Examining the impact of different factors influencing the validity of an individual’s self-report during a psychological assessment is important in ensuring valid clinical findings and useful recommendations. These factors are often referred to as response biases. There are multiple types of response bias that can negatively influence the validity of self-reports in clinical assessment contexts. Specifically, individuals undergoing an assessment can be impacted by non-contentbased response bias, overreporting, and underreporting of psychological impairment and/or distress. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) instruments are amongst the leading tools within professional psychology used to identify response bias. The most recent iteration, the MMPI-3, incorporates the latest updates and normative comparison data into validity scales that are designed to capture the different domains of response bias. The current study sought to explore and identify different clinical and contextual factors that influence response bias amongst different groups of individuals involved in a forensic system using the MMPI-3. The results suggest that both situational context as well as psychological impairment and distress may play roles in different levels and types of response bias between different groups of people within a forensic system. This study serves as an important first step in better identifying the unique threats to assessment validity amongst different individuals involved in forensic systems.
","abstract_html":"<p>Examining the impact of different factors influencing the validity of an individual’s self-report during a psychological assessment is important in ensuring valid clinical findings and useful recommendations. These factors are often referred to as response biases. There are multiple types of response bias that can negatively influence the validity of self-reports in clinical assessment contexts. Specifically, individuals undergoing an assessment can be impacted by non-contentbased response bias, overreporting, and underreporting of psychological impairment and/or distress. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) instruments are amongst the leading tools within professional psychology used to identify response bias. The most recent iteration, the MMPI-3, incorporates the latest updates and normative comparison data into validity scales that are designed to capture the different domains of response bias. The current study sought to explore and identify different clinical and contextual factors that influence response bias amongst different groups of individuals involved in a forensic system using the MMPI-3. The results suggest that both situational context as well as psychological impairment and distress may play roles in different levels and types of response bias between different groups of people within a forensic system. This study serves as an important first step in better identifying the unique threats to assessment validity amongst different individuals involved in forensic systems.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Steinert, Steven W."],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)","degree_level":"Open Access Dissertation","degree_discipline":"Psychology","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Eamonn P. Arble, PhD","Tamara Loverich, PhD","Chong Man Chow, PhD"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2022,"date_issued":"2022-01-01T08:00:00Z","date_published":"2022-01-01T08:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:17:47Z","subjects":["Clinical Psychology"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://commons.emich.edu/theses/1157","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Eamonn P. Arble, PhD","Tamara Loverich, PhD","Chong Man Chow, PhD"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Steinert, Steven W."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2022-09-21T07:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Psychology"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Open Access Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Clinical Psychology"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://commons.emich.edu/theses/1157"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Examining the impact of different factors influencing the validity of an individual’s self-report during a psychological assessment is important in ensuring valid clinical findings and useful recommendations. These factors are often referred to as response biases. There are multiple types of response bias that can negatively influence the validity of self-reports in clinical assessment contexts. Specifically, individuals undergoing an assessment can be impacted by non-contentbased response bias, overreporting, and underreporting of psychological impairment and/or distress. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) instruments are amongst the leading tools within professional psychology used to identify response bias. The most recent iteration, the MMPI-3, incorporates the latest updates and normative comparison data into validity scales that are designed to capture the different domains of response bias. The current study sought to explore and identify different clinical and contextual factors that influence response bias amongst different groups of individuals involved in a forensic system using the MMPI-3. The results suggest that both situational context as well as psychological impairment and distress may play roles in different levels and types of response bias between different groups of people within a forensic system. This study serves as an important first step in better identifying the unique threats to assessment validity amongst different individuals involved in forensic systems.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["A comparison of forensic populations using the validity scales on the MMPI-3"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Eamonn P. Arble, PhD","Tamara Loverich, PhD","Chong Man Chow, PhD"],"dc:creator":["Steinert, Steven W."],"dc:date.available":["2022-09-21T07:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["Examining the impact of different factors influencing the validity of an individual’s self-report during a psychological assessment is important in ensuring valid clinical findings and useful recommendations. These factors are often referred to as response biases. There are multiple types of response bias that can negatively influence the validity of self-reports in clinical assessment contexts. Specifically, individuals undergoing an assessment can be impacted by non-contentbased response bias, overreporting, and underreporting of psychological impairment and/or distress. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) instruments are amongst the leading tools within professional psychology used to identify response bias. The most recent iteration, the MMPI-3, incorporates the latest updates and normative comparison data into validity scales that are designed to capture the different domains of response bias. The current study sought to explore and identify different clinical and contextual factors that influence response bias amongst different groups of individuals involved in a forensic system using the MMPI-3. The results suggest that both situational context as well as psychological impairment and distress may play roles in different levels and types of response bias between different groups of people within a forensic system. This study serves as an important first step in better identifying the unique threats to assessment validity amongst different individuals involved in forensic systems.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://commons.emich.edu/theses/1157"],"dc:subject":["Clinical Psychology"],"dc:title":["A comparison of forensic populations using the validity scales on the MMPI-3"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Psychology"],"thesis:degree_level":["Open Access Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:17:47Z"}