Dana R H, Cantrell J D
University of Arkansas.
J Clin Psychol. 1988 Sep;44(5):760-3. doi: 10.1002/1097-4679(198809)44:5<760::aid-jclp2270440516>3.0.co;2-c.
Reviews, commentary, and recent research on the MCMI are examined. There has been controversy over the impact on research of delayed availability of hand scoring materials, the discrepancies between Millon's diagnostic conceptualizations and DSM-III, and MCMI construction idiosyncrasies. MCMI use for clinical diagnosis continues to be suspect, but clinicians now have an augmented awareness of DSM limitations as a result of this version of the Millon instrument.
对MCMI的综述、评论及近期研究进行了审视。关于手工计分材料延迟提供对研究的影响、米隆的诊断概念与《精神疾病诊断与统计手册第三版》(DSM - III)之间的差异以及MCMI编制的特质一直存在争议。MCMI用于临床诊断仍受到质疑,但由于这一版米隆工具,临床医生现在对DSM的局限性有了更强的认识。