Meunier and Bodkins discussed the unclear interpretation of Scale 5 of the MMPI–A, investigated use of the scale with adolescent girls in a court-ordered residential treatment program and suggested that subclinical elevations on the scale may predict disruptive behavior in special samples. This note comments on statistics reported by Meunier and Bodkins and recommends additional analyses, including estimation of effect sizes for scales on which comparisons are statistically nonsignificant.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychological Association. (2001) Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. (5th ed.) Washington, DC: Author.
2.
ArcherR. P. (1997a) Future directions for the MMPI–A: Research and clinical issues. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 95–109.
BashamR. B. (1992) Clinical utility of the MMPI research scales in the assessment of adolescent acting out behaviors. Psychological Assessment, 4, 483–492.
5.
ButcherJ. N.WilliamsC. L. (2000) Essentials of MMPI and MMPI–A interpretation. (2nd ed.) Minneapolis, MN: Univer. of Minnesota Press.
6.
KlineR. B. (2004) Beyond significance testing: Reforming data analysis methods in behavioral research. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7.
MeunierG.BodkinsM. (2005) Interpretation of MMPI–A Scale 5 with female patients. Psychological Reports, 96, 545–546.
8.
RobinsonD. H.LevinJ. R. (1997) Reflections on statistical and substantive significance, with a slice of replication. Educational Researcher, 26(5), 21–26.
9.
Wilkinson, L., & Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999) Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594–604.
