Associations Between Symptom Validity Test Failure and Scores on the MMPI–2–RF Validity and Substantive Scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the association between Symptom Validity Test (SVT) failure and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2 Restructured Form (MMPI–2–RF; Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008), in the Forensic Disability Claimant samples described in the MMPI–2–RF Technical Manual (Tellegen & Ben-Porath, 2008 Tellegen, A. and Ben-Porath, Y. S. 2008. MMPI–2–RF (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2–Restructured Form) technical manual, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. [Google Scholar]a, 2008b). SVTs used included the Word Memory Test (Green, 2003 Green, P. 2003. Green's Word Memory Test for Windows: User's manual, Edmonton, Alberta, , Canada: Green's Publishing. [Google Scholar]), the Computerized Assessment of Response Bias (Allen, Conder, Green, & Cox, 1997 Allen, L., Conder, R. L., Green, P. and Cox, D. R. 1997. CARB’ 97 manual for the Computerized Assessment of Response Bias, Durham, NC: CogniSyst. [Google Scholar]), the Medical Symptom Validity Test (Green, 2004 Green, P. 2004. Green's Medical Symptom Validity Test (MSVT): User's manual, Edmonton, Alberta, , Canada: Green's Publishing. [Google Scholar]), and the Test of Memory Malingering (Tombaugh, 1996 Tombaugh, T. N. 1996. Test of Memory Malingering, Toronto, Ontario, , Canada: MultiHealth Systems. [Google Scholar]). SVT failure was associated with significant elevations throughout the MMPI–2–RF overreporting validity scales and substantive scales. Pairwise contrasts between groups failing 0 and 3 SVTs revealed predominantly large effect sizes for the overreporting validity scales (d = 0.78–1.11), and many of the substantive scales, including the Cognitive Complaints (COG) scale. Results of this study demonstrate an association between SVT performance and elevated scores on the MMPI–2–RF. These results suggest that exaggeration of cognitive symptoms as demonstrated by SVT failure is also associated with overreported emotional, somatic, and neurocognitive complaints on the MMPI–2–RF.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".