Adult Psychopathology Paper

Psychological assessments can be very useful diagnostic and clinical tools when they are used properly and can simplify unclear information, elicit previously unavailable data, and add objectivity, validity, and reliability to interactions and records of clients. In forensic settings, where impaired populations are extremely common, the three most widely used types of multiscale inventories, or objective tests, used to assess adult psychopathology include: the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2), the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI), and the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI-III). All three of these assessments evaluate different aspects of an individual’s functioning and/or personality based on how they respond.
The MMPI-2 is a well-validated multiscale inventory consisting of 567 true-false questions that are organized into overlapping scales.
This assessment can be used with an array of inpatient and outpatient clients, however it is important that these individuals are screened to have at least an 8th grade reading level prior to completing the assessment and should also have an adequate level of concentration, in order to ensure they are able to complete the lengthy assessment. One of the benefits of this assessment is its ability to evaluate response styles in cases where the clinician may have concerns about malingering, defensiveness, lying, etc. Aside from screening for response styles, the MMPI-2 also offers clinical descriptions based on the individual’s code-type, which is comprised from a combination of the individuals most elevated
scales. On the other hand, the PAI is much shorter than the MMPI-2 consisting of 344 items.
Additionally, the PAI has other advantages over the MMPI-2 such as allowing for four different responses, versus strictly being able to answer true and false. The PAI also offers items that are more easily comprehensible, requiring only a 4th grade reading level and is far less complicated to interpret than the MMPI-2, which may lead to more consistent interpretations among mental health professionals. However, the PAI assesses useful patterns of psychopathology related to the DSM-IV diagnoses, which may be problematic since clinicians now use the DSM-V, as well as its failure to account for inclusion and exclusion
criteria. The MCMI-III is the shortest of all three assessments and attempts to evaluate Axis 1 clinical syndromes and Axis II personality disorders, while also evaluating response styles with only 175 true or false items. Unfortunately, this assessment lacks sufficient construct validity to be used in forensic settings. The MCMI-III also cannot be used to make diagnoses as the test often generates errors in nearly 80% of diagnosed cases. However, many clinicians still use the MCMI-III due to its brevity and simplistic administration. Overall, mental health professionals using objective assessments should remain cognizant of the limitations of the various assessments. It is also important to keep in mind that assessment methods must be empirically testable with a known error rate. Additionally, it is important that mental health professionals are well versed in the testing instruments they are administering or interpreting to draw appropriate and suitable interpretations. Lastly, clinicians should not ever attempt to make direct connections between test interpretations and specific diagnoses and/or legal understandings/capabilities.