MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050788267 · doi:10.1177/1073191107305570

Psychometric and Structural Analysis of the MMPI-2 Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) Facet Subscales

2007· article· en· W2050788267 on OpenAlexaff
Lena C. Quilty, R. Michael Bagby

Bibliographic record

VenueAssessment · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPersonality Disorders and Psychopathology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyFacet (psychology)Minnesota Multiphasic Personality InventoryPsychopathologyPersonalityClinical psychologyPsychometricsPsychopathyBig Five personality traitsSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Personality Psychopathology Five (PSY-5) is a model of personality psychopathology assessed in adult populations with a set of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) scales. The authors examine the reliability and validity of recently developed lower-order facet subscales for each of these five domains, with an emphasis on structural invariance, using both confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and exploratory factor analysis (EFA). MMPI-2 protocols completed by psychiatric patients (N = 693) served as the data source. The reliability and discriminant validity of the subscales were mostly inadequate. Results from the CFAs reveal universally poor statistical fits. Subsequent EFAs extracted alternate latent structures, which also demonstrate mostly inadequate reliability and validity. Overall, results suggest that the item pool that forms the MMPI-2 PSY-5 domain scales may not be able to sustain meaningful facet subscales.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.357 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAssessmentSame topicPersonality Disorders and PsychopathologyFrench-language works237,207