Association Between the MMPI-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) and Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction Among Non-Head Injury Disability Claimants
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current study examined the over-reporting Validity Scales of the MMPI-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF; Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2008/2011) in relation to the Slick, Sherman, and Iverson (1999) criteria for the diagnosis of Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction in a sample of 916 consecutive non-head injury disability claimants. The classification of Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction was based on scores from several cognitive symptom validity tests and response bias indicators built into traditional neuropsychological tests. Higher scores on MMPI-2-RF Validity Scales, particularly the Response Bias Scale (Gervais, Ben-Porath, Wygant, & Green, 2007), were associated with probable and definite Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction. The MMPI-2-RF's Validity Scales classification accuracy of Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction improved when multiple scales were interpreted. Additionally, higher scores on MMPI-2-RF substantive scales measuring distress, internalizing dysfunction, thought dysfunction, and social avoidance were associated with probable and definite Malingered Neurocognitive Dysfunction. Implications for clinical practice and future directions are noted.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it