Tellegen Auke, Ben-Porath Yossef S, Sellbom Martin, Arbisi Paul A, McNulty John L, Graham John R
Department of Psychology, Elliott Hall, University of Minnesota, 75 East River Road, Minneapolis, 55455, USA.
J Pers Assess. 2006 Oct;87(2):148-71. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa8702_04.
The reviews by Rogers, Sewell, Harrison, and Jordan (2006/this issue), and by Nichols (2006/this issue) offer markedly contrasting appraisals of the MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales introduced by Tellegen et al. (2003). The one common feature is that both reviews draw on the same atypical MMPI-2 (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham, Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989) data set for their empirical analyses, with results warranting critical scrutiny. Rogers et al.'s critique provides an evaluation of the RC Scales from the perspective of Jackson's (1970) method of test development. One significant issue in Rogers et al.'s review concerns social desirability, prompting us to clarify our own views on this topic. We also highlight and discuss problems associated with Rogers et al.'s use of the unrepresentative data set. Nichols's polemical critique neglects empirical and theoretical support for demoralization as a central construct and misconstrues as "construct drift" the purposeful process of developing the RC scales. Nichols's criticisms and proposals overlook requirements for assessing syndromes and for construct validation and even rudiments of scale development. Our reply incorporates evidence, including new findings, refuting his criticisms and confirming that demoralization is a pervasive MMPI dimension, that the RC Scales capture the major distinctive features of the original Clinical Scales, and that they generate correspondingly meaningful validity patterns.
罗杰斯、休厄尔、哈里森和乔丹（2006年/本期）以及尼科尔斯（2006年/本期）对泰勒根等人（2003年）推出的明尼苏达多相人格测验第二版（MMPI - 2）重构临床（RC）量表给出了截然不同的评价。一个共同特点是，两篇综述在实证分析中都采用了相同的非典型MMPI - 2（布彻、达尔斯特伦、格雷厄姆、泰勒根和凯默，1989年）数据集，其结果值得严格审视。罗杰斯等人的批评从杰克逊（1970年）的测验编制方法角度对RC量表进行了评估。罗杰斯等人综述中的一个重要问题涉及社会赞许性，这促使我们阐明自己对该主题的看法。我们还强调并讨论了与罗杰斯等人使用不具代表性的数据集相关的问题。尼科尔斯的批判性评论忽视了将士气低落作为核心构念的实证和理论支持，并且将RC量表有目的的编制过程误解为“构念漂移”。尼科尔斯的批评和提议忽视了评估综合征、构念效度验证以及量表编制基础等方面的要求。我们的回应纳入了证据，包括新发现，反驳了他的批评，并证实士气低落是MMPI中一个普遍存在的维度，RC量表捕捉到了原始临床量表的主要显著特征，并且它们产生了相应有意义的效度模式。
