Ward L C
J Pers Assess. 1986 Spring;50(1):73-9. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5001_9.
This article examines the methodology from recent item subtlety research with the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI). The Christian, Burkhart, and Gynther (1978) ratings, used in this research, define item subtlety as the perceived degree of psychopathology associated with individual items rather than specifying subtlety in relation to qualities characteristic of individual scales. Consequently, the ratings often violate commonsense notions of subtlety, and the results of research with the ratings are difficult to interpret. Studies with the ratings also contain procedural defects which limit generality. It is recommended that future investigators give greater consideration to the operational definition of item subtlety, to the intended applications of the MMPI, and to item properties other than simple correlations with criteria that can enhance the predictive and discriminative powers of MMPI scales.
本文探讨了近期明尼苏达多相人格量表(MMPI)项目微妙性研究的方法。本研究中使用的克里斯蒂安、伯克哈特和金瑟(1978年)的评分,将项目微妙性定义为与单个项目相关的心理病理学感知程度,而不是根据单个量表的特征来具体说明微妙性。因此,这些评分常常违背微妙性的常识概念,并且使用这些评分进行研究的结果难以解释。使用这些评分的研究还存在程序缺陷,限制了普遍性。建议未来的研究者更多地考虑项目微妙性的操作定义、MMPI的预期应用,以及除了与标准的简单相关性之外的项目属性,这些属性可以增强MMPI量表的预测和区分能力。