The Effect of Response Bias on the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID–5)

References

• Al-Dajani, N., Gralnick, T. M., & Bagby, R. M. (in press). A psychometric review of the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID–5): Current status and future directions. Journal of Personality Assessment.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
   Google Scholar
• American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• American Psychiatric Association, DSM–5 Development. (2013). Personality trait facet and domain scoring: The Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID–5)—Adult. Retrieved from http://www.psychiatry.org/practice/dsm/dsm5/online-assessment-measures#Personality
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M., Ayearst, L. Quilty, L. C., Chmielewski, M., & Bagby, R. M. (2015). Associations between DSM–5 Section III personality traits and the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2–Restructured Form (MMPI–2–RF) scales in a psychiatric patient sample. Psychological Assessment, 27, 801–815.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M., Bagby, R. M., Quilty, L. C., Veltri, C. O. C., Markon, K. E., & Krueger, R. F. (2013). On the convergence between PSY–5 domains and PID–5 domains and facets: Implications for assessment of DSM–5 personality traits. Assessment, 20, 286–294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M., Wygant, D. B., Salekin, R. T., & Krueger, R. F. (2014). Examining the associations between DSM–5 Section III antisocial personality disorder traits and psychopathy in community and university samples. Journal of Personality Disorders, 28, 675–697.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson, J., Snider, S., Sellbom, M., Krueger, R., & Hopwood, C. (2014). A comparison of the DSM–5 Section II and Section III personality disorder structures. Psychiatry Research, 216, 363–372. doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2014.01.007
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baer, R. A., & Miller, J. (2002). Underreporting of psychopathology on the MMPI–2: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Assessment, 14(1), 16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagby, R. M. (Ed.). (2013). Special issue on the Personality Inventory for DSM–5. Assessment, 20, 267–268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagby, R. M., & Marshall, M. B. (2003). Positive impression management and its influence on the Revised NEO Personality Inventory: A comparison of analog and differential prevalence group designs. Psychological Assessment, 15, 333–339.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bagby, R. M., & Marshall, M. B. (2004). Assessing underreporting response bias on the MMPI–2. Assessment, 11, 115–126.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2012). Interpreting the MMPI–2–RF. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Tellegen, A. (2011). MMPI–2–RF manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. (Original work published 2008)
   Google Scholar
• Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Tellegen, A. (2014, April). An introduction to the MMPI–2–RF (Restructured form). Presentation at the MMPI–2, MMPI–2–RF, MMPI–A Workshops and Symposium, Scottsdale, AZ.
   Google Scholar
• Burchett, D. L., & Bagby, R. M. (2014). Multimethod assessment of response distortion: Integrating data from interviews, collateral records, and standardized assessment tools. In C. J. Hopwood & R. F. Bornstein (Eds.), Multimethod clinical assessment (pp. 345–378). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Burchett, D. L., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2010). The impact of overreporting on MMPI–2–RF substantive scale score validity. Assessment, 17, 497–516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Dhillon, S., & Bagby, R. M. (2015, August). The retest reliability of the Personality Inventory for DSM–5. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, ON, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Edwards, A. L. (1957). Social desirability and the probability of endorsement of items in the interpersonal check list. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 55, 394–396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• First, M. B. (2005). Clinical utility: A prerequisite for the adoption of a dimensional approach in DSM. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 114, 560.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forbey, J. D., & Lee, T. T. C. (2011). An exploration of the impact of invalid MMPI–2 protocols on collateral self-report measure scores. Journal of Personality Assessment, 93, 556–565.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forbey, J. D., Lee, T. T. C., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Arbisi, P. A., & Gartland, D. (2013). Associations between MMPI–2–RF validity scale scores and extra-test measures of personality and psychopathology. Assessment, 20, 448–461.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goodwin, B. E., Sellbom, M., & Arbisi, P. A. (2013). Posttraumatic stress disorder in veterans: The utility of the MMPI–2–RF validity scales in detecting overreported symptoms. Psychological Assessment, 25, 671.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hathaway, S. R., & McKinley, J. C. (1943). Manual for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. New York, NY: Psychological Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Hopwood, C. J., Schade, N., Krueger, R. F., Wright, A. G. C., & Markon, K. E. (2013). Connecting DSM–5 personality traits and pathological beliefs: Toward a unifying model. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 35, 162–172.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopwood, C. J., & Sellbom, M. S. (2013). Implications of DSM–5 personality traits for forensic psychology. Psychological Injury and the Law, 6, 314–323.
   Google Scholar
• Hopwood, C. J., Wright, A. G. C., Krueger, R. F., Schade, N., Markon, K. E., & Morey, L. C. (2013). DSM–5 pathological personality traits and the Personality Assessment Inventory. Assessment, 20, 269–285.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jackson, D. N., & Messick, S. (1962). Response styles on the MMPI: Comparisons of clinical and normative samples. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 65, 285–299.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krueger, R. F., Derringer, J., Markon, K. E., Watson, D., & Skodol, A. E. (2012). Initial construction of a maladaptive personality trait model and inventory for DSM–5. Psychological Medicine, 25, 1879–1890.
   Google Scholar
• Krueger, R. F., Derringer, J., Markon, K. E., Watson, D., & Skodol, A. E. (2013). The Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID–5)–Adult (Full version). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
   Google Scholar
• Krueger, R. F., Hopwood, C. J., Wright, A. G. C., & Markon, K. E. (2014). DSM–5 and the path toward empirically based and clinically useful conceptualization of personality and psychopathology. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 21, 245–261.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krueger, R. F., & Markon, K. E. (2014). The role of the DSM–5 personality trait model in moving toward a quantitative and empirically based approach to classifying personality and psychopathology. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 477–501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markon, K. E., Quilty, L. C., Bagby, R. M., & Krueger, R. F. (2013). The development and psychometric properties of an informant-report form of the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 (PID–5). Assessment, 20, 370–383.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (1983). Social desirability scales: More substance than style. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 51, 882–888.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGrath, R. E., Mitchell, M., Kim, B. H., & Hough, L. (2010). Evidence for response bias as a source of error variance in applied assessment. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 450–470.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Millon, T., Millon, C., Davis, R., & Grossman, S. (2009). Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory–III manual (4th ed.). Minneapolis, MN: Pearson Education.
   Google Scholar
• Morey, L. C. (2007). The Personality Assessment Inventory: Professional manual (2nd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
   Google Scholar
• Morey, L. C. (2012). Detection of response bias in applied assessment: Comment on McGrath et al. (2010). Psychological Injury and the Law, 5, 153–161.
   Google Scholar
• Paris, J. (2014). Modernity and narcissistic personality disorder. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 5, 220–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quilty, L. C., Ayearst, L., Chmielewski, M., Pollock, B. G., & Bagby, R. M. (2013). The psychometric properties of the Personality Inventory for DSM–5 in an APA DSM–5 field trial sample. Assessment, 20, 362–369.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogers, R., & Bender, S. D. (2012). Evaluation of malingering and related response styles. In I. B. Weiner & R. K. Otto (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Vol. 11. Forensic psychology (2nd ed., pp. 517–540). New York, NY: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Rogers, R., Sewell, K. W., Martin, M. A., & Vitacco, M. J. (2003). Detection of feigned mental disorders: A meta-analysis of the MMPI–2 and malingering. Assessment, 10, 160–177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rohling, M. L., Larrabee, G. J., Griffenstein, M. F., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Lees-Haley, P., Green, P., & Greve, K. W. (2011). A missing review of response bias: Comment on McGrath, Mitchell, Kim, and Hough (2010). Psychological Bulletin, 137, 708–712.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sellbom, M., Anderson, J. L., & Bagby, R. M. (2013). Assessing DSM–5 Section III personality traits and disorders with the MMPI–2–RF. Assessment, 20, 709–722.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sellbom, M., & Bagby, R. M. (2008). Validity of the MMPI–2–RF (Restructured Form) L-r and K-r scales in detecting underreporting in clinical and nonclinical samples. Psychological Assessment, 20, 370–376.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sellbom, M., & Bagby, R. M. (2010). Detection of overreported psychopathology with the MMPI–2 RF form validity scales. Psychological Assessment, 22, 757–767.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tellegen, A., & Ben-Porath, Y. S (2008). MMPI–2–RF technical manual. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Widiger, T. A., & Lowe, J. R. (2007). Five-factor model assessment of personality disorder. Journal of Personality Assessment, 89, 16–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiggins, C. W., Wygant, D. B., Hoelzle, J. B., & Gervais, R. O. (2012). The more you say the less it means: Overreporting and attenuated criterion validity in a forensic disability sample. Psychological Injury and Law, 5, 162–173.
   Google Scholar
• Wiggins, J. S. (1959). Interrelationships among MMPI measures of dissimulation under standard and social desirability instructions. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 23, 419–427.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, A. G. C., Calabrese, W. R., Rudick, M. M., Yam, W. H., Zelazny, K., Williams, T. F., … Simms, L. J. (2015). Stability of the DSM–5 Section III pathological personality traits and their longitudinal associations with psychosocial functioning in personality disordered individuals. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 124, 199–207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, A. G. C., & Simms, L. J. (2014). On the structure of personality disorder traits: Conjoint analyses of the CAT–PD, PID–5, and NEO–PI–3 trait models. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 5(1), 43–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright, A. G. C., Thomas, K. M., Hopwood, C. J., Markon, K. E., Pincus, A. L., & Krueger, R. F. (2012). The hierarchical structure of DSM–5 pathological personality traits. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 121, 951–957.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar