Nelson Nathaniel W, Parsons Thomas D, Grote Christopher L, Smith Clifford A, Sisung James R
Rush University Medical Center, Department of Psychology, Chicago, IL, USA.
J Clin Exp Neuropsychol. 2006 Jan;28(1):1-12. doi: 10.1080/13803390490919272.
A number of recent studies have supported the use of the MMPI-2 Fake Bad Scale (FBS) as a measure of negative response bias, the scale at times demonstrating greater sensitivity to negative response bias than other MMPI-2 validity scales. However, clinicians may not always have access to True FBS (T-FBS) scores, such as when True-False answer sheets are unavailable or published research studies do not report FBS raw scores. Under these conditions, Larrabee (2003a) suggests a linear regression formula that provides estimated FBS (E-FBS) scores derived from weighted validity and clinical T-Scores. The present study intended to validate this regression formula of MMPI-2 E-FBS scores and demonstrate its specificity in a sample of non-litigating, clinically referred, medically intractable epilepsy patients. We predicted that the E-FBS scores would correlate highly (>.70) with the T-FBS scores, that the E-FBS would show comparable correlations with MMPI-2 validity and clinical scales relative to the T-FBS, and that the E-FBS would show an adequate ability to match T-FBS scores using a variety of previously suggested T-FBS raw score cutoffs. Overall, E-FBS scores correlated very highly with T-FBS scores (r = .78, p < .0001), though correlations were especially high for women (r = .85, p < .0001) compared to men (r = .62, p < .001). Thirty-one of 32 (96.9%) comparisons made between E-FBS/T-FBS correlates with other MMPI-2 scales were nonsignificant. When matching to T-FBS "high" and "low" scores, the E-FBS scores demonstrated the highest hit rate (92.5%) through use of Lees-Haley's (1992) revised cutoffs for men and women. These same cutoffs resulted in excellent overall specificity for both the T-FBS scores (92.5%) and E-FBS scores (90.6%). The authors conclude that the E-FBS represents an adequate estimate of T-FBS scores in the current epilepsy sample. Use of E-FBS scores may be especially useful when clinicians conduct the MMPI-2 short form, which does not include all of the 43 FBS items but does include enough items to compute each of the validity and clinical T-Scores. Future studies should examine E-FBS sensitivity in compensation-seekers with incomplete effort.
近期的一些研究支持将明尼苏达多项人格测验第二版假坏量表（FBS）用作测量消极反应偏差的工具，该量表有时对消极反应偏差的敏感度高于明尼苏达多项人格测验第二版的其他效度量表。然而，临床医生并非总能获取真实FBS（T-FBS）分数，比如在是非题答卷不可得或已发表的研究报告未报告FBS原始分数的情况下。在这些条件下，拉腊比（2003a）提出了一个线性回归公式，可提供从加权效度和临床T分数得出的估计FBS（E-FBS）分数。本研究旨在验证明尼苏达多项人格测验第二版E-FBS分数的这个回归公式，并在一组非诉讼、临床转诊、患有药物难治性癫痫的患者样本中证明其特异性。我们预测E-FBS分数将与T-FBS分数高度相关（>.70），E-FBS与明尼苏达多项人格测验第二版效度和临床量表的相关性相对于T-FBS将具有可比性，并且E-FBS使用各种先前建议的T-FBS原始分数临界值将表现出足够的能力来匹配T-FBS分数。总体而言，E-FBS分数与T-FBS分数高度相关（r = .78，p < .0001），不过与男性（r = .62，p < .001）相比，女性的相关性尤其高（r = .85，p < .0001）。在E-FBS/T-FBS与明尼苏达多项人格测验第二版其他量表的相关性比较中，32次比较中有31次（96.9%）无显著差异。当与T-FBS“高”分和“低”分匹配时，通过使用利斯 - 黑利（1992）针对男性和女性修订的临界值，E-FBS分数显示出最高的命中率（92.5%）。这些相同的临界值使得T-FBS分数（92.5%）和E-FBS分数（90.6%）都具有出色的总体特异性。作者得出结论，在当前癫痫样本中，E-FBS是对T-FBS分数的充分估计。当临床医生进行明尼苏达多项人格测验第二版简式时，使用E-FBS分数可能特别有用，该简式不包括全部43个FBS项目，但包含足够的项目来计算每个效度和临床T分数。未来的研究应考察E-FBS在努力不完整的索赔者中的敏感度。
