhichthetestwasbuilt,anddifferentfromtheusualpsychiatrist’snotionofatestwhereyoustartwithgroupsofpeoplealreadysortedonsomebasis—forinstance,byformalpsychiatricdiagnosis—andyoutrytobuildatestwhichwillguessorpredictoragreewiththatdiagnosisorwhateveryouuseasacriterion.

Attheriskofexaggerating,Iamgoingtobealittleflamboyantandsaythatthisconceptionofthefunctionofthetestseemstometoberatherfoolish.Idon'tmeantotalkdowntheimportanceofformaldiagnosisincertainsituations,butingeneralmyattitudewouldbe,allowingforsomeexaggeration,thatifIwanttoknowwhatthepsychiatristisgoingtocallsomebodyIprobablyshouldsimplyaskhim.Theideathattheprimaryfunctionofpsychometricsistopermitme,sittinginmylittlepsycholo-gist’scubicle,toprophesywhatthepsychiatristisgoingtosayaboutsomebodyis,whilestillwidespread,notaverypowerfulwayoflookingatthefunctionofaninstrumentsuchastheMultiphasic.

Youallareawareoftheterribleunreliabilityandfallibilityofformalpsychiatricdiagnoses.Therehavebeensomebetterstudiesofthemrecentlypublished.Theunre-liabilityofformaldiagnosis,evenbyafairlygoodstaff,isratherimpressive.Youmightsay,well,ifitissounreliable,howcomeyou’reevenfoolingaroundwithaninstru-mentwhichisbuiltonthebasisoftheformaldiagnosisofpsychiatristsinthefirstplace.Theessentialnotionhere(whichIhaveboredsomeofyouwithadnauseamin

General Approach

Making Test Better Than

Criterion


2

thepast,Iknow)isthenotionofstatisticsinitemanalysisenablingyousomehowtoliftyourselfbyyourbootstrapssothatyouarebetterwiththeinstrumentafteryougetthroughfoolingwithit,thanisthecriterionthatyoustartedwith.

Everybodyrecognizesthisnotioninthesenseofintelligencetesting.Forinstance,ifyouaskwhypeoplewereimpressedwithMr.Binet’swork,itwasbecausehistests,littlesamplesofbehavior,wouldpredicttheopinionsofschoolteachers,whetherasratings,orintheformofgrades.ButthesedaysiftheschoolteachersaysJohnnymustbedumb,hecan’tseemtodoverywellinschoolandalltheteachersagreethatJohnnymustbedumb,andyouhaveagoodpsychologistunderappropriateconditionsofmotivationandsoon,givingintelligencetests,andJohnny’sIQturnsouttobe125,nobodysays“My,my,my,thepoorStanford-Binetmissedagain.”Rather,theysay,“Isn’tthatinteresting;whatisthereaboutJohnny’sbehaviorinotherrespectsthatmakestheschoolteachersunabletoperceivehowintelligentJohnnyreallyis.”

Theinterestingquestionfromthestandpointofmethodologyis“Howdoyoutellwhenyou’vegotthatfar?”Wehavenogoodsetofrulesfordecidingwhenourinstru-mentshavetranscendedouroriginalcriterion—whenwearedoingabetterjobthanwhateveritwaswestartedwith.

Theoreticallyitisobviouswhysuchthingscanhappen.Ifyouthinkintermsofthestatisticsofthesituationyoucouldclassifyalotofpeopleerroneouslyandthestatis-ticalcharacterofitemanalysiswillgeneratescalesforyouwhichmeasurewhateveritisyouaretalkingaboutbetterthantheoriginalcriteriondid.Thereisnotheoreticalprobleminvolvedhere.Thequestionisthepractical,notthelogical,one:“Howdoyoutellwhenyouhavegottenthatfar?”SomeofthesuggestionsIhavewillbeapparentasItalkaboutsomeofourrecentMultiphasicresearch;butyoushouldallbeverymuchalivetotheproblemofthinkingaboutthis,inordertomakemoreexplicittherulesbywhichwecanmakeupourmindsthatourtestsaredoingbetterthanwhateveritwasthatgaveusconfidenceinthefirstplace.

Now,youcanoverdothatline,ofcourse.Itisnotvalidtofeelathomewithaninstrumentoveraperiodoftimetothepointthatyoubegintomakeitthecriterionwithouthavingdocumentedtheargumentthatitisbetterthantherealcriterion.That’sveryeasytodo,ofcourse,especiallyinthepersonalityfieldwhereeverybodyrecognizesthatthethingswe’retryingtogetataresomewhatsubtle,difficulttodetect,hardtoobserveandsoon.Itiseasytosay,well,ofcourseonthesurfacethisfellowdoesn’tshowhisbasicintroversionorhisbasicextroversionorhisrealpsych-opathyorhisthisorhisthat,butthetestsshowthathehasit.Sometimesthat’sallright,sometimesit’snot.Thequestionis,“Howdoyoutellwhenitis?”


3

Youdon’thavetoassume,inthecaseofthederivationofscalessuchasontheMultiphasicthattherearediseaseentitles,assomepeoplehaveclaimed,orthatschiz-ophreniaisamentaldisordercomparabletomeaslesasaphysicaldisorder,orwhat-ever.(Ihavemyownprejudicesastothatpoint,butyoudon’thavetotakeanyoftheseprejudices.)Allyoureallyhavetoassumetomakesenseofthewholeenterpriseissomethinglikethis—Ican’tstateitprecisely,Idon’tknowhowto:Peoplewhoaresortedtogetherbypsychiatristsare,ingeneral,morelikeoneanotherinsomeimpor-tantwaysthantheyarelikepeoplesortedinsomeotherwaybythepsychiatrists.

Ifyoudon’twanttoagreewiththat,thenofcourseyoujustthrewthewholebusinessout,whichmaybeweshoulddo—I’mnotsure.Butifyouarewillingtoacceptthatlittlebit—peoplewhoaresortedtogether,underonecategoryname,byareason-ablysensitivepsychiatricstaff,aremorelikeoneanotherontheaverage,withallthefallibilityandunreliabilityandsoon,thantheyarelikethepeoplewhoaresortedtoge-therundersomeotherheadingbyaskilledpsychiatricstaff—ifyouwilladmitthatlittlebit,you’vegotyourfootinthedoor.Thensomestatistics,theory,andcommonsenseshouldenableyoutofillout,withasetofitems,thosecomponentsordimensionswhichthepsychiatristisdimlygettingatwhenhemakeshisformaldiagnosis.ThatistheconceptionwehaveoftheMultiphasic,atleastatthepresenttime.

Letmegiveyoujustonelittleexample(I’llgointotherealresearchmateriallater)ofthekindofthingImeanwhenIsay“liftingbythebootstraps”andwhatImeanwhenIsay“startingwiththetest.”

IwalkedintoHathaway’sofficeseveralmonthsago,andtherewasastackof21casesummaries—fromonetothreeorfoursingle-spacedtypewrittenpages,Multi-phasicsomitted—andhesaid,“Leafthroughtheseandwritedownwhatstrikesyou.”SoIsatdownandreadthroughthemandmadelittlenotes,andIcameoutwithabouteightortencommentsthatIhadsomefaithin.

Therewasjustonethingthatknockedmyeyeout,bywhichImeantherewasnotjustamajority,butinallbutoneoutoftwenty-one—21isn’tabigN,butafterall20in21isabigpercentage—namely,lowheterosexualaggressiveness.Twentyoutof21casesshoweditindifferentways.Thesummarywouldsay,“Thepatientwasanattrac-tiveandsociablegirlbutdidnotseemtocareforboys,”or,“HewasactiveintheBoyScoutsandHi-Ybuthewasalittleshywithgirls,”or,“Althoughhewasagood-lookingmanwithgoodhealth,andhadalwaysmadegoodmoney,hehadremainedabachelorbecause,asheputit,womendidnotinteresthimverymuch,”or,“Heneverfoundtherightone,”orsomethingofthatsort.Itshowedupinvariousforms,sometimes

Nature of MMPI

Criterion

Example of Empirical

Approach to Criterion


4

adjusted,sometimesnotadjusted;sometimesrationalizedandsometimesnot—butjustanoverwhelmingtrend.

Iwaskindofcurious;thediagnosesvaried—psychoneurosis,hysteria,obsessionalneurosis,involutionalmelancholia,drugaddiction,andsoon.SowhenIgotdoneIsaidtoHathaway,“Whatinthedevilarethesepeople,wheredidyouget’em?”Well,theywereallofthecasesinourrecords,eithersex,whohadverysafevalidityindicators(thatis:?,L,K,andF)andforwhomPdwasthelowestscore.Thatwastheonlydefin-ingproperty.HathawayjustwentthroughthefilesandlookedforallthecodesthathadPdasthebottomscoreandpulledoutthecasesummary,andthisisthekindofthingthatemerged.

Well,Idon’tthinkthatyouwouldbelikelytonoticethatratherinterestinglittletrendifyouwereconcentratingondiagnosis,ifyouwerealwaysaskingthequestion,“HowcanIguessthediagnosisfromthetestprofile?”Butifyoustartwiththeprofiles,inthiscasethepeculiararbitrarychoiceofprofileswithlowPd,regardlessofanythingelse,andregardlessofhowhighitisalso,hereyouhavesomethingthatisaveryimpressivetrend,evenwithanNof21.ThatisthekindofthingImeaningeneralwhenIsay“startingwiththetestandthenlookingatthepeople,”insteadofstartingwithabiggroupofpeopleandtryingtoguesstowhatsubgroupsomebodybelongsusingthetest.

DIRECTIONSOFRECENTBASICRESEARCH

Thesecondgeneralthingthathasbeenemphasizedinourresearchlately(and I’msuremostofyouarefamiliarwiththis)istheemphasisuponpatternsorconfig-urations.NowIgetembarrassedalwaysbeatingadrumaboutthispoint,butitsortofirksmethatsanepeopledon’tseemtobeabletoassimilateitverywell.Evenpsychol-ogistswhoarealwaystalkingaboutglobalityandconfigurations,etc.,whentheytalkaboutanythingelse—theinterview,theRorschach,ortheTATorsomething—don’tseemtobeabletoassimilatetheideainconnectionwithstructuredtests.Ifyouarecongenitallyaversetopatternsorconfigurations,itwouldbebetterforyounottousetheMultiphasicatall.Ifyouarebuiltsothatyoucan’tbetalkedoutofliftingupaMultiphasicprofileandlookingatScatthetopasthehighestscore,butwithblindersforeverythingelse,well,theninmyopinionitisamistakethatyouhavethetestinyourhands.

Nobodycanbeblamedforbeingalittlenaiveaboutthispointbecauseofthefactthatourpublicationofthesethings(aseverybodycomplains)islaggingfarbehindourownthinkingaboutit.Nevertheless,therehavebeenaseriesofarticlesbypeoplelike

Need for Pattern

Analysis


5

Gough,Schmidt,andmyselfoveraperiodofthreeorfouryearsthatitseemstomeshouldindoctrinateanybodyfairlywellwiththeideathatwethinkintermsofpatternsorconfigurations.Wedonotthinkintermsofthesinglescores.

Thethirdshiftinourresearchemphasisthesedaysthatisveryimportanttoyouascounselors—moresothantoclinicalpsychologists,forexample—isthatwehavedepartedincreasinglyfromtheemphasisontheusualpsychiatricvariants,andwehavemovedintwodirections.

Thefirstisinthedirectionofcommonlanguage.Psychiatryhasrecoursetotheordinaryadjectivesthatweuseindescribinghumanbehavior,butrecentlywehavebeenconcernedtofindoutwhatwords,ingardenvarietylanguage,areappliedtopeoplewhohavecertainkindsofMultiphasicscores.Someofyouhavecooperatedwithusintheresearchwedidonthatsubjectalittlewhilebackwhichisstillunpub-lished.WehaveabigmessofdataandI’llgiveyousomesamplesofitlater.

Thatis,employerswouldbemuchmorelikelytousetermslike“careless,”“friendly,”“worrying,”“unreliable,”or“proud”orsomethinglikethat,thantheywouldbetousetermslike“obsessive,”“compulsive,”or“schizoid”orwhatever;andwehavebeeninterestedinfindingoutwhatkindsofwordsinordinarydiscoursetendtobeappliedtopeoplewhohavethisorthatsortofprofile.Thisistheso-calledadjectivestudywhichI’lltalkmoreaboutalittlelater.

Secondly,wehavebeeninterestedingettingatsomemoretechnicalpsychologicaldimensionsbutstillofanon-psychiatricsort,suchasdominant,submissive,feelingofresponsibilityinthesocial-ethicalsense,extroversion,andpsychologicalstatus(thatis,thepsychologicalcorrelateofsocio-economicstatus—socio-economicstatusseenfromtheinsideratherthanasthesociologistmightseeitintermsofaperson’ssocialposition).

Someofthatmaterial,theSt(socialstatus)key,forinstance,hasbeenpublished;buttwoveryinterestingscales—oneforresponsibility,andonefordominance—havebeendevelopedrecentlyandarenoteveninpressyet.We’vebeenwritingthemanu-scriptsandI’llgiveyousomeofthedataonthem.KeysforthemwillbeobtainablefromDr.Hathaway’sofficebeforeverylong,andIthinkinyourworkyoumightfindbothofthemratherinterestingandhelpful.

WehavebeendoingalotofworkonfrequenciesofprofileformsonthebasisofthecodingsystemthatDr.Hathawayinvented.Theproblemindevelopingagoodcodingprocedurehasseveralaspects.Forinstance,you’vegottofigureoutsomewayofconveyinginformationaboutboththeheightandthepatternoftheprofile.Wedon’t

Developing More

Common Language

Developing Non-psych-iatric Scales

Problems in Coding Profiles


6

knowatthepresenttimetherelativeimportanceofthosetwothings—whichareimportantforwhichpurposes.Anditisadifficultthingtocombinethosetwosortsofinformation,ortodecidewhethertheyevenoughttobecombined,insteadofbeingindicatedseparatelyinsomeway.

Secondly,thereistheproblemofgettingenoughinformationintothecode,butnottoomuch.ThelocalwarbetweenWelchandHathawayhasgoneonforsometime.WelchhadinventedamoreextendedcodingsystemthatputinalltheMultiphasicscores.Hathawaystucktotheoriginaloneheinventedwhereyoudidn’tcodescoreswithinahalfasigmaofthemeanoneitherside.Obviouslyyoudon’twanttoputintoomuchofthedata;youmightaswellsitandlookatthewholeprofilethen.Thefunctionofthecodeistoabstractinsuchawaythatthemind’seye,sotospeak,cangraspwhatisbeingpresented.Itishardtoknowhowmuchyoucangetinandmakeitpayoffintermsofthewholefunctionofthecode.

Anotherthingis,youwantanycodingconfigurationsystemtobesensitive,butnottoomuchso;Thatis,youwantthecodetorepresentinsomewaythedifferencebetweenasituationlikethis,andonelikethat.[Indicatingprofilesonachalkboard?]Thecodedoesn’tdothatnowifoneofthesehappenstobeabove70,andonearound60.Ontheotherhand,ifyoustartplayingaroundwithtooslightdifferences,thenyoumayhavethreecodedscoresthatareveryclosetooneanother,withslightvariationswellwithinthestandarderrorofmeasurementwhichfromsomeunpublisheddataseemstobebestestimatedatanywherefromthreetosixorsevenT-scorepoints.

Don’tforgetthat!Slightfluctuationswithinthestandardareaofmeasurementmaychangethecodepronouncedly.Ifyouaredoingresearchwhenyouhaveacodefileaswedo,whereyoupulloutthe37’sandlookatthem,youarelikelytohaveaproblemofmarkeddisplacementsastopositionbecauseofthefluctuationswhichareactuallyrandomanddonotrepresentanythingaboutthepatientsatall.

FREQUENCIESOFCODEDPROFILES

Wehavedeterminedthefrequencyofoccurrenceforvariouscodesinsomedetail,butI’llgiveyousomedataonlyforthefirsttwodigits.Theseinterpretationswillbebasedon618normals,and1763patientswhowereinthehospital.

It’salittlehardtomakegeneralstatementsastowhatcharacterizesthepeoplewithagivencodebecausethefrequenciesgetsosmall.That’sabigproblem.Wedon’tknowhowtodealwithit.Forexample,thecommonest2-digitcodeamongnormalmalesis94(withapeakonMa,andasecondarypeakonPd).Buttosayitisthecommonestisnotsayingmuch.Intermsofitsactualoccurrence,itoccursonly4.3

Need for Large

Samples


7

percentofthetime.Yousee,therearesomanypossibilities.Thatmeanstohavetensuchnormalmalestoscrutinize,youneedasampleof233normalmales,sothattheproblemofgettingenoughpeopleinordertobeabletosayanythingwithanyconfi-dence,atthesametimegettingitfairlydetailedastotheconfiguration,isaverydifficultproblem.

Wewanttomakesomekindofacompromise.Wedon’twanttobetoosuperficial,wewantarelativelyintensiveknowledgeofeachindividualwe’regoingtosaythingsabout.Ifitgetstoosuperficial,youmightaswellnotfoolwithit.Afterall,thetestshoulddoafewthingsyoucan’tdobylookingatpeople,sowewanttohavefairlyintensiveinformationforeachsubject;andyetwewanttohaveanextensivesamplingbecausewehavegottohavealotofsubjectsinordertobelievewhatwesayaboutthesubjectsthatwestudyintensively.Itisnotjustatechnicalproblem:Youjustdon’thaveenoughpeoplestudiedintensivelybyonestaffwithoneinstrument,iswhatitamountsto.

ThemostcommontypeofHathawaycodeforthenormalsisanuncodedprofile,thatistosay,oneinwhichnoneofthescoresisoutsidetheT-scorerange46to54.Alleightofthescale-scores(weleftoutMfbecausesomanyofourrecordsdon’thaveit)liewithinone-halfstandarddeviationofthemean.Thisoccursinaboutone-fourthofthecases,andthatone-fourthoccursineachsexamongthenormals.Lessthan2%ofabnormalshavenoscoreoutsidetherangeplusorminusone-halfstandarddeviation.Butatleastit’sarelieftofindthatyouhave12timesasmanyuncodedprofilesamongthenormalsastheabnormals.

Thesexesareverysimilarastotherelativeincidenceofvariouscodetypes,exceptforD.TherearetwiceasmanyMultiphasiccodesamongnormalwomen,withDepres-sionasthepeak,asthereareamongnormalmen,eventhoughthereareseparatenormsfortheT-scoresforthetwosexes.

Themostcommonpeakscoreamongnormals(andI’msureyou’veallobservedthisinyourwork)isMa.Thatistrueforeithersex.EighteenpercentofthemalesandthirteenpercentofthefemaleshavetheMascoreasthehighest.

Youarecommonlyaskedwhatisthefrequencyofabnormalprofilesinthenormalpopulation.IfbyabnormalyoumeanatleastonescoreaboveT-70,foroursample,itisapproximatelyone-seventhofthepersonsinthenormalpopulationwhohaveatleastonescoreequaltoorgreaterthan70.Now,onlybetween1/20thand1/40thofthenormalswillhaveT-scoresabove70onanyonekey,butofcourseyouhaveeightkeystogetupon.Theyarenotexclusivepossibilitiessoyoujustcan’tmultiplyitby8,butyoucanseeittakesaconsiderablerise.That’sahealthydatumtokeepinmind:

Uncoded Profiles

Sex Differences

Abnormal Profiles


8

thatamongpeopleingeneralwhowerenotlockedup,werenotunderpsychiatricscrutiny,andsoon(notthatthey’reallnormalbyanymeans,butatleastthey’restayingoutofthepsychiatricwardandsurvivinginthecommunity),oneinsevenofthemwillhaveatleastoneMultiphasicscoreof70orabove.

Thiscontrastswiththreeoutoffouroftheabnormals,whohaveatleastonescoreof70orabove.Keepinmind,too,thatoneoutoffourpeoplewhoareinthehospitalwithanNP[neuropsychiatric]diagnosismanagetokeepalltheirMultiphasicscoresunder70.

Therearecertaincodetypesorconfigurationsthatarisemuchmoreoftenamongabnormalsthannormals,andhencearemoreworthyofattentionifyouseethem. Thatis,theyareindicativeofpathologyintheprobabilitysensebecausetheyoccurrelativelyfrequentlyamongabnormalpeopleandnotveryofteninthenormalpopu-lation.Forinstance,whereasMaisthecommonestnormalpeak,acombinationofMaandSc,orScandMa,asthetoptwoscoresisrare,andoccursmuchmorefrequently inabnormals.Thatissomethingthatoneshouldkeepinmind.IfyouhavesomebodywithanMaof65or72even,thisnicepeakforthenormalsisprobablyjustforasales-manorsomething(thatkindofinterpretationisoverdoneImightadd,butI’llsaymoreaboutthatlater);buttohavesomebodywithanMaandScasthetwohighestscoresismuchrareramongtherelativelyhealthypeople,andmuchcommoneramongthesick.

ThecombinationofDandPd,thatis,a24ora42,ismuchmorecommonamongthesick.Thatmakessenseifyouthinkaboutitawhile.Itisapeculiarconstellationofthingstofindinanormalperson.

The27pattern,DandPt,occurstwelvetimesasofteninthesickasitdoesinthewell.I’mnottalkingaboutelevationsnow,I’mjusttalkingaboutthepatterns,regard-lessofhowhightheyare.Sometimestheyseemmorestrikingifyoutalkabouteleva-tions.Twenty-fivetimesasfrequentlyamongthesickasthewell,youhavepattern27,bothofthemequaltoorgreaterthan70.ThecombinationofPdandScismorecom-monamongthesick,butScandPdinthatorderisnotparticularlymorecommon.Thepattern87,thatis,withScandPt,iseighttimesasfrequentinthesickasinthewell.Asamatteroffact,witheitherofthesescoresequaltoorgreaterthan70,thepatterndidnotoccuronceamong258normals.

Therearesomecurvetypeswhichappearmoreoftenamongnormalsthanabnor-mals,suchasthecodewhereonlyHyiscoded.Thecombination,interestinglyenough,PaPd,64,ismorefrequentamongnormalsthanabnormals.

Abnormals vs

Normals


9

TheprofilewhereonlyMagetscodedistentimesasfrequentamongnormalsasitisamongabnormals.Abouttheonlyabnormalsthatcanmanagethatofcoursearethemanics,afewofyouralcoholicseniles,andafewaberrantconductdisordersthatyoujustwonderaboutdiagnostically.Asamatteroffact,eveniftheMakeyis70orabove—andyoushouldrememberthissoyoudon’tgoaroundover-interpretingyourfind-ings—ifitisaloneinthecodeitwillbethreetimesasfrequentlyfoundamongnormalpersonsasitwouldamongabnormalseveniftherewerethesamenumberofnormalsandabnormalsinthepopulation.ThereasonforthisIwon’tgointo,chieflybecauseIdon’tknowthereason,butIhavesomespeculationsthatarenotverywelldocumen-ted,andHathawayandIdon’tagreeaboutitanyway.Ithinkitisapurelystatisticalphenomenaandhegivesitapsychopathologicalinterpretation.We’reprobablybothalittlebitright.

INTERPRETATIONSOFCODEDPROFILESOFABNORMALS

Onemorepoint:Ifyoucan,getintothehabitofusingthecodetotalkaboutcurves,insteadoftalkingaboutthepsychiatriccategorynamesatthetopoftheprofilesheet.It’shealthier,wefeel.It’sworsttotalkabouttheschizophreniakey;it’sbettertotalkabouttheSckey;it’sbesttotalkaboutcode8.Thatis,ofcourse,entirelyinlinewithwhatweweresayingaboutstartingwiththetestandlookingatthepeople,insteadoftryingtoguessthediagnosis.Whenyouareworkingchieflywithrelativelynormalindividuals,asyouasagrouparedoing,itisstillmoredesirabletoavoidthepsychiatricimplication.

It’sallverywelltosay,“well,wewon’ttalkaboutthepsychiatryofit,”butthemindissuchthatifyoualwaystalkabouttheschizophreniakey,youcan’thelpthinkingaboutit;whereasifyoutalkaboutthe87’sorthe23’s,thenyoucansetuprelativelyfreshassociationswiththesignificanceofthosenumbers.Therefore,itisdesirabletocultivatethehabitoftalkingalwaysintermsofthecode.Wehavereallytriedtopracticeit,andsomeofus,Iguess,aregettingfairlygoodatit.It’snottooeasy.

Anotherthingwhichwe’vebeendoingwiththecodesbesidesfindinghowoftentheyoccur,istostudycharacteristicsofcodetypesinthehospitalpopulation.Cuttingacrossdiagnosis,youjusttakeallthepatientswhohavea13or27orwhateveritmightbe,andaskwhatkindofstufftheyshow.Takethe12’sandthe21’sforinstance;thatis,thosepeoplewhoseMultiphasicshowsanHsD,orDHspeak.We’veclassifiedtheincidencebythingsthatarefoundinthemajorityofthesecases,thingsthatarefoundinone-thirdtoone-half,andthingsfoundinone-fifthtoone-third.

Using Code

Terminology

Basis of Interpre-tations


10

Theactualvaluesofthesefractionsarepracticallymeaningless.Itisonlytherela-tiveamountsofthesesymptomsthatmakeanydifference,becausetosaytheyarefoundinthesepeoplemeansthatthejuniormedicalstudentwhowroteupthesum-marywasstruckbyitandmentionedit,andhenceitgotcheckedbythestaffmember.It’sofrelativesignificanceonly.Ifithappensinathirdofthecasesonthechart,itmighthappentotwo-thirdsoftheminactuality.I’llsticktotheinterpretationofmajorityresultssincetimepresses.

Thepeoplewith12and21have,inthemajorityofcases,pain;thisisregardlessofdiagnosisnow.Someofthesepeoplemaybecalledschizophrenics,psychopathseven.Pain,depressed,irritable,shyandseclusive,andsomaticconcern.Somaticconcernisdistinguishedfromconversion.Thesepeoplehaveanxietyandworryaboutthestateoftheirbodies.Two-thirdsofthepatientswitha12or21inoursamplearediagnosed“psychoneurosis.”

Forthe23’sandthe32’swehadsofewmalesinoursamplethatweanalyzedtalliesonlyforfemales,andtheonlythingthatshowsupinthemajorityofthemisdepression.Showingupinastrongminorityareweakness,apathy,andagitationortenseness.

27’sor72’s,thatis,thosewithaDandaPtcombination,inamajorityhavedepression,oraredescribedastenseornervous;andforathirdtoahalf,astrongminority,wehavelistedanxiety,insomnia,andsensitive.

Forthemajorityof28’sand82’s,wefindlisteddepression,anxietyoragitation;andinastrongminority,hystericaltendencies,excludingpainhowever.Thereisacollectionofhystericalphenomenaherelikeconversion,paralyses,orblindnessorsomethinglikethat,notpain.Thereisapro-illnesspersonalitydescribedasunsociable.Thereismentallossinthesensethatthepatientcomplainedhecouldn’tconcentrateortherewaspsychometricevidenceofit,orhesaidhewasconfused,orotherssaidhewasgettinginefficientincarryingonhisactivities.Theyaresuspiciousorsensitive,andhypochondriacal.Heredityisbad,definedhererathercrudelysimplyaspsychosisinsiblingsorparents.

The31or13codehasbecomeknownastheconversionorthehysteroidvalley,withDbeingbelowthetwosomaticvariables.Inthemajority,twothingsappear:painandsomethingabouteating.Itmightmeanactualanorexia,orhystericalvomiting,orthatthepersoncomplainedofdiscomfortaftereating,orthatheatetoomuch,orsomethingalongthosegenerallines.Ihaven'ttalliedithere,butIrecallthatlastyearintheseminarwewerediscussingthefactthatthe13’sandthe31’stendtoputthepainindifferentplacesfromthe12’sandthe21’s.The13’sand31’sgetpaininthe

12 and 21 Interpretation (Abnormals)






11

headandperipherally,arm,back,headverycommonly,eyeshurt,andsoon;whereasthe12’sand21’sgoalittlebitmoreforinnards,lowerbowelandthatkindofstuff.Whenthesepeoplegoforinnards,theyhavepainupjustlevelwiththeinnards,withheartandprecordialpain,andpainsinthechest,andthinkthey’vegottuberculosisandthelike.

Aninterestingfindingthatfitsinwiththeoryforachange,thankgoodness,isasizeableminoritydescribedbythemedicalstudentassociableandextroverted.That’syourhystericalpersonality,whichagainyoudon’tfindinallpeoplewithaconversion,butwhichcharacterizesthemrelativelymorethanhypochondriacsandobsessivecharactersandthelike.Andalsomarkedinasizeableminority(I’lldoalittlemoreselectionofthemoreinterestingthings)isthattheyobjectedtopsychiatricstudy.Theytookadimviewoftheenterprise.TheycameintotheOut-PatientClinicfortheirsorebackandnowthey’regettingprocessedinthispsychicbusiness,andtheydon’tlikeitabit.

Nothingshowsuptocharacterizethemajorityof64’sand46’s.Verysurprisingtome.Butinasizeableminority,wehavethingssuchasdepression(surprisingtome)irritable,nervous,introverted,suspicious,judgmentdefect,andalcoholic.

68’sand86’shave,inthemajority,onlyonecharacteristic—paranoiddelusions.Inastrongminoritytherearefourcharacteristics:depression,apathy,irritabilityandwithdrawal.Themajorityofthese,asyoumightexpect,arepsychotic.

Ifyoumovetothe78’sandthe87’s,youhavetwothingsshowingupinthemajority:depressionandintroversion;andinastrongminority:withdrawn,apathy,nervous,aworrierasdescribedbyhimselforaninformant,andirritable.Incidentally,the78’sand87’saresignificantlyyoungerthantheothercodegroups,atleastinourhospitalsample.Thedifferenceissignificantatthe1%level.

I’mafraidthethingsIreademphasizesimilarityincertaintypesmorethandiffer-ences.Asyoumoveintothestillsmallerminorityyoubegintogetgreaterpatterning.Thestrongpilingsupareofcourse,inalargepart,afunctionofthedispositionofthemedicalstudentswhosaycertainthingsaboutallkindsofpeopleifthey’resick.Strikingthings.Mostpeoplewhoareinthehospital,exceptmanicsandsomepsycho-paths,aredepressedinvariedamounts,nomatterwhattheformaldiagnosis.

Well,I’llonlygiveyouonemoreofthese.I’vepickedtheoneswherewehadabigenoughsamplesowegetsomestability.The49’sorthe94’scomeasalittlebitofreliefaftertheseothercharacters,Ithink.Inthemajority,theyareover-active;andinastrongminority,irritable,violent(thatis,theyassaultsomebody,breakthedishes,






12

etc.),talkative,extroverted,ambitious,andenergetic.Thisgroupof94’sor49’sshowedthebiggestpilingup,incidentally,offormaldiagnosis,asyoumightexpect.Ofthe22caseshere,16arepsychotics,fivepsychopaths,andoneneuroticofallthings.Ifyou'regoingtohaveneurosisandhavea49,youmightaswellhaveananxietyneurosisasanythingelse.Itdoesn’tfittoowellasis.

INTERPRETATIONSOFCODEDPROFILESOFNORMALS

Well,letmereadyousomestuffaboutnormals.Thisadjectivestudy,onwhichsomeofyoucooperatedwithus,wasoneinwhichwehadpeopleratetheirfriends,orcounselorsratetheirclients,onatwo-pagelistofadjectivestakenfromCattell’slistoftraitsthatcoverthepersonalityspheremoreorless.TheN’saresosmallthatwehadtodepartfromourownrules.Wehadtogobysinglescalesbecauseifyoufigureoutwhatthesampleofaboutahundredforeachsexmeans,youknowyoucan’tdoanystatisticsifyoutakeeventwodigitsofthecode.

Sothisisbaseduponakindofahalf-bakedattemptatpatternanalysis,namely,whatadjectivesturnouttodiscriminatebetweenhighandlowscoringgroups.Forexample,yougetalistofadjectivesthatdiscriminate,say,highfromlowHy,andthenyoulookatthosetwolistsandsaywhatadjectivesarecommon,andyouhopethatthereisn’tanybizarrepatterningrelationshipherethatwillknocksomeofthoseout.WhatIamsayinghereisthatwhenIsayhighDandPt,itwasnotbasedonananalysisof27’sbecauseyouwouldn’tfindenoughtodoanobjectiveanalysis.It’sbaseduponhighversuslowD,independentlyofthathighversuslowPt,andthenaskingwhatadjectivesshowupinboth.

Well,forbothsexes,thewaypeoplewith27curves(inthisphonyway)looktotheirfriendsorcounselorsorrelatives,isindecisive.They’refrank,self-dissatisfied(inyourpsychopathologyviews,youmightsaythatoccursasareactionformationagainsttheirhostility,ofcourse),affectionate,dissatisfiedingeneral(notonlyself-dissatisfied,butdissatisfiedperiod),andindividualistic;and,receivinganegativeloading,sothatDPtpeopletendnottobedescribedthisway:cheerful.

ForHsandD,thatis12,threeadjectivesemergeinbothsexes:high-strung,soft-hearted,generous.Negatively,thereisnotself-control.Thenthereisapronouncedtrendinthefemale,butnotshowingupatallinmales,tobedescribedasfrank(I’dliketoknowwhatthisfrankbusinessdoesherewiththesewomen).And,veryniceclini-cally,weseethefemaleofthissortdescribedasamorous.Idon’tknowwhatitmeans,butitcomesout.

Method

27 and 72 Interpretation

(normals)


(normals)


13

For23’sand32’s,wereadHyadjectives.Wehavefourofthem:worrying,affec-tionate,high-strung,andindividualistic.Negatively(notcharacterizingthesepeople),formales:balanced.MenwhohaveDandHyarenotconsidered“balanced”bytheirfriends;andfemalesarelow(thatis,negative)forfacinglifeandactingorderly.Males,only,arepronouncedlydescribedasgenerous.

Here’sabeautifullist,Ilikethisone.ThisisMa-Pd,bothsexes.Asamatteroffact,thereareafewthingsthatareveryhardtounderstand,theoretically.There’sabigloading—ofallthings—onworrying.Nowyou’vegotme,howthatgetsinthere.Thatshouldn’tbeintherebutitis,clearlyso,andforbothmenandthewomen.WhetherthatmeansthesignificanceofMaandPdinthenormalrangeisaltered,orwhetheritmeansthattherearesomepeculiaraspectsofthephenotypicbehaviorseenbyjudgeswhichtheymisconstrueasworrying,Ijustdon’tknow.

Therestofthelist,forthemostpartmakesitlookasiftheMa-Pdinthenormalrangeisjustanicewatereddownclinicalone,andforthatreasonI’minclinedtothesecondhypothesis,butIhavenogoodevidenceofit.Theyarehighonbothofthesetwocombinations:talkative,self-dissatisfied(that’salittlesurprising);enthusiastic,sensitive.

Andthenthere’saspecialtypeof“sociable”whichCattellseemstohavelistedseparately,andIthinkverywisely,as“social,forward.”Formymoney,themoststrikingsinglethingaboutthePdinanormalrangeiswhatIcallalackofsocialfear.Hedoesn’tevenhavethenormalgardenvarietyofsocialfear,andit’snicetoseethatthestatisticssupportthatinindicatingsociabilityoftheforwardtypeascharacteristic.Versatile,high-strung,impulsive,verbal,amorous(marvelouscharacters,these),likesdrinking(hardlyanadjectivebutStarkehasgotitinthere,thankgoodness),rebel-lious,andindividualistic.Andthenthere’salovelysetoffournegatives:peoplewithPd-Mainanormalrangearedefinitelynotdescribedbytheirfriendsaspractical,orderly,balanced,andmature.

Allright,PaandSc,68,86,bothsexes.Herecomes“generous”again.Myownhypothesis,incidentally,aboutthis“generous”isthatitcomesinthesepeoplefromtheinabilityoftheneurotictoshowtheminimalaggressioninvolvedinrefusingthingstopeople—refusingfavors,refusingtolendmoney,refusingtohelp.Ithinkthatifyoustudiedthebehaviorofthejudgesthatyou’dfindthatthisgenerousbusinesscomesaboutbecauseofthisnegativefactor—notfromawarmgiving,themilkofhumankindnessgenerosity,butfromtheneuroticismwhichmakesrefusalaformofaggression,anunacceptableanxiety-producer.That’sjustmyopinion,Idon’thaveany


(normals)


(normals)


(normals)


14

statistics.Self-dissatisfied,sensitive,sentimental,soft-hearted,frank,high-strung,emotional;andinthenegative,balanced.

You’veprobablygotwriter’scramp,andarealsoalittlebored,soIwon’tbereadingyouanymorelists,atleastforawhile.

NowtheimportanceoftheadjectivestudyasIseeitisthatitenablesustotalkwithalittlebitofempiricaldataaboutwhatcharacterizesnormalsthathavethisMultiphasicprofile.Whenwegetalltheseadjectivespublished,peoplewhoareusingthemtotestinthenormalrangewillnotbecompletelyoutonalimbbasingthem-selvessolelyontheirclinicalimpression,orfromawateringdownofthesyndromes;buttheywillhavethispitifullittlebitofdatasothattheyknowatleasthowtheseindividualslooktosomeoneelse.

NEWKEYS

NowI’dliketotellyouaboutsomeofthesenewerkeyswehavebeenworkingonrecently.TwohavebeendevelopedjointlybyDr.Gough,whoisnowinCaliforniasendingusmanuscriptshotoffthegriddle,Mr.McCloskeyintheDepartmentofPoliticalScience,andmyself,chieflyforsomeresearchinthefieldofpoliticalbehavior;butIthinkthesetwokeyswillprobablyhavesomeconsiderableusefulnessingeneral.

First,dominance.That’savariablewetalkaboutagooddeal,andinseveralkindsofactivityitisimportanttohaveitjudged.Wehadthe15mostand15leastdominantmembersofafraternityandofasororityattheuniversity.Thejudgmentsweremadeforthesexesseparately,butwepooledthemenandthewomentodoouritemanaly-sisbecausetheN’sweretoosmallotherwise.Then,also,wehadthe50mostand50leastdominantstudentsinaseniorhighschoolclassinMinneapolis.Inthecaseofbothofthosegroups,thejudgmentswerenotmadebyateacher,butweremadebyasemi-sociometricprocedure.Thefraternitymembersratedeachother;andinthehighschoolclass,thestudentsratedoneanotherastotheirdominance.

I’msorry,Idon’thavewithmeacopyofthedefinitionweused,butitwasingeneralalongthelinesofatendencytoappearstrongandtomaintaintheascendantroleinface-to-facesituations.Thentherewasalistofsomeexamples(suchassales-menandthelike),andtherewasthespecificwarningforjudgingnottoconfuseitwithintelligenceorwithspecialadvantagesfromhavingmoremoneythanotherpeoplehad;andthatitdidnotmeandomineering;thatsomedominantpeopleconveyedthisfeelingofpersonalstrengtheventhoughtheydidn'tparticularlywanttorunthings,etc.;thatitwasbehavior,andnottheperson’sdesiretobedominantthatwewere

Introduction

Dominance Key


15

interestedin;andthisisnottheperson’sself-concept;rather,itishowthepersonbehavesasothersseehim.

Wewrote150itemsspecificallytogetatdominance(thethreeofuswrotetheseitems),andthenwehadtheMultiphasicitempoolalsoadministeredtothesecriterioncases.TheentirepooloftheMultiphasicwasgiventothefraternityandsororitygroups,andaboutahundredpromisinglookingitemsfromthatstudywerethengiventothehighschoolgroup,togetherwiththespecialoneswewrote.Wedon’thaveagoodcross-validationandyoushouldkeepthatinmind;we’regoingtocollectmoredata.Butwedohaveatleastasemi-cross-validationinthesensethattheseitemsworkforbothsexesinthefraternityandsorority.Wedidouritemanalysisonthewholebunchforsignificance(butwedidlookatthetalliesforthemenandwomenseparately).ThenwemovedahundreditemsfromtheMultiphasicintothesecondsample,soitisn’tasdishonestavalidityindicationasyoumightthink,butitstillneedsgoodcross-validation.

Sixty-itemswereretainedonthebasisofthesevariousanalyses:32fromthepoolwrittenforthatpurpose,and28fromtheMultiphasic.That’saveryinterestingthingmethodologically,yousee.Wesitdownandmakeup150itemstomeasuredomin-ance,ofwhich32worked;andthenoutof550generalitemsintheMultiphasic,almostasmanyworked.Thisissomethingyourunintoconstantlyinthistypeofpersonalitytesting—theinability,thankheavens,topredictbeforehandwhatkindofitemcontentwillcorrelatewiththecriterion.

Regardingreliability,theonlythingwehaveistheKuder-RichardsonFormula21,whichgivesanestimatedreliabilityof.79.Validity—notcross-validationyet,butcorrelationwithratingsbyothers—was.60inthecollegegroupand.69inthehighschoolgroup.Soeventhoughwehaven’tcross-validation,thevalueshereareprettyhigh,quiteencouraging.Correlationwithself-ratingswas.52inthecollege,.56inthehighschoolgroup.Idon’tattachmuchimportancetothat:that’sonebunchofself-ratingsagainstanother.Biserialcorrelationwithsocialservicepoints(highschoolstudentsgotpointsfordoingspecialthingsaroundtheschool)was.33.

Themeandifferencesareextremelylarge,evenconsideringthefactthatthisistheoriginalgroup.Forthecollegegroup,themeandifferencebetweenthemostandleastdominantisabout2½standarddeviations,andforthehighschoolgroupit’sapproxi-mately3standarddeviations;soevenallowingforafairamountofshrinkage,Ithinkyoucanseethiskeyhasagooddealofvalidityinit.Correlationis.35withsocio-economicstatusasmeasuredbythehomeindex.Theyoungeraresignificantlylessdominant,butthat’syoungerjustinthesensethatthey’reinhighschool,andIdon’t


16

knowwhatexplainsthat[difference].Imean,youdohaveasocio-economicselectionincollege,andvariousothervariables,soIdon’tknowwhattosayaboutthat[significantdifference].

Well,that'sakeythatIthinkyoumightfinditworthgettingholdofandseeingwhatvalueithasinyoursituation.

Responsibility—that’ssomethingwecertainlytalkabout.Isthispersonrespons-ible,ornot?Well,thedefinitionwegavetotheraterswas:“Willingnesstoaccepttheconsequencesofhisownbehavior,”dependable,trustworthy,showingasenseofobligationtothegroup—asotherstendtodescribehim.Otherstendtodescribethepersonas,“youcandependuponhim,”“heisastraightshooter,”“healwaysdoeshispart,”andthelike.Thiswasallputintheparagraphwegavethejudges.Therewasanothersetofwarningstoavoidconfusingresponsibilitywithintelligence,dominance,andpopularity.

Herewehadmoresamples:stillwedon’thavearealcross-validation.Youmightsay,whydon’tyoukeepsomeofthesecasesstrictlyforcross-validation.Well,wearguedaboutthat,butthefeelingwasthatitwasmoreimportantnottohavesomebumitemsintherethatwerespecifictoacertainpopulation.Wecouldgetcross-validationofascalelater,butifwegetsomebumitemsininthefirstplace,we’lljustgetlowervaliditylater.Thatisthereasonwedon’thaveanycross-validationyet.

Butherewehavethe40mostversusthe40leastresponsiblestudentsinaninthgradeclass,ratedbyteachers.Thenwehadthe30mostversusthe30leastrespons-ibleinaseniorclass,selectedbytheprincipal.Thenwehadthe50mostversusthe50leastresponsibleinacitysocialsciencehighschoolclass,chosenbysociometricjudg-mentsoffellowstudents.Andfinally,the50mostand50leastresponsibleinacollegefraternityandsorority,sexesratedseparately.Weanalyzedthesegroupsseparatelysowearefairlycomfortableaboutthescale.Itishardertogetat,incidentally,asyou’dexpect,thanisdominance.

Well,outcome32itemsfromtheMultiphasic.Wehavea56itemkeyforrespon-sibility,butonly32areintheMult.TheMultiphasicsub-scale,however,correlates.84and.88intwosampleswiththetotalresponsibilitykey.Itcorrelates.47withratingsinthefraternityand.53withratingsinthehighschoolsample.Ifyoujustsay“let’sseparatethemostfromtheleastresponsiblebyanarbitrarycuttingscore,”youget78%hitsinthecollegegroup,and87%hitsinthehighschoolgroup,intheexpecteddirection,thankgoodness.Well,that’sanotherscalethatwillbeavailablebeforelongwhichIthinkmightberefreshingtoplayaroundwithalittlebit.

Responsi-bility Key


17

Mr.FriedmanisdoinghisthesisoncerebrallocalizationontheMultiphasic,ofallthings—anenterpriseinwhichItookverydimviewinitially,buttowhichIamgraduallygettingconverted.Ialwaysbelievedthatthemindhadsomethingtodowiththebrain,butIdon’tknowwhyIwassounwillingtoacceptthissortofstuff.Nowhehassomebeautifulprofileformsforthedifferencebetweenpeoplewithfocallesionsofthefrontalversuspeoplewithfocallesionsoftheparietallobe.It’sjustunbelievableasyougothroughthecurves.I’mstillnotentirelyconvinced,butIcan’tseeanythingwrongwithit.

Hehasalsodevelopedakeyspecificallybyitemanalyzingthefrontalversusparietalcases,andontheoriginalgroup—nowremember,thismayshrinksome—hegets93%hitsseparatingfrontalfromparietallobelesions.ThisisreallyhotstuffandbetterthantheEEGoranythingelsewehavearoundthesedays,sowecanallowforsomeshrinkageandstillhaveaveryimpressiveresultthere.Judgeslookingattheprofilesandsortingthemareabletodo75%accurateseparation.Probablythesatistizationoftheprofilepatternwilldobetterthanthejudges,butwillprobablynotdoaswellasthescalebasedonitemanalysis.

Well,therearesomeotherthingsthatarenotsousefultoyoubuttestifytotheinherentpoweroftheitempoolanywayandmakeusfeelalittlebitoptimisticaboutwhatwecando.Dr.Hanvik,whotookhisdegreeherelastyearintheVAtrainingprogram,hasalowbackpainscalethatdoesanicejobseparatingorganicandfunctionalcases—peoplewithslippeddiscversusthosewhohavefunctionalbackpain.ThenwehavesomestuffonepilepsywhichI’llletDr.HalestellyouaboutwhileIgetabreath,sinceIdon’tknowmuchaboutthatresearch.He’shadmoretodowithit.

(SupplementbyDr.WilliamHales)

I’dliketotellthemfirst,Dr.Meehl,aboutthebackachescale.Theymightbeinter-estedinthat.Idon’tknowhowmanyofyouseepeoplewithbackaches.Thereisakey,alreadymentioned,availableforit.Herearetherespectivecurves,withthelowercurveforpeoplewithorganicbackaches.Theseareprimarilydisccases,ascontrastedwithfunctionalbackaches.NoticethatyougetwhatamountstoatypicalHy-DthatDr.Meehlmentioned,inthecaseofthefunctionalbackaches.Researchonthetestistakingmanydeviouspaths,andit’sreallyamazingthatyoutakewhatwasassumedbyeveryonetobeapersonalitytestandfindthatitcanbeusedinseparatingoutwell-definedorganicconditions.

Brain Injury Key

Other Keys

Low Back Pain Key


18

Wehavegottenaway,too,fromthefeeling(somethingI’dliketoemphasize)thatwecanonlyapplyonekindofatesttoaspecifictypeofcondition.I’dliketomentioninthisconnection,abouttheorganictypeofconditions,thatwearegettingmoreandmoreawayfromtheideathatwewillbeabletofindanysortofascalewhichwillmeasureordiscriminateorganicbraindamageinitsentirety,asanentityinitself.Whatweareprobablygoingtocomeupwithinthefuture,thewaythetrendslooklikenow,willbemanydifferenttypesofscalesorothermeasuringdevicesforattackingthisproblemofso-calledorganicorintra-cranialdamage.

Asyouallknow,foralongtimetheresearchwasdevotedtotryingtofindasingleinstrumentwhichwouldpickoutallpersonswithanykindofintra-cranialdamage.Noweffortisbeingdirectedtobreakingupthisideaofatotalityandattackingitfromvarioussides—forexample,theparietalversusfrontal,thedominanceofoneareaovertheother,laterality,andsoon.

Asanexample,Ihaveoneofthefirstroughkeysthatwasmadefortheparietal-frontalscalewhichIassumethatMr.Friedmanwillmakegenerallyavailable.Weareatpresentusingittoadvantage,andasDr.Meehlmentioned,wearegettingaverysignificantnumberofhits.Wecansaythatevennowitlooksveryfavorable.

(ReturntoDr.Meehl)

Idon’tknowwhetherthepreviouslypublishedStkeythatDr.Goughdevelopedisofanyusetoyou,butyoumighttakealookatitsomeday.Itsitems,scoring,andotherdataareinaseriesofarticlesintheAmericanJournalofSociologyforthelasttwoorthreeyears.Ifyoulookfortheword“status”inconnectionwiththename“Gough”you’llfindthem.They’reinterestingbecauseheisn’tlookinguponthekeyasawaytogetatsomebody’seconomiclevel—youseethat’sjustlikeguessingadiagnosis,onlyworse.Buthehas,forexample,askedaprincipalofahighschooltodescribeastudentwhocomesofapoorhomeandhasahighSt-score,theprincipalnotknowingwhythestudentisbeingpicked;andconversely,akidfromagoodfamilybyusualstandards,whohasalowStscore.

Inthesekidsofthehighstatusfamilywiththelowscores,yougettheprincipaldescribingthemas:“Idon’tknowwhat’sthematterwithFilbert,hisfatherisapillarofthechurchandaninfluentialmaninthecommunity,etc.,butFilbertdoesn’tseem totakehisresponsibilityseriously,”andsoon.WhereasagirlfromaverypoorhomewhohasahighStscoreisdescribedas:“Sheseemsveryambitious,shespendsalotoftimebaby-sitingtosavemoneysoshecangotomusicschool,becomeanurse,”orwhateveritmaybe.“Sheisoneofthebetterstudentsinourclassandsheworksvery

Measuring Brain

Damage

Social Status Key


19

hardandsheseemstohavesometroubleadjustingtoherfamily,”andthelike.What-evertheimportantpsychologicalpropertiesoftheStkeyare,Idon’tknow,butitcertainlyisaninterestingkindofthing.

NEWAPPROACHESTOPROFILEANALYSIS

Anotherthingthatwehavebeenfoolingwithlatelythatwehopewillmatureintosomethinguseful(buthasn’tsofar)istheproblemofquantifyingtheextentofsimilarityinprofiles.Nowalotofpeoplehaveworriedaboutthat—Bordinstudiedit,Molishdidapaperonitsomeyearsago,DuMasofDenverdidastudyonit.

WefindtheDuMasindexquiteunsatisfactorybecauseit’sbasedonlyuponslope,notuponmagnitude;andsecondly,moreimportantly,theindexisanarbitraryfunctionoftheparticularorderthatthescalesofthetesthappentobeputdownin,andthatcertainlyisdisadvantageous.Wehavefoundthatthecodeisalittlebittoofluctuant,especiallyfornormalcurves;alsothatitdoesnotconveyindicationofsuchspikeeffectasIwastalkingaboutbefore.Ranksare,likethecode,defectiveinthisrespect.Youmightthink,well,wecandoaregularrankordercorrelationbetweenanytwoprofiles.Thiscertainlytellsyousomething,butwehavetriedit,andhavegottentotheconvictionthatitdoesn’tquitedoallwewouldliketohaveitdo.

RecentlyIinventedanindexofprofilesimilaritywhichIwouldbegratefulforanyinformationabout.Itisbaseduponrepresentinganybody’sprofilebyfirst,theheight—theelevationofthemedianofthetopthreescores(don’taskmewhyIchosethat,Ijustwantedtogetsomeelevationvalueinthereandcouldn’tthinkofanyotherone;ittookmeabouttwodaysbeforeIrealizedit’sthesameastakingthenexttothehighestscore,believeitornot).

Takingthenexttothehighestofthetopthreescoresasyourreferenceline,youthenobtainthedifference(keepingalgebraicsign)betweeneachoftheotherscoresandthatvalueinT-scorepoints.Thenyourecordthosedifferences.That’sasetofdifferencesforthefirstprofile.Nowthosenumbersconveyalltheinformationabouttheconfiguration.Insomesensetheyhavealltheinformationbecauseyoucanrepro-ducetheprofileexactlyfromthosenumbers.IfthesecondhighestscoreisD,thenIknowthesetofdifferences(algebraicT-scoredifferences)fortheother8scores(Iusedsevenbecauseouroldrecordsdon’thaveMf)andcouldreproducetheprofile.

Thatsetofdifferenceswouldthenobtainforthefirstcurve.Thesameprocedureisdonewiththesecondcurve,nottakingthesamebaseline.IfinthesecondcurvethehighestpointisPa,andthenexthighestisSc,thentheScistakenasthebase—say72

Measuring Profile

Similarity

Meehl Index of Profile Similarity


20

istheT-score—andwegetasetofdifferencesfromit.Andthenwetakethedifferencebetweenthedifferences.Nowdon’tgettraumatized,thisisn’tasmuchtroubleasitlooks;youcandoitinlessthan30secondsonceyou’vedoneafew.

Thenifyouthinkofaperson’sconfiguration,neglectingelevation,asbeingrepre-sentedinahyperspaceofsevendimensions,yousay“What’sMeehl’sMultiphasicform,”not“Howhighisit.”Well,whatisitsform?Meehlcouldbelocateduphereinthe7thspaceintermsofthecoordinatesrepresentingthemagnitudeofthesedeltas(ordifferences).Andthenhere’sHales’Multiphasicconfigurationoverhere.What’sthedifferencebetweenMeehlandHales?It’sthedistancebetweentheminthespace,isonewayoflookingatit,soyoutaketheoldfamiliargeometricalprincipleofthesquarerootofthesumofthesquares.Thediscrepanciesofthesecoordinatesishowfaraparttwopointsareinthespace,orhowfarapartMeehlandHalesareontheirprofileconfiguration.

Sowhatwedoistakethedifferencesofthedifferences,squarethem;butbeforewesquarethem,weroundthemoff(thisreallyterrifieseverybody,butitcorrelatesbeautifullywithwhathappensifyoudon’t)tothenearestten.Thatis,here’sadifferenceofadifferenceoftwelve,andhere’sadifferenceofadifferenceof17,andthere’sadifferenceofadifferenceoffive.Youroundthefirstdeltaofftoone,anotherofftotwo,andtheotherofftozero.Youjustforgeteverythingelse,yousee,andithorrifiesyourcompulsivenesswhenyoufirstdoit.Thenyoucansquareupinyourhead,1plus4plus0plus1,andthesquarerootofwhateveryougetisthedifferenceindex.IttellshowfarapartMeehlandHalesareinthehyperspaceofsevendimensionsthatcharacterizetheprofile.

Youcan’tneglectthesignwhenyou’resubtracting,butyoucanneglectitwhenyouwritedowntheresult.Theconventionisincaseof.5’s,todropback.(Youhavetomakeaconventiontogetnorms,soyoujustarbitrarilychooseaway.)Onesquaredplus1squaredis2,andsothisdifferencebetweenMeehl’sandHales’profilesis1.414.

Now,ofcourse,itdoesn’thaveanyabsolutemeaning.Westillhavetogetadistri-butionofthevaluesofthatindexfornormals,abnormals,andsoon.Wehavetofindoutwhatthedegreesofdifferencerepresent.Theroundedindexcorrelates.95withtheunroundedindex,soHathawaytellsmeoverthetelephone,sodon’tletthisbotheryou.We’llgetabiggersampleandtryitagain,butitseemstobeprettycloseandwillsavealotofclericalwork.

Wehavecorrelationswiththreejudges,thatis,judgeslookingatMultiphasicpro-filesaskingsimplyhowsimilarthepattern.Thecorrelationoftheindexis.68withone

Computing Meehl Index

Validation of Meehl

Index


21

judge,.65withanotherjudge(thatoneanon-psychologist),and.91withHathaway.Now,wedon’thaveanywayofknowingwhetherthedifferencebetweentheindexandthejudge’sideaofsimilarityinanygivencaseisvalidorinvalidfortheindex.Theeyetogetherwiththebraindoessomeofthismatchingsortofstuffverywellanddoessomeofitverybadly;andoneofthegreatclinicalproblemsiswhatkindsofthingsdoesthebraindobetterthanthecalculatingmachine.Well,whytalkalldayonthat,soIwon’t.Butthat’salittlethingyoumightfoolaroundwith.

Wearethinkingoftryingtoestablishbyvariousexternalcriteria,notbyjustagreeingwithjudges,thesimilaritiesofpeoplewhohavesimilarprofilesversusdissimilarprofiles.Wedon’tknowanythingaboutthesamplingdistributionofthisthing,wedon’tknowanythingabouttheeffectofunreliability.It’sjustthefirststep,butwethinkithassomepossibilities.

Certainlyit’spreferabletotheonethatCattellpublishedrecentlywhichinvolvesaveryunrealisticsetofassumptions.Hisarticlehadprofilesthatsimplydidnotgowiththeindices.It’sobviousthatsomethingisrotteninDenmark,andthatyoucanneveruseanindexthatindicatesthekindofrelationshipsthathisdoes.Ithinkthatthetroubleisthatwearebeingtoocompulsiveaboutthemathematicsofthesituation.Weoughttoquitworryingaboutthefactorsandthecomponentsandtheindependentassumptionsandallthat,andsay,“Let’strytomakeupsomehalf-bakedwayofcom-biningthenumbersthatwilldoatleastreasonablejusticetowhatthebraindoestotheprofileform.”Ithinkthat’sthemostprofitablewaytostart.

Well,anotherlineofourresearch,sofaraspatterningprocedureisconcerned,hasbeengoingonforsolongthateverybodykidsmeaboutit;it’stheso-calledMeehl–Dahlstromdata.Thesedataareabouttwoyearsold.Weseemtohaveaninhibitionaboutworkingwiththem.Dahlstrommeanwhilehaslefttown,whichmakesthingsworse,butthegeneralapproachIstillthinkispromising.IhavebeenworkingonitagainrecentlyandIhopeoverthevacationnowtofinishitoff.

Essentially,thereisstillanotherwayoflookingattheproblemofprofileconfig-urationsandwhatisinvolved.Wehavetakenasourproblem,todistinguishneurosisfrompsychosis.Leaveasidenowtheimportanceofthat,that’sadifferentquestion.Butsupposeyouwant,forsomereason,todistinguishneurosisfrompsychosis—howcanyoudoit?Whatwehaveworriedaboutisthepossibility—thelikelihood,Iwouldsay—thattheimportanceoftheelevationofagivenscoredependsuponthesizeofsomeotherscore,oruponthedifferencebetweensomeotherpairofscores.Thatmeansthatnokindofregressionequationordiscriminatefunctionthatjustaddsnumbers,or

Cross Product Approach to Profile Analysis


22

eventakessquaresandaddsthem,willdojusticetotherelationship.Itinvolves,forexample,crossproductsofsometype.

I’mgoingtogiveyouoneexampleofthat.Supposeyoudecidethataspike,whenthewholeprofileishigh,suggestsinvolutionalpsychosis;andaspike,whenthewholeprofileislow,suggestsananxietyneurosisorreactivedepression;andthewholethinghigh,withnotsomuchspike,suggestsamanic-depressivepsychosis.Let’sjustsaythat;sothatifyouwanttoconsiderthatspikeeffectontheHs,D,andHy,youwanttohavesomewayofdescribingthedifferences.

Well,oneobviouswaytothinkofdoingthatistosaythatwhat’scrucialhereisthedifferencebetweenDandHy,andalso,betweenDandHs,butthatthedifferenceisimportanttotheextentthatthewholeprofileismarkedlyup.SothatwouldmeansomethingliketakingsomeweightofD,timesthedifferenceDminusHy,plusanotherweightofDtimesthedifferenceDminusHs.Well,ifyousitdownandfigureouthowmanycross-productterms,squaredterms,andfirstdegreetermsyouhave(Iforgetwhatitcomesto,50orsomething)fora9variableequation,theproblemofworkingitoutplustheproblemofneedingatremendoussamplinghere….Well,wesaid,“theheckwiththat,”andgotsortofgraphicalwhichisalwaysagoodprocedureifyoucan’tthinkthroughsomething.

Whatwehavebeensayingisthatwewillassignweightstocertaindiscrepancies,butweletthoseweightsvary,dependinguponthevaluesofotherdiscrepancies.[Referringtochalkboard.]Forexample(thiskillsme,butitisn’tsohardtodo,actually,afteryou’vedoneafew),wehavedistributedPtminusHsalongtheabscissa,algebraicsigncovered.Alonghere,we’vegotScminusD.Youseethekindofgamewe’replaying.We’retryingtoquantifytheusualpatterningremarksaboutthepsychoticandneuroticband.Thenwe’vegotbands1,2,3,4,5,soyougetPtminusHsoverhere,andthenthatpersonhasaprofilewhereScminusDissuchandsuchavalue,andyoulocatehimuphere.Allright,thisbandhasasetofrules.There’sadifferentsetofrulesforthesecondband,andthethirdband.Soyoulookthereandthisdelta—whichisafunctionofPt,Hs,Sc,D,Pa,PdandHy—thedifferenceofthissumandthissumifthisdeltaisgreaterthan15,callitpsychosis;ifitislessthan15,callitneurosis,unlessschizisover80,inwhichcaseyoucallitpsychosis.

It’sthekindofthingthatrecentlyappearedinconnectionwiththeRorschachworkbyBuhler,anditisanattempttodosomethingthatideallywouldbedonewithcontinuousfunctioning.Yousee,insteadofmultiplyingandsoon,havingcontinuouschanges,allyoudoisbreakupacertaindifferenceintodiscretestepsoffive,andthedifferentruleswithineachbandcorrespondtothedifferentweightthatyou’dhaveif

Computing by Cross Product Method


23

youwereusingcontinuousvariables.That’swhatitis;it’sahalf-bakedgraphicalmethodoftryingtodosomethingindiscreteformthatisimpracticaltodowithacontinuousvariable.

Nowouraiminthisisnotprimarilytohelpsolvetheadministrativeproblemof“Whoisapsychotic,”althoughthatisnotentirelytrivial—everyclinicianknowsthatsomedecisionsaremadeafunctionofthat—butweareprimarilyinterestedhereinliftingourselvesbythebootstraps.

Wearetakingthepatientswhoarediagnosed“psychoneurosis,”whohaveaclearlypsychoticprofile,andwhowerediagnosedbackin1942and1943.Wehaveafollow-upofseveralhundredcaseswhomsocialworkersranalloverthestateofMinnesotafollowingupon:hadtheygonetostateorprivatehospitalsandforhowlong,orweretheyinjail,orhadtheycommittedsuicide,orwhatwasthesituation.Naturallyyoucanseewhatourhopeis.Wehope,andIbelievemyself,fromlookingintothecasestudiesthatgowiththesethings,thatalargenumberofthecasescalledneurosisbutwhohadpsychoticcurveswill,intermsoftheirsubsequenthistories,provetohavebeeninsomesensereallypsychoticatthetimetheywerediagnosed;andthattherearesomeveryimportantprognosticandotherdifferencesasafunctionoftheseconfigurations.

PROPOSALFORCONFIGURALSCORING

Anotherthingwe’vebeeninterestediniswhatIcallconfiguralscoring.Instead oftalkingabouttheconfigurationoftheprofile,yougorightbacktotheoriginalbehavior,namely,thatofrespondingtosingleitems.NowI’llhavetoboresomeofyouwhohaveheardmeonthistopicbefore.I’dliketointroducethisbyaparadoxicalexamplewhichwouldneverexistintherealworld,butit’sfuntotalkabout.

Supposeyouareinterestedinseparatingschizophrenicsfromnormals,andyouhadayes-noitemwhichhadzerovalidityforthatpurpose,andthevalidityof0didn’tdependuponaparticularmethodofitemanalysis.Therewasjustnopercentofpeopleinthenormalorintheschizophrenicgroupwhohittheitemtrueorfalseasthecasemaybe,oritwasatexactlythesame,say50%,difficultylevelinbothpopulations.Sowhetheryoudoachi-squareoraphi-coefficientoratetrachoric,nomatterhowyoudoit,theitemhasnovalidity,literallynone,andI’mnottalkingaboutsamplinghere.Similarlywehaveaseconditemwhichalsohaszerovaliditystrictlyinthesupply.

I’mfondofaskingonPhDprelims,“Isitpossiblethatthesetwoitemscouldhavesomevalidityforthecriterion?”Almosttotheman,thestudentwillthink(hethinksthere’ssomethingrotteninDenmark,ofcourse),butendupbysaying“No,they

Advantages of Configural

Scoring


24

couldn’t.”Hethinksthatatleastoneoftheitemswouldhavetohavesomelittlevalidityiftheotheronewastoact,say,asasuppressor.Buttheinterestingthingisthat,algebraically,it’squitepossibletohaveanitemofzerovalidity,anotheritemofzerovalidity,andthetwoitemsjointlyhavingperfectvalidity.AsIsay,itwouldneverhappeninreallife,butthefactthatitisalgebraicallypossibleisimportantbecauseitmeansthatweshouldbelookingfortheapproximationstoitintherealworld.

Suppose,forexample,thatweconsideritem1whichcanbeansweredplusorzero;anditem2whichcanbeansweredplusorzero.Therearefourwaystobehavewithrespecttothetwoitems:Youcanhitbothofthem,youcanhitneitherofthem,youcanhitoneandnottheother,youcanhittheotherandnottheone.

Supposingwehave50normalindividualswhogiveyoutheresponseplus,plus;theother50normalsgivetheresponsezero,zero.Nowthedifficultyofitem#1inanormalpopulationwillbe50%andforitem#2willbe50%.Butnowifyouconsidered50schizophrenicsandanother50schizophrenics,thenifanybodygivesyouthepat-ternplus-plus,heisoneofthesepeopleandhencehe’sanormal.Ifhegivesyouthepatternzero-zero,he’soneofthesepeopleandhenceheisalsonormal.Ifhegivesyouthepatternplus-zero,thenhe’saschizophrenic;andifhegivesyouthepatternzero-plus,he’saschizophrenic.

Soyoulookatthosetwoitemsjointly,anddon’tfoolwiththembyaddingthemup.You’vegottolookatthem,sotospeaksimultaneously,inyourscoringkey.You’vegottohaveascoringkeytogiveitemnumbersoandso,anditemsoandso,withsomekindofaredlinebetweenthem,orsomeotherdevice.Youlookatthisitem,andyourunyourfingerdownhere.Ifitsaysthesamethinghereasitsaysherethat’sOK—whethertheybothsaytrueorbothsayfalsedoesn’tmatter—butiftheydon’tsaythesamething,it’snotOK,andyougetonepointforbeingaschiz.Nowinanytraditionalitemanalysistheseitemswouldjustfallthroughthehopper,wouldn’tthey?Youwouldnotdiscoverthem;theywouldn’tseemtohaveanyintrinsicvalidity.

Nowitcanbeshownthatyoudon’thavetotakesuchextremecasesasthis,thatifweconsideraphi-coefficientinonepopulation,saytheschizophrenics,andthephi-coefficientsintheotherpopulations,saynormals,thattheconfiguralvaliditywillbeone-halfofthealgebraicdifferencebetweenthosephi-coefficientswhenthesymmetryisaroundzero.Whenthesymmetrygetsofffromzero,it’salittlebithigherthanthat,actually.Soyouhavetwoitems,bothwithzerovalidityforschizophrenia.Butamongschizophrenics,thefirstitemhadaphi-coefficientwiththesecondof+.50,andamongthenormals,thetwoitemshadaphi-coefficientof–.50;andeverytimeyougotaTForFTpatternyouwouldsaynormal,andwhereveryougotaTTorFFyouwouldsay

Method of Configural

Scoring


25

schizophrenic,andthephi-coefficientsofthevalidityofthatjudgmentofnormality orschizophreniawouldbeminus50,or100/2,whichwouldbe50.

Yougetthatobviouscasewhenyouhavesymmetryaboutzero.Youcanevenworkitwhenbothofthemhavethesamesign.Ifoneofthemhasaphi-coefficientof.90amongthenormalsandonly.20amongtheschizophrenics,halfthedifferenceisgoingtobe.35,configuralvalidityisslightlyover.35.Asyougetawayfromzero,yougetthecurvegoingup,positivelyaccelerated,fortheconfiguralvalidity.Again,weknownothingaboutthesampledistributionofthatstatistic;wehavenoinformationastowhenconfiguralvaliditypaysoff,ifiteverpaysoff.

IhaveacoupleofstudentsdoingsomeresearchonthisproblemwiththePakey,whichasyoumayknowisoneofthefeeblerMultiphasickeys.Whenitworksitworksnicely,butitdoesn’tworkworthahootonalotofsharpparanoids;andtheideais thatyoucouldcatchsomeofthesecageyparanoidsbyaconfiguralscoringsystem. It’salittleharder,youknow,tofigureouthowyouhavetoanswertwothingssimulta-neously.

Ifyouwanttogetpsychoticandgrandioseaboutthisyoucanextendthereasoningalittlebit.Youcouldsay,whycouldn’twescorebytriads,orpentads,andreallygototown.Afterall,that’swhatyoudoinaclinicalinterview.Thepatientsaysthisandthenyoustartout,andthepatientsaysthisandhehasthisslipofthetongue,andhehasthisdream,andsoon,andsoon;andtheinterpretationsgivenarefunctionalthroughthewholeconfiguration.

Well,youcanimaginesomesuper-duperscoringkeylikethis,youknow—ifthepersonsaystruetothis,thenyouscorehim5pointsforschizophreniaifthesetwoareindisagreement.So,intermsofthepattern,youwouldwritethisone:TFTorFTTarescored,butalloftheothereightcombinationsremainunscored.Yougetsockedforschizophreniaifyoudon’tanswerthesetwothesamewayif,andonlyif,yousaytruetothatone.Youcancomplicatescoringsoitwouldreallybeunbeatable.Ageniuspsychologistwouldhaveahardtimebeatingsuchatest,anditwouldcontain,ofcourse,manypossibilitiesfordynamicinteractionswhichourstructuredtestshaveordinarilynotcontained.

******

Well,thatendswhatIhavetosayaboutourlocalactivities.Howwouldyourathergoonfromhere?Ihavepageafterpageofresearchsummarization,orwecouldhave adiscussion;whicheveryouthinkfruitful.IhaverecentlyreviewedalloftheMulti-phasicdata,all195articles—I’mamazedthatIcangetupanydrivetotalkaboutthe

Application of Configural

Scoring


26

Multiphasicatall,butIalwaysseemtobeabletomanageonceIgetgoing.Whateveryouthinkwouldbebest,Dan.[DNW:Iwonderhowthegroupwouldfeel?Wecanpresentthesetwoalternativestoavote:one,tohaveDr.Meehlcontinuewithhisdiscussion,aslongaswehavethetime;andtheother,toopenitupforgeneralquestionsandanswersnow.(ThevoteshowedpreferenceforDr.Meehltocontinuehislecture.)]

******

MMPIRESULTSFORSPECIALGROUPSANDBEHAVIOR

Let’stalkabouttheresearchthen.Thisisinnorationalorder;it’sintheorderthatitwasinafolderthatIhave,strictlyrandom.SomeofthisresearchIamsureisfamiliartoyou;someofitprobablyisn’tsomuchso.

Wehavesomedataontheblind.ThereseemstobeverylittledifferencebetweenblindandsightedfemalesonaBrailleformoftheMultiphasic.Thereisatendencyforblindmalestobealittlemoreabnormalthansightedmales,especiallyontheMfkey.Butifyoulookatmeansandnotatthepercentofscoresover70,thedifferencesbetweenblindandsightedarenotsignificant.Inotherwords,theyareintheborder-linerange,apparently.

Intermsofapplicabilityofthetesttotheblind,itseemstobefairlygoodinthesensethatwhenagroupofpresumablysentientjudges,includingsomethatdidagooddealofworkwiththeblind,pickitemsthatwouldseemtobeinappropriateforadmin-istrationtoblindindividuals,theseitemstendtoshowupasnotsignificantlydifferentintheblindandthesighted.SoitseemsthatitisfairlysafetousetheBrailleMulti-phasic,ofwhichthereareseveralsetsaroundthecountryandlocally,forworkwiththeblindprovidedthatsomeallowanceismadeinthecaseofmalesasregardstheinterpretationofMf.Whetheryoushouldsaythatthislatterisinvalidityorwhetheritindicatesafeminizationofmaleswhoareblind,itwouldbedifficulttosay.Again,asinmostcases,myguesswouldbesomeofboth.

TheMultiphasicdoesnotseemtobeappreciablyintimatelyrelatedtoStrongscoresnortovocationalchoiceinsomestudies.Therearesomesignificantcorrela-tions,butonthewholetheyaren’tparticularlyimpressive,fromstudiescoveringvariousdomainslikeeducation,engineering,medicine,law,andjournalism.Thereis astudyindicatingthatstudentsinnursing,music,liberalarts,andteachertrainingdonotdifferappreciablyintheirMultiphasicprofiles.

Characteristics of the Blind

MMPI & Interests and

Attitudes


27

ThereisaslightrelationshipbetweenpronenesstohomesicknessincollegewomenandHs,D,andPt.ThereisevidencethatHs,D,andScaresignificantlyrelatedtoradicalisminacollegesample,andHytoconservatism—veryinterestingsetoffindings.ThereisevidencethatcollegestudentswithawiderangeofrecreationalactivitiesshowlowerscoresonF,Hs,D,PtandScthanthosewithnarrowrecreationalinterests.Studentswithhighsocialintroversionhavebeenshowntobesignificantlylessparticipantincollegeactivities.

ThereisevidencethattheMFscalemaybeveryeasilyfakedbymanifesthomo-sexuals.WeknowthatdelinquentgirlsandalsodelinquentboyshaveanelevatedPdscore.Youshouldbeawarethatthatwidelyquotedstudyondelinquentgirlsfusesthreecurvedtypesandallyouseeisthemeancurvewhichshowslowneurotictriad,highPd,andsecondarypsychoticelevations,Pt,Sc,Pa,Ma.Butthatifyoulookattheactualrecords,thecurvesbreakintoasizeablemajorityofpsychopathiccurves,relativelypure;asmallernumberofpsychoticcurves;andaverysmallnumber,butstilldistinct,ofneuroticcurves,sothatthemeansofCapwell’sdataarealittlebitmisleading.

Multiphasicsofpersonssoberandslightlydrunkshowmarkedsimilarityinform,evenwhentheelevationchanges,andevenwhenindividualitemschangealot.Thatisoneofthemostinterestingfindingswehave.GivetheMultiphasic,thengivesomebodytwoorthreegoodstrongcocktailsandlethimtaketheMultiphasicoveragain,andhegetsaverysimilarpatternthoughhemayhaveaslittleas45%overlapinhissignificantitemresponses.Thetheoreticalsignificanceofthatisgreat,butIdon’thavetimetotalkmuchaboutit.

Maximumseparationofpresumablyvalidfrompresumablyfakedcurvesisach-ievedifyoucallitfakewhentheresultofFminusKrawscoresisequaltoorgreaterthan9.Thatisthelatestdopebaseduponastudyof1800orsopresumablyauthenticrecords,andover300fakedrecordsfromseveraldifferentexperiments.FminusKrawscoresequaltoorgreaterthen9willcatchthree-quartersoffakedrecordsattheexpenseof3%ofthevalidones.Thisisfakingbadorfakingsick,notfakinggood.

TherearetwoorthreeinvestigationsindicatingstronglythatFscoresover70aremuchmorelikelytobevalidindicatorsofpsychoticmentationormultipleneuroticcomplaintsthantheyareofvalidityperse.WhentheFgetsupto70or75,youshouldnotconcludethatthetestisinvalid;inthemajorityofcasesitwillbevalid.Itwillbeanindicationoftheperson’ssickness.EvenFrawscoresover16areratherfrequentlyvalidalthoughyounaturallygetsuspiciouswhentheygetwayupthere.

MMPI & Delinquency

MMPI & Alcoholism

Validity Indicators


28

Butsofarasdecidingaboutvalidityisconcerned,itseemssafesttousetheFminusKindexjointlywithquestioningthepatientanddoingaretest.Afterall,ifyoumanagetogetaverysimilarprofile,youarealmostcertainlygettingsomeattentiontothetest.Youmayhavesomepeculiarsomaticdistortions,butthat’saformofpsycho-pathologyanyway—atleastyou’renotgettingthecardsthrownatrandom.Soitispreferabletoquestionthepatientaboutsomeitems,havingtheretestandlookingattheprofileformitself,togetherwiththeFminusKindex,insteadofjustlookingatL,andlookingatF,andlookingatK.

Thereissomeevidencethatfemalesaleswomenandfactoryworkersshowfewsignificantdifferencesfromcontrols,buttheimpressionIhavefromthatstudyischieflythatthedifferencesareslight,eventhoughtheyaresignificant.IammoreimpressedingeneralwithdifferencesbeingslightwhenIfindthemsignificantthanIamwiththemerefactthattheyarestatisticallystable.

InsurancesalesmenaresignificantlyabovethestandardgrouponHy,Mf,PaandMa;andthosewithhighKuderPersuasivescoreshavelowerHyperchondriasisandDepressionscoresthansalesmenwithlowerPersuasivescores.

SocialworkerswithlowerSocialServicescoreontheKuderhavesignificantlyhigherScontheMultiphasic.

UnsuccessfulrehabilitationtraineeshavesomewhathigherMultiphasicscoresthandosuccessfultraineesforfouroccupationalgroupsstudied.

Inanunpublishedstudyofmaleactors,professionalactorsonBroadwayscoredsignificantlyabovecontrolsofsimilarageandIQ,onPd,Mf,Pa,andMa.ThemeanMfofthesemaleactorsis77.Veryinteresting,andwhatyouwouldexpecttheoretically,ofcourse.

StudentsfromupperclasshomesbutwithlowStscoresontheGoughStkeyhavethepropertyImentionedbefore,andalsotendtoanticipatelowerincome.Justaskabunchofkidsinaclasshowmuchmoneytheyexpecttobemakingatacertainage.ThekidswithalowStscorefromupperclasshomesexpectlowerincomesthankidswithhighStscoresfromhomesofasimilareconomiclevel.

Wienershowedthatthemeanscoresofthegroupversusindividualformbasedontestingoddandevencasesarenotsignificantlydifferentalthough7ofthe9showahigherscoreontheindividual.Standarddeviationsarealsoverysimilar,althoughtheywerenottested.IfyoutestthesamesubjectsonthecardandgroupformsratherthantakingcasesrandomlyasWienerdid,thecorrelationsrangefrom.56inthecaseofPa,

MMPI Results for

Saleswomen

Results for Insurance Salesmen

Results for Social Workers

Rehabilitation Trainees

Actors

Financial Aspiration

Group vs. Individual

Forms


29

to.91inthecaseofMf,withamedianof.60,whichvaluesarefairlyclosetothebestestimateswehaveonthereliability.

IfyouthrowtogethertheMfscalesoftheStrong,Kuder,Multiphasicandsomeothertest,youfindthattheMultiphasiccorrelatesmorewiththeotherthreethantheytendtowithoneanother.Whatevertheyarealldoingasamass,theMultiphasicisdoingalittlemore,asfarasfemininitygoes.

Patientsinageneralmedicalout-patientclinicwereroutinelytested.EverybodycominginwasgiventheMultiphasicregardlessofhiscomplaints.Thosewhohavetwoormoreneuroticscoresontheneurotictriadabove70,iftheyarecontrastedwiththosethathavenotriadscoreabove60,havethreetimesasmanyheavycharts—chartsweighing6oz.ormore.Hathawayjusttookthehospitalchartsandweighedthem.Veryinterestingoperationalwayofgettingatvalidity,yousee.Thesepeoplehaveneuroticscorescomingin,multiplediagnosticproceduresarecarriedout,theycomeinagainandagain,theygetsentfromoneclinictothenext,andsoon.Ilovethatstudy.

Ifthecriteriaofoutcomearereliable,theMultiphasiccanbeusedtopredict,betterthanchance,theresultsofin-patientandintensiveout-patienttherapyalongshort-termpsychoanalyticlines.AdversesignsforsuchtherapyarehighPd,Sc,Pa,oringeneralhavingotherscoreshigherthanDepression,orhavingPdorScabovePt.ThestudywasdoneinCalifornia.

MultiphasicPtcorrelates.52inmen,and.45inwomenwitharathercarefullyvalidatedmeasureofinsecurity.Thismakestheoreticalsenseandalsofitsthefacevalueofthecharacteroftheitemsinthiscase.

SeminarystudentshaveelevatedMfscores,ameanT-scoreof63,whichcertainlyyouwouldexpect.Localclergy,bytheway,haveelevatedMf,Hy,andalittleL,whichyoucaninterpretinseveralways.ReligiousstudentsattheUniversityofMinnesotaarereliablylessdepressedthannon-religious,significantatthe1%level,andoverasigmadifferent,whichisinteresting,evenwhenage,sex,andtotalmembershipinorganizationsareheldconstant.Thenon-religiousstudentsaremoreabnormalinallbuttheMascores,invaryingdegrees.

Non-successfulstudentsinaschoolofbusinesshavehigherprofilesthansuccessfulones;inthecaseofMaandSc,thedifferenceexceeds5T-scorepoints.

Femininity

Neurosis and Medical

Treatment

Predicting Outcome of

Therapy

Insecurity

MMPI & Religion

Business Students


30

2 9

CAUTIONSANDCONCLUSIONSRETESTINTERPRETATION

IhaveafewgeneralcommentsthatIcanspendthenextseveralminuteson.ThetwomostimportanterrorsIwouldsayarebeingtoocautious,andinnotbeingcau-tiousenough.Iwouldliketowarnyouthatitisnotsafesimplytowaterdownclinicalsyndromestodecidewhatpeopleinthenormalrangearelike;and,ingeneral,I’msuspiciousofmakingvocationalextrapolationsonlyontheoreticalgrounds.Iamnotsuspicious,naturally,whenthedataarethere,andIdon’tseeanyreasonwhyapersonshouldnotallowhimselftothinkaboutthesepossibilities.ButIdobelieveitisnotwisetomakestraightoutvocationalextrapolationsfromtheoreticalconsiderations,becausethetheory,sofarasI’mconcerned,ofvocationalinterestasrelatedtopsycho-dynamicsisnotsufficientlywell-elaboratedatthepresenttime.Rememberthattheoddsarefornormalityjustonplaingarden-varietybases.Knowingnothingelse,apersonisprobablynotverysick,andthereforeyoushouldbecarefulininterpreting,especiallyminimaldeviations.

Theinstrument,likeanyinstrument,oughttobeusedwithallthedata.Iaminfavorofblindanalysisforcertainresearchpurposes,andinsomeclinical,settings,evenI,asopposedtomostclinicians,woulddefendblindanalysis,becauseIbelievethekindofcorroborationgivenblindlyhasahigherweightforcaseswheretheinterpretationissubjective.Butonthewhole,youcanlookuponblindprocedure,asMurraysays,asaniceparlortrick,andnottheoptimumwaytouseaninstrumentinaclinicsetting.

Keepinmindthepossibilitythatthevalidityofanitemmayactuallyundergoareversalinthenormalrange.Idon’thavetimetoreallydevelopthestatisticsofthatandIdon’tunderstandallofthemanyway,buttherearesomeitemsonthetestwhicharediscriminatingbackwardsaslongasweareworkingoutsideoftheabnormalpopulation.

Itmaywellbethatifyouconsider“normal”non-suspiciouspeople,“normal”paranoidsuspiciouspeople,andfull-blowndiagnosedpsychoticparanoids,someoftheitemswhichdiscriminatethislattergroupfromtheothertwolumpedtogether,maynotbefunctioningstatisticallytodiscriminatebetweenthesetwogroups.IhaveinmindparticularlyitemslikePa-subtle.DanandIcarryonmildwarfareatalltimesaboutthemeaningofthesubtlescales,andIdon’thaveanybetterhypothesisthanhedoes,andnoworse,Ithink.

Butitispossible,atleast,thatifwetaketheseitemslike“Somepeoplearesobossythatyoufeellikedoingtheoppositetowhattheysayevenwhentheyareright,”

Major Errors in Interpre-

tation

Blind Analysis

Reverse Discrim-ination


31

thatweshouldscoreitforPa.Answered“false”—inotherwords,“Nopeoplearen’tthatbossy”—itmayrepresenttherigidpseudo-objectivitythatthefull-blownpara-noidshowsclinicallysooften,aphonyrationalityaboutthewrongthings.Whenyoumoveintothenormalpopulation,thatresponsemaybecharacteristicofthemorehealthyindividualandtosay“true”toitdoesn’tgiveyouaPascore,butinthenormalrangeitmaybeindicativeofalittlebitofthatgarden-varietysuspiciousnessthatnormalpeoplehave.AndIthinkparticularlyonallofthesescaleswhichhavesizeablecomponentsofsubtleitems,thatthereisaseriousproblemofinterpretationwhichneedstobeindependentlyworkedoutbysuchthingsastheadjectivestudy.

Further,Ibelievethatitisdangeroustoplaytoofastandloosewithextrapolationsfromthehospitalizedpopulation.Asalways,Iadvocatebuildingscalesforspecificpurposes.Irealizethereareobjectionstothetailor-madeapproach.Itrequireseffortandsoon.It’snicetohaveadomainalreadycovered.Butifacertainspecificpurposeisconstantlycomingupandisveryimportant,itwouldseemtobebettertomakeasetofitemsforitratherthantakingwhateverintrinsicbutobscuredvalidityforthatpurposeisburiedinvariousplacesfortheothergroups.

Itdoesn’talwayswork.Youcan’tdoitbecausetherearecomplicatedpatterningandsuppressivefunctionsthatyoucan’tgetatsoreadilythatway.We’vetriedtomakeastraightpsychotickey,forexample,forneurosisversuspsychosis,anditdidn’tworkworthahoot.Itshouldhave,butitdidn’t.Itdoesn’tworknearlyaswellinourpresentgroup,atleastasthesetofdifferencesdoes.

Ontheotherhand,Ithinksomepeoplearetoonervousandtooanxiousaboutthetest.Ihearpeoplesaying,“Gee,maybeIshouldn’tbeusingthis.”Nowithardlyhurtsyoutohavealittlemoredata,asHathawayalwayspointsout.Aslongasyoudon’tgooffthedeepend,whatharmisthereinhavinganinstrumentthatcancontributesomething,aslongasyou’rereasonablycareful?Idon’tthinkanybodyshouldconfirmordisconfirmthetestscorebyhisownjudgment,andIdon’tthinkheshoulddotheconverseeither.It’samatterofraisingtheprobabilitiesalittlebit.Sometimesthetestisseeingsomethingyouarenotseeing,sometimesyouseesomethingthatthetestdoesn’tsee.

Ithinkeverybodywhousesthistestinthenormalrange—andevenintheabnormalrange—shouldpracticethedevelopmentofaharmless-soundingvocabularyforpsychopathology.Youshouldnotsuggesttopeoplethattheyareschizophrenicsorhomosexuals,orwhatever.Youallknowthat,Irealize,butit’salittlehardtodeveloptheskilloftalkinginaharmlesswayaboutsomething.Itdependsuponthekindofcounselingyoudowhetheryougetintothisboxatall,butifyougetintosuch

Need for Special Keys

Over- cautious

Use of Test

Problem of Vocabulary


32

situations,youshouldpracticeasetofwords.Thereareformostofthesekeys,evenforthemoresickandmalignantoneslikeSc,afewnicelittlewordsthattendtoantagonizeorfrightenpeople,andyet,ontheotherhand,don’tmakeyoulooklikealiarinyourowneyes.Somecompromisebetweenthosetwoaimshastobeachieved,ofcourse.

Sofarasworkwithnormalsisconcerned,there’soneotherpointIhave.Ithink itislessdangeroustoextrapolatewhenyouaretalkingaboutgeneralpersonalitycharacteristicsthanwhenyouaretalkingspecificallyaboutvocationalthings.Inotherwords,Iamlessnervous,evenifIdidn’thavetheadjectivestudytogoon,aboutsay-ingofsomebodywithahighPd,“Ithinkthisguyisalittleontheirresponsibleside,”somethinglikethat,thantosay(takeanabsurdextreme),“IthinkthisguyoughttobecomeawatchmakerbecausehehassomuchPt,andit’skindofcompulsivefussybusinessmakingwatches.”

Thislatterkindofextrapolationpartakesoflargeelementsofdanger.ThespecificvocationalandinterestaspectsIthinkremaintobeestablished,althoughsomeveryinterestingleadshavebeenpresentedbyHarmonandWienerandothers.I’mleaningoverbackwardsincautionhere,whereastherearesomeobviousextrapolations.

Inalmostanykindofwork,youdon’twantsomeborderlinepsychopath,andit’smoreseriousifhe’sgoingtobeanairplaneinspectorthanifheisgoingtobeajanitor.

Well,IhaveonefinalsetofstuffonhowtoimprovethetestandmakeabetterMultiphasicsomeday,butthatwouldtaketherestoftheday.Iwouldn’twanttorunthroughitwithoutdoingitjustice,soIthinkI’lljuststopatthispoint.

****************

(ObservationsbyDr.Wiener)

Ithinkwecanagreethatthishasbeenaverysolidandinterestingpresentation.Ihavemadeafewnotes,ratherthantryingtosummarizethisveryextensivelecture,whichmightpointupsomeoftheproblemsthatwe’vefacedaswe’vedoneourwork,andwhichtieinwithsomeofthethingsthatDr.Meehlhassaid.

Heraisedaquestionatthebeginningwhichwasextremelysignificant,althoughhedidn’ttrytoanswerit.ThequestionwaswhethertheMultiphasicisnowgoodenoughsothatwecandowithitwhatwedowiththeBinetwhenweputresultsatvariancewiththeusualcriterion:weoftenwonderwhatspecialfactorsintheusualcriterionmaybedefectiveratherthanimmediatelydismissingthetestasinvalid

Vocational Implications

Local Counseling Problems


33

AlsoespeciallysignificantwasDr.Meehl’sstressingthatweshouldstartwithpeopleandthenlookatthetest,ratherthanviceversa.ThisapproachprobablymorethananyotheraccountsforthesubstantialcontributionsofthegroupunderDr.Hath-awayandDr.Meehlinthefieldofpersonalitytesting.

TheimportanceofanewlanguagehasbeenoneofthemoreseriousproblemsthatwehavefacedinusingtheMultiphasic.We’vecertainlytendedtodevelopthebadhabitofspeakingofschizophrenia,paranoiaandsoon,inreferringtothetestresults,beforewehadpersonallyabsorbedenoughdatatousethemintheproperclinicalsense.Ratherthanstigmatizingourclientswithseriousdiagnoses,however,itseemsthatthestrengthoftheterminologyhasbecomeconsiderablyvitiatedinitsfrequentapplicationtorelativelynormalpeople.

Personsinthe“normal”populationwhohaveT-scoresabove70havefrequentlyposedaproblemofinterpretation,anditoccurredtomeasPaulwasspeakingthattheseindividualsmightoftenhavehighKscoresreflectingsubtlescores.Thismaybearatherdesirablefeatureinanormalpopulation,asDr.Meehlpointedouttowardtheendofhislecture,sothatthemissesinasensemaybemissesbecauseoftheoriginalvalidationofthetestonthehospitalpopulation.[Meehl:Withnoevidenceatall,I’dbetthatthatwouldbethecase.]

Forthebenefitofthoseofyouherewhomaynotknowit,IgatheredthatthedescriptionsonthescalewillbeoutinaMultiphasicatlassoon,Paul?[Meehl:Yes] Doyouhaveanyideawhenthatwillbeout?[Meehl:Well,thefirstvolumeissupposedtoappearinthesummerorthebeginningofthefall;thesecondvolumeprobablyafterChristmassometime,I’mafraid.I’mnot100%surewhatwillbeinwhich.Abigmessofcasestudieswillbeinthefirstone.HowmuchoftheadjectivestuffwillbeinthefirstoneIdon’tknow.Wehaven’tdecidedonthatyet.I’mtryingtogetstartedwithmakingalittlemimeographedlistofthedifferentiatingadjectivessothatwecancircu-latethatamongpeoplewhousethetestbeforetheatlascomesout.I’llkeeptwistingHathaway’sarm;Ithinkwecanmanagethat.]We’llbelookingforwardtopublicationoftheatlas;itwillcertainlybeavaluableadditionforpersonalityinterpretation.

Inanalyzingprofiles,thefurtherwebreakresultsdown,themorewerunintotheproblemoftheextenttowhichanindividualcounselorcancomprehendtheconfig-urationofthevariouspatterns.Anybreaking-downattemptrunsalongwithattemptstowardsynthesis,towardsimplifyingthebasicareasinwhichhumanbehaviorisinterpreted.Dr.Meehl’stalktodayillustrateswelltheattempttogetatthecomplexdifferencesinhumanbehavior,whileRogersseemstoviewdiagnosticcategoriesasa


34

simplecontinuumofseriousnessofproblemsgenerally,atleastfortherapeuticpurposes.

THESUBTLEANDOBVIOUSKEYS(Dr.Wiener)

MeehlandHathawayhavedescribedtheneedofascaletoindicatetheeffectoftest-takingattitudesuponscoresobtainedonstructuredpersonalityinventories.Theirconclusionswerethatthereisaconsciousorunconscioustendencyforsubjectstopresentapictureofthemselvesthathasaconsiderableinfluenceupontheirpersonalitytestscores;thatthistendencymightbetoplacetheminanoverlyfavorableorunfavorablelight;andthatthepresent“validity”scalesoftheMinnesotaMultiphasicPersonalityInventorydidnotseemtobesufficientlysubtletodetectthistest-takingattitude.

TheconceptofrelativelysubtleandobviouskeysforthescalesoftheMinnesotaMultiphasicPersonalityInventorydevelopedtomeettheproblemraisedabove.ItwasfeltthatthedevelopmentofsuchkeysonindividualscalesoftheMMPIwouldyieldmoreinformationandbeofmorepracticalusefulnessthananoverallvalidityscale.

Themainproblemofthecounselorworkingwitharelativelynormalpopulation,asdifferentiatedfromtheclinicalpsychologistworkingwithaseriouslydisturbedgroup,istodistinguishnon-disablingpersonalityfactorsthatcharacterizecounseleeslikeaptitudeandinteresttestresultsdo.Theseriouslydisturbedgroupcanprobablybedistinguishedbyatestconsistingofitemsobviouslyindicatingdeviatepersonalitycharacteristics,sincetheextremedeviatesaremainlyunawareofthesignificanceoftheirsymptoms.Screeningdevicesdevelopedforthemilitaryservicesandforprivateindustrywhichconsistlargelyandobviouslyofdeviateitems,probablyowetheirsuccesstothisfact.

Tohelpthecounselorworkingwithanormalpopulation,however,amuchmoresubtletestisrequiredwhichwillbothdistinguishtheextremedeviates,andalsothecharacteristicsof“normals.”Thesetwoservicesofapersonalitytestwouldappeartobeservedbydevelopingsubtleandobviouskeys.

Todevelopsubtleandobviouskeys,wedividedallitemsoftheMMPIintotwogroups—thoseeasytodetectforindicatingemotionaldisturbance(obvious)and thoserelativelydifficulttodetect(subtle).Usingseveralcriteria,alloftheitemsforeachscaleweresortedintothesetwocategories.Noattemptwasmadetoequalize thenumberofitemsineachgroup,andmore“O”than“S”itemsresulted.Thekeysthusdevelopedwereusedtore-scorethetestsheetsofarepresentativesamplingof

Rationale for Subtle–Obvious

Keys

Method of Developing

S–O Keys


35

100casesoftheoriginalmalenormgroupfortheMMPI,andT-scoresweredevelopedforSandO.

Rawscoretabulationsforthesubtleandobviouskeys(hereafterreferredtoasSandO)indicatedpositiveskewsformostoftheO-itemdistributionsofthenormgroup.Relativelyfewindividualsinthenormalpopulationansweredtheobviousitemsinasignificantdirection.TheSitems,ontheotherhand,weredistributedinarelativelynormalmanner:For139normalmales,onallfivescalestheSitemswereansweredinasignificantdirectionapproximatelytwiceormoreasfrequentlyastheOitem.Inaddition,for65ofthe110itemsintheSkeysforthesefivescales,the“significant”directionforscoringreversedtheexpectationofHathawayandMcKinleywhentheyincludedtheseitemsintheMMPI,whereasonly8outofthe146O-itemsscoredinareversedirectionfromtheoriginalauthors’expectation.

TheattemptwasoriginallymadetodevelopSandOkeysforallscalesoftheMMPI,buttheresultsforSc,Pt,Mf,andHs,werealmostuniformlynegative.Hsconsistedalmostentirelyofobviousitems.PtandScbydefinitionalsoconsistedofextremelydeviateitemswhichwerethereforeobvious,andMfprobablyhastoolowvalidityasascaletoyieldpositiveresults.

IntercorrelationswerecomputedamongtheSandOkeys,includingHswhichisreallyanOscale.Ingeneral,theseintercorrelationsshowedtheOkeyshighlycorre-latedpositivelywitheachother,anduncorrelatedwiththeSkeys;whiletheSkeysshowlowpositivecorrelationswitheachother.Asaroughindexofrelationship,theaverageintercorrelationamongtheOkeysis+.60,theaveragecorrelationoftheOwiththeSkeysis–.15,andtheaverageintercorrelationamongtheSkeys+.21.

TheuniformlyhighnegativecorrelationsthatexistbetweenOminusSscoresandtheKscalestronglysuggesttheappearanceofatest-takingattitudeineachofthefivescales,andacloserelationshipbetweenSresponsesandtheKscore.

Agroupwithhighscoresonthe“Lie”scale(9itemsormore)washigherontheSkeysofallfivescalesthanontheOkeys,andwasalso,onfourofthescales,higheronthe3keysthanwasthelow“Lie”(0and1items)scalegroup.Forthegroupwithlow“Lie”scores,theOscoresforallscaleswereapproximatelyequaltoorhigherthantheSscores.

Individualsofhighability(intelligenceT-scoreabove60,andsomecollegework)haveapproximatelyequalOandSscores,whereasindividualsoflowability(T-scorebelow40,andlessthan9thgradeeducation)havegenerallyhigherOscoresthanS,andhigherOscoresthanthehighabilitygroup.

Correlations Among

S&O Keys and With K

S&O Relationships With Other

Factors


36

TheMultiphasicsofapsychologicallysophisticatedgroupshowedSmuchhigherthanOwhetherthegroupwasgiving“honest”resultsorwasattemptingto“fakegood.”Withthisgroupitappearedtomakelittledifferencewhetherthetestwastaken“honestly”or“fakedgood.”Ineithercase,Oitemsweresuccessfullyavoided,whereasSitemsyieldedaverageandaboveaverageT-scores.VeryfewOitemswereansweredinasignificantdirection.

Generalizingfromaverylimitednumberofcases,thereisapossibilitythatindi-vidualswithoutneuropsychiatricdiagnosesbutwithhighMMPIprofiles(oneormoreT-scoresabove70)aresomewhathigherthanontheSkeysandsomewhatlowerontheOkeysthanagroupwithneuropsychiatricdiagnosesandwithhighMMPIprofiles.

TheSandOkeyswereappliedtotheMMPIanswersheetsofsuccessfulandunsuc-cessfulveteranswhohadtakenschooloron-the-jobtraining.AlltheOkeysinallcasesshowedasignificantlyhigherscorefortheunsuccessfulcomparedwiththesuccessfulgroup,theSkeysindicatedinsignificantlyhigherresultsforthesuccessfulgroup,andthetotalscalesshoweddifferencessomewherebetweentheseresultsoftheOandSkeys,insignificantly(withoneexception)favoringemotionalstabilityinthesuccessfulgroup.

Inmostcounselingsituationswhereworkisdonewitharelativelynormalpopu-lation,itisprobablethatthepresentMMPItotalscalescoreswillfrequentlyfailtodif-ferentiatebetweenthesuccessfulandunsuccessfulbecausethetotalscorerepresentsacompromisebetweentwofairlywelldifferentiatedaspectsofeachscale.ApparentlyelevationontheSkeystendstoindicate,oratleastdoesnotcontraindicate,successinschooloron-the-jobtraining.Conversely,elevationontheOkeysapparentlytendstopredictfailure.ResultsoftotalscalescoresaloneobscurethisdifferenceinfunctionofSandOitems.

Thephrase“incontrolofhimself”isoftenusedtodesignatethepersonabletodirecthisownactivities,toadapttopresentsocialdemands,toplanforthefuture.“Outofcontrol”isatermoftenusedtodescribetheindividualwhoseemsatthemercyofimmediateenvironmentalstimuli.

IntermsofS&Oscores,previousstudieshadindicatedthatthoseindividualswhoseactualsocialadjustment,orpotentialitiesforadjustment,seemedtheleast,tendedtohaveobviousscoreshigherthanthesubtle.Ontheotherhand,themoresuccessfulindividualstendedtohavesubtlescoresequaltoorhigherthantheirobviousscores.

S–O Scores of Successful & Unsuccess-ful Trainees

The Control Factor in

Social Adjustment


37

Thetentativehypothesiswhichwasderivedmaybestatedasfollows:successfuladjustmentinsocietyrequiresknowledgeofsociallyacceptablewaysofbehavior,andthedesireandabilitytoactintheseways.Thesociallyacceptablewaytobehaveonthepersonalitytest,aswellasmoreovertly,seemsgenerallytobetoavoiddeviatebehavior.OntheMMPI,themostdeviateitemsaretheobviousitems,“deviate”becausetheyareseldomansweredinasignificantdirectionbyanormalpopulation.Thesociallysuccessfulpersonmayhavetheabilitytorecognizeandtoavoidmakingscoresonpersonalitytestitemswhichobviouslyindicatemaladjustment,whilethesociallyunsuccessfulpersonmaybeunabletorecognizeortoheedsignsofdeviatebehavioronapersonalitytest.

Successfuladjustmentmayshowitselfinmanydifferentconfigurationsofperson-alitytestfactors.A“control”factormaybepostulatedwhichaffectsthevariousscalesofapersonalitytestindifferentways.

WiththeveryactiveandhelpfulcooperationofDr.Hales,itwaspossiblepartiallytotestthehypothesis.Mostveteransdischargedfromtheservicewithneuropsychia-tricdiagnoseshavenowhadseveralyearsinwhichtoadjusttociviliansociety.Thenatureoftheiradjustmentmaybedichotomized,simply,bysayingthatonegroupisnowhospitalizedinmentalinstitutions,whiletheotherisnot.Iftwosuchgroupscanbematchedinbackground,ananalysisoftheirdifferencesonapersonalitytestmaythrowsomelightonatest“control”factorwhichmayimprovetheaccuracyofprognosisofbreakdown.

Twogroupsofveteranswithdiagnosesindicatingschizophreniawereobtained.Onegroupconsistedof100casesinasinglementalhospital,whiletheothergroup,of52cases,wascomposedofmennotinthehospitalatthetimeofcaseselection.Differ-encesintestresultsarenotmaximumbecauseofoverlapincareselection;certainhospitalizedcaseswereonthevergeofbeingdischarged,whilesomenon-hospitalizedcaseshadbeenandwouldbehospitalized.Educationandageofthetwogroupswerenotsignificantlydifferent.

WiththeexceptionsofK,Hy,Mf,andMa,themeanT-scoresforthehospitalizedgrouparehigherthanforthenon-hospitalized.ThechiefcharacteristicsoftheregularscaleprofileofhospitalizedgrouparethehighelevationsinPtandSc—evidenceofthevalidityofthesescales.Theprofileforthenon-hospitalizedgroupshowsnosuchoutstandingelevations:thelowmeanprofile,combinedwiththefactofnon-hospital-ization,suggeststhepossibleinvalidityofsomeofthepresentpsychiatricdiagnosesofschizophrenia.However,thediagnosesofschizophreniahavebeensubjectinalmostallcasestofromtwotofourpsychiatricexaminations.

Testing the Control

Hypothesis

Control Factor in NP

Hospital-ization


38

ResultsfromtheSandOkeystendtoconfirmtheoriginalhypothesis.Therela-tivelysuccessfulgroups(thenon-hospitalizedhere)hadSscoreshigherthanO,whiletheunsuccessful(thehospitalizedhere)hadOscoresmuchhigherthantheirSscores.OnallfivescaleswhichhaveSandOkeys,thenon-hospitalizedhadhighersubtleT-scoresthanthehospitalized.OntheOkeys,thehospitalizedhadsignificantlyhigherscoresthanthenon-hospitalizedonallscalesexceptforHy-O.

Thesharpestdifferencesbetweenthehospitalizedandnon-hospitalizedgroupswereontheOkeys.IfPtandSc,beingalmostentirely“obvious,”areconsideredtogetherwiththeOkeys,theimpressionisstrengthenedthatitisgettingscoresonobviouslydeviateitemsthatdifferentiatestherelatively“successful”fromrelatively“unsuccessful.”Successfulvocationaltraineesareevenlowerthanthenon-hospital-izedschizophrenicgroupinOscores.

TheremayalsobesignificancetotheamountofgapexistingbetweenOandST-scores.WhetherthisrelationshipisexclusivelyoneofgettinghighOscores,orwhetheritisoneofdynamicrelationshipbetweenSandO,isamootquestion.The“control”explanationwhichpostulatesadynamicrelationshipispreferredherebecausethesubtleitemsapparentlydonotcontribute,ina“normal”population,tothevalidityofthetotalMMPIscalescores.Thatis,thereappearstobeaslighttendencyinthisstudy,aswellasinpreviousones,forsuccessfulgroupsactuallytoobtainsome-whathigherscoresonthesubtleitems,thantheunsuccessful.

Asimplesubtle-obviousindexwasdevelopedtosummarizedifferencesbetweentheSandOT-scoresontheMMPIofasinglecase.AplusoneisgiventoanindividualeachtimehisOscoreistenormoreT-scoresabovehisSscore;andaminusonewhentheOT-scoreisequaltoorlessthanS.ThusthepossiblerangeofscoresforanindividualMMPIprofileisplusfivetominusfive(thereareS-OkeysforonlyfiveoftheMMPIscales).

UsingboththeS–OindexandanScscoreof70andabove,78%ofthehospitalizedcaseswareselected,whileonly40%ofthenon-hospitalizedgroupweresimilarlyselected.ThiscombinationofScwiththeS–Oindexbothincreasedthenumberofhospitalizedcasesselected,andwidenedthedifferencebetweenthehospitalizedandnon-hospitalizedgroupinnumbersofcaseswithsignificantsigns.

Thehypothesispresentedandstudiedherehasbeenthatrecognitionandavoid-anceofbehaviorwhichissociallydeviate,markingoftestitemswhichsubtlyindicatemaladjustment,andbeing“adjusted”or“successful,”tendtogotogether.Similarly,

Conclusions re Control

Factor


39

sensitivitytooravoidanceofunusualbehavior,markingoftestitemswhichindicateobviouslydeviatebehavior,andlackofsuccessinsocietyapparentlytendtogotogether.

Itisthetendencyofsubtleitemstohavenegativediscriminatingpowerwhichsuggestsadynamicrelationshipjustifyinguseoftheterm“control.”Withthesociallyadjustedorsuccessful,apparentlythepersontendstochecktestitemssubtlysymptomaticofemotionaldisturbanceandtoavoidtheobvioussymptoms.

pdf by LJY, March 2020

minnesota multiphasic personality...

Documents