Department of Psychology, The University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, MS, USA.
Assessment. 2011 Mar;18(1):63-6. doi: 10.1177/1073191110381718. Epub 2010 Sep 9.
Although the use of computerized testing in psychopathology assessment has increased in recent years, limited research has examined the impact of this format in terms of potential differences in test validity rates. The current study explores potential differences in the rates of valid and invalid Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) protocols between computerized and paper-and-pencil administrations. Participants were 387 undergraduate students (157 men and 230 women) from a Midwestern university who completed either a computerized version or a paper-and-pencil version of the MMPI-2. Chi-square analyses revealed some important differences between administration modalities by gender. Overall, results indicated that although no differences existed in the computerized version, men were more likely to invalidate the paper-and-pencil version. Furthermore, although less likely overall to produce invalid MMPI-2 results, women were more likely to invalidate the paper-and-pencil version via random responding compared with the computerized version. Limitations and future directions are discussed.
尽管近年来在心理病理学评估中使用计算机化测试有所增加，但关于这种格式在测试有效性率方面的潜在差异的研究有限。本研究探讨了计算机化和纸笔版明尼苏达多相人格问卷-2（MMPI-2）测试在有效和无效协议率方面的潜在差异。参与者是来自中西部一所大学的 387 名本科生（157 名男性和 230 名女性），他们完成了 MMPI-2 的计算机化版本或纸笔版本。卡方分析显示，不同的管理模式在性别上存在一些重要差异。总的来说，结果表明，尽管计算机化版本没有差异，但男性更有可能使纸笔版本无效。此外，尽管总体上产生无效的 MMPI-2 结果的可能性较小，但与计算机化版本相比，女性更有可能通过随机反应使纸笔版本无效。讨论了限制因素和未来方向。
