Another Look at The Mini-Mult
Another Look at The Mini-Mult
Another Look at The Mini-Mult
ScholarWorks at WMU
8-1972
Recommended Citation
Umansky, Dianne S., "Another Look at the Mini-Mult" (1972). Masters Theses. 2831.
https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/masters_theses/2831
ty
Dianne S. Umansky
A Thesis
Submitted to the
Faculty of The Graduate College
in partial fulfillment
of the
Degree of Master of Arts
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ACKNOVi LEDGEMENTS
and Mr. John Gallagher, who have given much needed help.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
INFORMATION TO USERS
This dissertation was produced fro m a m icrofilm copy o f the original docum ent.
W hile the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this
document have been used, the q u ality is heavily dependent upon the quality of
the original subm itted.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part o f the material being
p h o to g ra p h e d the photographer follo w ed a d efin ite m ethod in
"sectioning" the material. It is custom ary to begin photoing at the
upper le ft hand corner o f a large sheet and to continue photoing from
left to right in equal sections w ith a small overlap. If necessary,
sectioning is continued again - beginning below the firs t row and
continuing on until com plete.
University Microfilms
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
MASTERS THESIS M-3657
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
PLEASE NOTE:
Filmed as received.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
List of tables ii
Introduction 1
Method 7
Results 9
Tables 13
Figure: Mean T Scores 20
Discussion 21
Appendix . 29
References 31
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
LIST OF TABLES
Table Fa^e
1 Froduct-moment Correlations between
Comparable Scales for Three Groups:
Total, Male, and Female 13
2 Mean and Standard Deviations of the
Scale Scores for the Three Groups:
Total, Kale, and Female 14
ii
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
INTRODUCTION
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
2
MMFI.
and Ma. Correlations between the two forms for the dif
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
The Mini-Mult and the MMPI were administered to each
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
k
reduction, which he followed in developing the Mini-
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
5
the MMFI and the Mini-Mult extracted from these MMPI
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Also, this study employed an actuarial method for in
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
METHOD
representative sample.
Sc, and Ma) were obtained for the standard MMFI and the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
8
score of 7 0 .
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
RESULTS
level.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
10
Hs,. D, Pt, and Ma, Scales F and Hs were the only scales
where the Mini-Mult was invalid and the MMPI was valid.
cases where the MMPI was valid and the Mini-Mult was not.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
files as invalid when scale L was equal to or above
of the 50, the MMFI was valid but the Mini-Mult was not.
the top three is 75% for the total group, 7%% for males,
and 72% for the female group.. The probability that the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
12
on both tests*
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
13
TAELE 1
.75 .77 .6 6
♦♦not sig
nificant
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE 2
L 4.02 2.2? 4-02 2..17 3.82 2-36 4.12 2-44 4.22 2-18 3.92 1.89
F 10.68 7*31 8.82 4.96 11-88 8-44 9.72 5.12 9.46 5-81 8.26 4.41
K 11.87 5-08 11.07 4.40 11-74 5.54 11.44 4.80 12.00 4.63 10.70 3.96
CM
CM
CM
HS 6.30 17*42 21.10
0
18.56 21.65 3.59 5.90 3-41 19.70 6.53 3-71
.
D 29*88 7.42 29.33 5.87 26.78 6.99 28.46 5.48 32.98 6 .5 6 30.20 6-18
Hy 28.18 6.42 28.29 4.15 26.45 6.24 27.46 5*68 29.92 6.18 28.58 4.25
Pd 29.18 6 .0 6 28.21 5.12 29.38 6.09 28.58 5.35 28.98 6.01 27-39 6.25
Pa 14.06 4.45 14.93 4.15 13.62 4.99 14.24 4.43 14.70 4.07 15.62 3-76
Pt 36.25 7*64 34.57 7.14 34.48 8-05 33-72 7.41 38.02 6.83 35.42 6.82
So 38.05 10.B9 37.47 8.79 37.10 12.55 37.86 9.30 39.00 8.98 36.96 8-21
Ma 20.29 4.47 20.94 3.29 21.22 4.39 20.54 4-16 1 9 .3 6 4.38 20.94 3.62
TABLE 3
F 1*86 2 .1 6 1*20
Hs 3.09 3*68 2 *5 0
1*34
O
Hy .11
t
Pt 1*68 .76 2 .6 0
Ma .6 5 *68 1.58
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
16
TABLE 4
df = 99 df = 49 df = 49
* p < .01 * p < .01 * p < .01
**p<.05 **p<.05 **p<.05
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE 5
1 i*6 15 lb 25
2 12 20 23 ^5
3 8 2** 22 ±6
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
18
TABLE 6
1 2 3 4 So:
1 26 8 5 11
2 5 13 10 22
3 k 12 10 2k
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
19
TABLE ?
1 2 3 4 85re
1 20 7 9 14
2 7 7 13 23
3 4 12 12 22
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
20
90
80
T Scores
70
60
Mean
50 MMPI
MM
Hs
80
70
T Scores
6o
50
Mean
^0 MMFI
MM
Sc Ma
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
DISCUSSION
21
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
22
this group was not significant and the Ey scale was sig
only two cases, on scale L for the male group and scale
the MMPI for all scales. Hartman obtained only one case,
tion was higher for the Mini-Mult than for the MMPI.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
23
son. He attributed the differences for scales P and
the only similarity found was for the P scale. For this
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
and Pa reflect a tendency for the Mini-Mult to overesti
mate the extreme scores for that scale; and the differ
scale D, which was not found for the total group, was
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
25
treme scores. A significant mean difference was found
for scale D in both male and female groups but not in the
tion, their study found that, for the total group, the
the male group and 18% for the female group. Hevaluat-
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
26
or above a T score of 60, or scale P was equal to or
of the profiles for the male group and 18# of the pro
that the top ranked score would remain among the top
lower for the present study, being 75# for the total
score would fall outside the three point code 45# and
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
27
for the males, and 20% for the females, had the same
15% of the cases for the total group, lk% for the male
group, and 16^ for the female group. Also, only 12%
of the profile pairs for the total group, 18% for the
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
flcant differences between the means of comparable scales
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
APPENDIX A
29
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
APPENDIX A
30
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
REFERENCES
31
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.