NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Showing all 4 results Save | Export
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Pinsoneault, Terry B. – Computers in Human Behavior, 1996
Computer-assisted and paper-and-pencil-administered formats for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventories were investigated. Subjects were 32 master's and doctoral-level counseling students. Findings indicated that the two formats were comparable and that students preferred the computer-assisted format. (AEF)
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Computer Assisted Testing, Graduate Students, Higher Education
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Voyce, Colleen D.; Jackson, Douglas N. – Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1977
A model designed to account for major factors on personality questionnaires is proposed and evaluated using the Differential Personality Inventory. Two respondent processes are postulated: sensitivity to the underlying desirability of items, and threshold for responding desirably. (Author/JKS)
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Factor Analysis, Higher Education, Item Analysis
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Lilienfeld, Scott O. – Psychological Assessment, 1996
In 3 studies involving a total of 305 undergraduates, the Antisocial Practices (ASP) scale of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) exhibited convergent and discriminant validity with other measures of personality. The ASP and the Psychopathic Deviant scale appear to measure different facets of psychopathy. (SLD)
Descriptors: Antisocial Behavior, Behavior Patterns, Comparative Analysis, Construct Validity
Peer reviewed Peer reviewed
Gaston, Michele F.; And Others – Assessment, 1994
Comparability of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) and the MMPI-2 was explored by examining T-score means, profile configurations, score distribution, and rank-order correlations on validity scales for 84 undergraduates. Equivalency of the two forms was generally supported. (SLD)
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Correlation, Higher Education, Personality Assessment