Burkhart B R, Christian W L, Gynther M D
J Pers Assess. 1978 Feb;42(1):76-80. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4201_11.
The X-zero distinction has been used as the operational definition of MMPI item subtlety in previous research. A consistent finding has been that the X items, which are obvious in terms of pathological content, can be faked whereas the more subtle zero items cannot be faked. The present study examined the relationship between instructional sets and endorsement patterns, using a more refined, comprehensive measure of item subtlety. Sixty (30 male, 30 female) subjects completed two MMPI protocols, one under a standard instructional set and the other under either a fake-good or fake-bad response set. Order of administration and sex were counterbalanced. In general, the findings for the sublte-obvious dimension paralleled the previous findings with the X-zero distinction. Endorsement of obvious items was a direct function of instructional set, whereas endorsement of sublte items was inversely related to instructional set. Because subtle items did not appear to measure the constructs for which they had been originally intended, other uses for subtle items were discussed.
在以往研究中，X 零区分已被用作明尼苏达多相人格调查表（MMPI）项目微妙性的操作性定义。一个一致的发现是，在病理内容方面明显的 X 项目可能会被伪装，而更微妙的零项目则无法被伪装。本研究使用更精细、全面的项目微妙性测量方法，考察了指导语集与认可模式之间的关系。60 名（30 名男性，30 名女性）受试者完成了两份 MMPI 问卷，一份在标准指导语集下完成，另一份在装好或装坏反应集下完成。施测顺序和性别进行了平衡处理。总体而言，微妙-明显维度的研究结果与先前 X 零区分的研究结果相似。明显项目的认可情况是指导语集的直接函数，而微妙项目的认可情况与指导语集呈负相关。由于微妙项目似乎并未测量其最初 intended 的结构，因此讨论了微妙项目的其他用途。 （注：原文中“intended”后似乎少了个单词，可能影响理解，但按要求未添加解释。）
