mmpi-2-rf: forensic practice briefing...mmpi-2-rf: forensic practice briefing martin sellbom, phd...
TRANSCRIPT
MMPI-2-RF: Forensic Practice Briefing
MARTIN SELLBOM, PHD ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY UNIVERSITY OF OTAGO DUNEDIN NEW ZEALAND [email protected]
Agenda Overview ForensicApplications Admissibility/AddressingChallenges
Acaseexample
1
MMPI-2-RF Overview
MMPI-2-RF Overview Published2008◦ AuthorsBen-Porath&Tellegen
338items SubsetofMMPI-2ItemPool NormsbasedonMMPI-2normativesample
2
MMPI-2-RF Overview • 51Scales• 9ValidityScales• 3Higher-OrderScales• 9RCScales• 23SpecificProblemsScales• 5Somatic/Cognitive• 9Internalizing• 4Externalizing• 5Interpersonal
• 2InterestScales• 5PSY-5Scales
MMPI-2-RF Overview Manuals:◦ManualforAdministration,ScoringandInterpretation
◦ TechnicalManual◦ User’sGuideforReports
3
MMPI-2-RF Overview InterpretingtheMMPI-2-RF◦MMPIEvolution◦MMPI-2-RFDevelopment&Constructs
◦ InterpretiveGuidelines◦ CaseStudies
Important Differences between MMPI-2 and MMPI-2-RF ValidityScales◦ Eliminationofitemoverlap◦ F-r◦ Fs◦ FBS-r◦ RBS◦ 75+peer-reviewedarticles
FocusonPsychologicalConstructsratherthanPsychiatricSyndromes◦ ConstructsdelineatedinBen-Porath(2012)book◦ Linkedtocurrentmodelsandconceptsinpersonalityandpsychopathologyresearch
◦ e.g.,PSY-5◦ Caninformdiagnosticassessments(DiagnosticConsiderationslistedformostsubstantivescales)
4
Forensic Applications
Forensic Applications MMPI-2-RFusedin◦ CriminalCourt◦ CompetencyandInsanity◦ RiskAssessments(sentencing)
◦ CivilLitigation◦ PersonalInjury
◦ DisabilityClaims◦ WorkersCompensation
◦ FamilyCourt◦ ChildCustody◦ ParentalFitness
◦ CorrectionalSettings
5
General Considerations Assessmentofresponsebias◦ Greaterexternalincentive◦ Contextspecific◦ Over-reportingvsunder-reporting
Assessmentofpsychopathologysymptoms◦ Severementalillness◦ Psychosis(e.g.,THD,RC6,RC8,PSYC)orMania(e.g.,RC9,ACT)
◦ Mooddisorder/Emotionallability◦ Internalizingscales
◦ Personalitypathologyandbehavioraldysfunction◦ E.g.,PSY-5scales/externalizingscales(e.g.,BXD,RC4,JCP,SUB,AGG)
Criminal Court Considerations Competencytostandtrial◦ Capacity-focusedtest◦ Currentfunctioning
Criminalresponsibility◦ Differentsanitystandards◦ Retrospectiveevaluation◦ UtilityofMMPI-2-RF?
Riskassessment(pre-sentence)◦ Assessmentofstaticvs.dynamicriskfactors
◦ MMPI-2-RF,e.g.,◦ PastEXThistory(e.g.,JCP,SUB)◦ Emotionalinstability◦ Behavioralinstability◦ Activesymptomsofmentalillness◦ Insight(L-r)
6
Civil Litigation and Disability Considerations Assessmentofresponsebias◦ Somatic/cognitiveover-reportingscales
Currentfunctioning◦ Wastheplaintiff/claimantactuallyharmed?◦ Depression,e.g.,
◦ EID,RCd,RC2,SUI,HLP,SFD,HFC,NEGE-r,INTR-r,SAV◦ AnxietyDisorders,e.g.,
◦ EID,RC7,STW,AXY,BRF◦ PTSD,e.g.,
◦ RCd,RC7,STW,AXY**,SAV/DSF;◦ Substanceabuse,e.g.,
◦ BXD,RC4,SUB,DISC-r◦ Chronicpain,e.g.,
◦ RC1,GIC,NUC,HPC,COG,MLS(overalldebilitation)
Isthepersondisabledduetocurrentpsychiatricdiagnosis? DideventXattimeYcauseorcontributetocurrentdiagnosis?
Family Court Considerations Psychologicalbestinterestsofthechild Under-reporting◦ Comparisongroups
Currentfunctioningthatcouldinterferewithparenting◦ Psychopathology◦ Maladaptivepersonalitytraits
Notameasureofparentingabilityorpredictoroffutureparentingperse
7
Correctional Settings Considerations Mentalhealthneedsandintervention
Securityclassificationandriskassessment
Predictionofself-harm◦ SUI(seeGlassmireetal.,2016)
Paroleconsiderations◦ See“RiskAssessment”
Now available IntroductiontoMMPI-2-RFinforensicsettings
Assessmentofresponsebias
ConsiderationsforMMPI-2-RFusein8ofthemostcommontypesofcriminalandcivilforensicevaluations
8
Addressing Challenges to MMPI-2-RF-based testimony
Daubert Factors Hasthetechniquebeentested?
Hasitbeensubjectedtopeerreview?
Whatisthetechnique’sknownorpotentialrateoferror?
Aretherestandardscontrollingthetechnique’soperation?
Isthetechniquegenerallyaccepted?
9
Has the technique been tested? Areempiricaldataavailableonthetechnique?
◦ MMPI-2-RFTechnicalManual
10
Exc
erpt
ed fr
om th
e M
MP
I-2-R
F Te
chni
cal M
anua
l by
Auk
e Te
llege
n an
d Yo
ssef
S.
Ben
-Por
ath.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8, 2
011
by th
e R
egen
ts o
f the
Uni
vers
ity o
f Min
neso
ta.
Has the MMPI-2-RF been tested? EmpiricalCorrelatesin◦ MentalHealth◦ Outpatient◦ Inpatient
◦ Medical◦ SubstanceAbuseTreatment◦ Forensic-Civil◦ Forensic-Criminal◦ Non-Clinical
N=4,336Men;2,327Women 605Criteria 53,970Correlations
11
Has the MMPI-2-RF been tested? DescriptiveDataforfollowingsettings:◦ MentalHealth◦ Medical◦ Pre-Surgical◦ SubstanceAbuseTreatment◦ CriminalForensic◦ CivilForensic◦ Correctional◦ PersonnelScreening◦ Non-ClinicalSettings
N=68,377
Has the MMPI-2-RF subjected to peer review?
Examplesinforensic/correctionalsettings...
◦ Correctionalsettings◦ Forbey,Ben-Porath,&Gartland(2009)◦ Clegg,Fremouw,Horacek,Cole,&Schwartz(2010)◦ Sellbom(2014)
◦ RiskAssessment◦ Grossi,Green,Belfi,McGrath,Griswald,&Schreiber(2015)◦ Laurinaitytė,LaurinavičiusUstinavičiūtė,Wygant&Sellbom(2017)◦ Sellbom,Ben-Porath,Baum,Erez,&Gregory(2008)◦ Tarescavage,Glassmire,&Burchett(2016)◦ Tarescavage,Luna-Jones,&Ben-Porath(2014)
◦ Psychopathy◦ Phillips,Sellbom,Ben-Porath,&Patrick(2014)◦ Sellbom,Drislane,Johnson,Goodwin,Phillips,&Patrick(2016)◦ Sellbom,Ben-Porath,Patrick,Wygant,Gartland,&Stafford(2012)
◦ Malingering◦ Sellbom,Toomey,Wygant,Kucharski,&Duncan(2010)◦ Wygant,Sellbom,Gervais,Ben-Porath,Stafford,Freeman,&Heilbronner(2010)
◦ Wall,Wygant,&Gallagher(2015)
Over400peer-reviewedpublicationshaveincludedMMPI-2-RFscales
12
The known or potential rate of error of the MMPI-2-RF?
DataonreliabilityandstandarderrorofmeasurementofMMPI-2-RFscalescoresaddressthisquestiondirectly.
Exc
erpt
ed fr
om th
e M
MP
I-2-R
F Te
chni
cal M
anua
l by
Auk
e Te
llege
n an
d Yo
ssef
S.
Ben
-Por
ath.
Cop
yrig
ht ©
200
8, 2
011
by th
e R
egen
ts o
f the
Uni
vers
ity o
f Min
neso
ta.
13
The known or potential rate of error of the MMPI-2-RF? ClassificationAccuracy◦ MMPI-2-RFValidityScales◦ Sensitivity,Specificity,PositivePredictivePower,NegativePredictivePower,andHitRate
The known or potential rate of error of the MMPI-2-RF?
Source:Sellbom,M.,Toomey,J.A.,Wygant,D.B.,Kucharski,L.T.,&Duncan,S.(2010).UtilityoftheMMPI-2-RF(RestructuredForm)ValidityScalesinDetectingMalingeringinaCriminalForensicSetting:AKnown-GroupsDesign.PsychologicalAssessment,22,22-31.
14
Are there standards controlling the MMPI-2-RF?
15
Is the MMPI-2-RF Generally Accepted? FryeTest◦ MMPI-2-RFbeingusedincreasinglyin:◦ Forensicevaluations◦ Publicsafetypersonnelscreening◦Medicalevaluations◦Mentalhealthsettings◦ Inmanystates,caselawguidesjudgestoconsider“Daubert-like”factors(i.e.,scientificvalidityandreliability)
16
Indications of MMPI-2-RF Acceptance MMPI-2-RFinterpretiveguidelinesprovidedintwoleadingMMPItextbooks:◦ Graham,J.R.(2012).MMPI-2:AssessingPersonalityandPsychopathology(5thedition).NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress.
◦ Greene,R.L.(2011).MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF:AnInterpretiveManual(ThirdEdition).NewYork:Allyn&Bacon
Coveredincurrentforensictextbooks:◦ Ben-Porath,Y.S.(2013).ForensicapplicationsoftheMinnesotaMultiphaiscPersonalityInventory-2RestructuredForm.InR.P.ArcherandE.M.A.Wheeler(Eds)Forensicuseofclinicalassessmentinstruments(pp.63-107).NY:Routledge.
MMPI-2-RF Translations
17
Indications of MMPI-2-RF Acceptance ListedamongrecommendedoutcomemeasuresinTraumaticBrainInjuryresearchcompiledbyInteragencyTraumaticBrainInjury(TBI)OutcomeMeasuresWorkgroupconvenedbyNIH◦ Wildeetal.(2010).RecommendationsfortheuseofCommonOutcomeMeasuresinTraumaticBrainInjuryResearch.ArchivesofPhysicalMedicineandRehabilitation,91,1650-1660.e17.
Listedamongstandardmeasuresusedinassessmentofthepsychologicaleffectsofpain◦ Barr,W.B.(2013).Differentialdiagnosisofpsychologicalfactorsevokedbypainpresentations.TheClinicalNeuropsychologist,27,17-29.
Indications of MMPI-2-RF Acceptance Listedamongmeasuresinproposedpracticeguidelinesforassessmentsofchildsexualabusers◦ Chu,C.M.,&Ogloff,J.R.P.(2012).Assessingchildsexualabusersinnon-criminalcontexts:Proposedpracticeguidelines.Psychiatry,Psychology,andLaw,19,464-481.
Listedasrecommendedmeasureinguidetoestablishingapracticeonpolicepre-employmentpsychologicalevaluations◦ Gallo,F.J.,&Halgin,R.P.(2011).AGuideforEstablishingaPracticeinPolicePreemploymentPostofferPsychologicalEvaluations.ProfessionalPsychology:ResearchandPractice.10.1037/a0022493
18
Indications of MMPI-2-RF Acceptance HighlightedinInstituteofMedicine(IOM)reporttoUSCongress:PsychologicalTestingintheServiceofDisabilityDetermination:
CommitteeonPsychologicalTesting,IncludingValidityTesting,forSocialSecurityAdministrationDisabilityDeterminations;BoardontheHealthofSelectPopulations;InstituteofMedicine.Washington(DC):NationalAcademiesPress(US);2015Jun29.
IndicationsofMMPI-2-RFAcceptance Discussedfavorablyingrowingnumberofbooksandbookchapters:
Bell,B.D.,&Giovagnoli,A.R.(2013).Epilepsyandaging.InL.D.RavdinandH.L.Katzen(eds.).Handbookontheneuropsychologyofaginganddementia(pp.421-442).NY:Springer.Boone,K.B.(2013).Clinicalpracticeofforensicneuropsychology:Anevidence-basedapproach.NY:Guilford.Budd,K.S.,Connell,M.,&Clark,J.R.(2013).Assessmentinachildprotectioncontext.InR.K.OttoandI.Weiner(eds.).Handbookofpsychology:Vol.11ForensicPsychology(pp.139-171).NY:Wiley.Cohen,R.J.,Swerlik,M.E.,&Sturman,E.D.(2013).Psychologicaltestingandassessment:Anintroductiontotestsandmeasurement.NY:McGrawHill.Corey,D.M.(2011).Principlesoffitness-for-dutyevaluationsforpolicepsychologists..InJKitaeff(ed.)Handbookofpolicepsychology(pp.263-294).NY:Routledge.Corey,D.M.&Borum,R.(2013).Forensicassessmentforhigh-riskoccupations.InR.K.OttoandI.Weiner(eds.).Handbookofpsychology:Vol.11ForensicPsychology(pp.246-270).NY:Wiley.
19
IndicationsofMMPI-2-RFAcceptance Discussedfavorablyingrowingnumberofbooksandbookchapters:
Cutler,M.J.(2011).Pre-employmentscreeningofpoliceofficers:Integratingactuarialpredictionmodelswithpractice.InJ.Kitaeff(Ed.)Handbookofpolicepsychology(pp.125-129).NY:Routledge.Heilbronner,R.L.,&Henry,G.K.(2013).Psychologicalassessmentofsymptommagnificationinmildtraumaticbraininjury.InS.S.Bush&D.Carone(Eds.).Mildtraumaticbraininjury:Symptomvalidityassessmentandmalingering(pp.183-202).NY:Springer.Larrabee,G.J.(2011).Assessmentofmalingering.InG.J.Larrabee(Ed.).ForensicNeuropsychology:Ascientificapproach(pp.116-159).NY:OxfordUniversityPress.Rogers,R.,&Bender,S.S.(2013).Evaluationofmalingeringandrelatedresponsestyles.InR.K.OttoandI.Weiner(Eds.).Handbookofpsychology:Vol.11ForensicPsychology(pp.517-540).NY:Wiley.Nelson,N.W.,&Dome,B.M.(2013).Researchandsymptomvalidityassessmentinmildtraumatcbraininjury.InS.S.Bush&D.Carone(Eds.).Mildtraumaticbraininjury:Symptomvalidityassessmentandmalingering(pp.119-138).NY:Springer.
Indications of MMPI-2-RF Acceptance Cited in growing number of Federal and State appellate court decisions: ADAMSv.ASTRUE,CommissionerofSocialSecurity.No.3:11-CV-00378RE.July3,2012.UnitedStatesDistrictCourt
A.P.v.THESUPERIORCOURTOFDELNORTECOUNTY,DELNORTECOUNTYDEPARTMENTOFHEALTHANDHUMANSERVICES etal. No. A136808. Courtof Appeals of California, FirstDistrict, Division One. Filed February 1, 2013.
BENSEv.ASTRUE,CommissionerofSocialSecurity.March19,2013.UnitedStatesDistrictCourt,E.D.Missouri,EasternDivision.
DANIELSONv.MICHAELJ.ASTRUE,CommissionerofSocialSecurity.No.12-CV-0153-TOR.December19,2012.UnitedStates DistrictCourt
INRE:D.C.J.AMinorChild(AppealbyMaternalGrandparents,andGuardianAdLitem).Nos.97681and97776.Released and Journalized: September 13, 2012. Courtof Appeals of Ohio, Eighth District, CuyahogaCounty
FINKv.ASTRUE,CommissionerofSocialSecurity.No.4:12CV295LMB.March27,2013.UnitedStatesDistrictCourt,E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division.
MICHIGANv.ESPINOZA.No.297574.CourtofAppealsofMichigan.September27,2011.
SOUTERv.COLVIN,ActingCommissionerofSocialSecurity.CaseNo.11-3465-CV-S-REL-SSA.February19,2013
20
Case Example
Not guilty by reason of mental impairment AustralianCapitalTerritory
(1)Apersonisnotcriminallyresponsibleforanoffenceif,whencarryingouttheconductrequiredfortheoffence,thepersonwassufferingfromamentalimpairmentthathadtheeffectthat-(a) Thepersondidnotknowthenatureandqualityoftheconduct;or(b) Thepersondidnotknowthattheconductwaswrong;or(c) Thepersoncouldnotcontroltheconduct
(2)For1(b),thepersondoesn’tknowthattheconductiswrongifthepersoncannotreasonwithamoderatedegreeofsenseandcomposureaboutwhethertheconduct,asseenbyareasonableperson,iswrong
21
Case 01 33y.oCaucasianwoman
Chargedwithcommonassaultwithintenttocausegrievousbodilyharm◦ 4monthspriortoevaluation
Lengthyhistoryofbehavioral,mentalhealth,andsubstanceabusedifficulties
Sexualabuseasachild Historyofbehavioralproblemsasachildandexpelledtwiceforviolentbehavior
Adjustmentbecameworseatage17subsequenttodeathofmother
Numerouspsychiatrichospitalizations,includingmaniaasadult◦ DiagnosedwithBipolarDisorder,PersonalityDisorders,SubstanceUseDisorders
Inconsistentcompliancewithtreatmentincommunity
Case 01 Attimeoftheoffense–shehadsoughtemploymentatagentleman’sclubasadancer Afterinterview,othersobservedassaulthimwithabrokenbeerbottle◦ Witnessesheardhimaskinghertoleaveashewouldnotgiveherajob
Shemadenoattempttoleavethescene Shetoldpolicethattheownerhadduringtheprivatepartoftheinterview,theownerhasaskedherto “Suck his D**K” to which she said “I’d rather suck on afish”à he tried to force her when sherefused Uponjailadmission,describedas“manic,disorganized,anddemanding“ 16daysearlier,shehadbeenhospitalizedformania◦ Didnotcontinuetotakemedication
Ex-boyfriendreportedthatshewasobsessedwithbeingavigilanteandrescuewomenfromsexualpredators –she had boughtacrossbow –neighbors were threatened◦ “Iwaslosingcontrol;IthoughtIcouldbeanangel.IhadbeenreadingaboutThePunisher.Hewasacomicbookvigilante…Iwantedtobethat.…IguessIwasn’tright.”
22
MMPI-2-RF Validity Scales
20
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
K-rL-rFBS-rFsFp-rF-rTRIN-rVRIN-r
Raw Score:
Response %:
VRIN-rTRIN-rF-rFp-r
Variable Response InconsistencyTrue Response InconsistencyInfrequent ResponsesInfrequent Psychopathology Responses
5
58
100
FsFBS-rRBS
Infrequent Somatic ResponsesSymptom ValidityResponse Bias Scale
0
42
100
4
77
100
2
51
100
10
57
100
4
39
100
2
47
100
2
38
100
120
110
Cannot Say (Raw): 0
T Score: F
53Percent True (of items answered): %
665669
F
54 50 65 5462
10 22152310 16 1117
Comparison Group Data: Forensic, Pre-trial Criminal (Women), N = 223
---
--- ---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Standard Dev
Mean Score
1 SD+( ):
( ):
_
74 19923379 424Percent scoring at orbelow test taker:
L-rK-r
Uncommon VirtuesAdjustment Validity
RBS
4
38
100
46
11
324
The highest and lowest T scores possible on each scale are indicated by a "---"; MMPI-2-RF T scores are non-gendered.
MMPI-2-RF® Score Report ID: 502/15/2008, Page 2 Ms. B
23
MMPI-2-RF Higher-Order (H-O) and Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales
20
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
RC9RC8RC7RC6RC4RC3RC2RC1RCdBXDTHDEID
Raw Score:
T Score:
Response %:
EIDTHDBXD
Emotional/Internalizing DysfunctionThought DysfunctionBehavioral/Externalizing Dysfunction
9
49
100
RCdRC1RC2RC3RC4
DemoralizationSomatic ComplaintsLow Positive EmotionsCynicismAntisocial Behavior
RC6RC7RC8RC9
Ideas of PersecutionDysfunctional Negative EmotionsAberrant ExperiencesHypomanic Activation
0
36
100
6
54
100
19
84
100
7
70
100
2
42
100
12
71
100
12
70
100
5
75
100
3
56
100
9
55
100
27
88
100
120
110
Higher-Order Restructured Clinical
61 63615456 58 5952 59 5656 48
14 15141115 14 1211 16 1413 10
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Comparison Group Data: Forensic, Pre-trial Criminal (Women), N = 223
Standard Dev
Mean Score
1 SD+( ):
( ):
_
Percent scoring at orbelow test taker:
25 53610086 17 8592 90 6154 100
The highest and lowest T scores possible on each scale are indicated by a "---"; MMPI-2-RF T scores are non-gendered.
MMPI-2-RF® Score Report ID: 502/15/2008, Page 3 Ms. B
24
MMPI-2-RF Somatic/Cognitive and Internalizing Scales
20
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
NFC ANPAXYSTW MSFBRFNUCGIC HPC HLPCOG SFD
Raw Score:
T Score:
Response %:
MLSGICHPCNUCCOG
MalaiseGastrointestinal ComplaintsHead Pain ComplaintsNeurological ComplaintsCognitive Complaints
1
46
100
AXYANPBRFMSF
AnxietyAnger PronenessBehavior-Restricting FearsMultiple Specific Fears
SUIHLPSFDNFCSTW
Suicidal/Death IdeationHelplessness/HopelessnessSelf-DoubtInefficacyStress/Worry
1
50
100
0
41
100
0
42
100
0
46
100
0
45
100
0
42
100
0
40
100
3
51
100
0
44
100
5
65
100
5
66
100
3
48
100
1
56
100
Somatic/Cognitive Internalizing
120
110
63 59616162 57 5953 57 6258 53 5555
13 16151418 19 1313 13 1712 12 1013
Comparison Group Data: Forensic, Pre-trial Criminal (Women), N = 223
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
------
--- ---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
MLS SUI
20 38232046 65 2738 42 3678 89 3967
Standard Dev
Mean Score
1 SD+( ):
( ):
_
Percent scoring at orbelow test taker:
The highest and lowest T scores possible on each scale are indicated by a "---"; MMPI-2-RF T scores are non-gendered.
MMPI-2-RF® Score Report ID: 502/15/2008, Page 4 Ms. B
25
MMPI-2-RF Externalizing, Interpersonal, and Interest Scales
20
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
SAV MECAESACTAGGSUBJCP FML DSFIPP SHY
Raw Score:
T Score:
Response %:
FMLIPPSAVSHYDSF
Family ProblemsInterpersonal PassivitySocial AvoidanceShynessDisaffiliativeness
3
63
100
JCPSUBAGGACT
Juvenile Conduct ProblemsSubstance AbuseAggressionActivation
AESMEC
Aesthetic-Literary InterestsMechanical-Physical Interests
6
68
100
8
83
100
8
86
100
4
69
100
0
34
100
0
37
100
2
47
100
0
44
100
5
61
100
5
62
100
InterpersonalExternalizing Interest
120
110
55 55525057 52 5254 52 4449
12 14131113 11 1112 12 711
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
78 8410010088 3 1338 63 9790
Comparison Group Data: Forensic, Pre-trial Criminal (Women), N = 223
Standard Dev
Mean Score
1 SD+( ):
( ):
_
Percent scoring at orbelow test taker:
The highest and lowest T scores possible on each scale are indicated by a "---"; MMPI-2-RF T scores are non-gendered.
MMPI-2-RF® Score Report ID: 502/15/2008, Page 5 Ms. B
26
MMPI-2-RF PSY-5 Scales
20
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
INTR-rNEGE-rDISC-rPSYC-rAGGR-r
Raw Score:
T Score:
Response %:
AGGR-rPSYC-rDISC-rNEGE-rINTR-r
Aggressiveness-RevisedPsychoticism-RevisedDisconstraint-RevisedNegative Emotionality/Neuroticism-RevisedIntroversion/Low Positive Emotionality-Revised
18
88
100
2
39
100
12
66
100
16
79
100
5
63
100
120
110
47 54595154
9 13131015
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
---
Comparison Group Data: Forensic, Pre-trial Criminal (Women), N = 223
Standard Dev
Mean Score
1 SD+( ):
( ):
_
Percent scoring at orbelow test taker:
100 117299.678
The highest and lowest T scores possible on each scale are indicated by a "---"; MMPI-2-RF T scores are non-gendered.
MMPI-2-RF® Score Report ID: 502/15/2008, Page 6 Ms. B
27
Not guilty by reason of mental impairment AustralianCapitalTerritory
(1)Apersonisnotcriminallyresponsibleforanoffenceif,whencarryingouttheconductrequiredfortheoffence,thepersonwassufferingfromamentalimpairmentthathadtheeffectthat-(a) Thepersondidnotknowthenatureandqualityoftheconduct;or(b) Thepersondidnotknowthattheconductwaswrong;or(c) Thepersoncouldnotcontroltheconduct
(2)For1(b),thepersondoesn’tknowthattheconductiswrongifthepersoncannotreasonwithamoderatedegreeofsenseandcomposureaboutwhethertheconduct,asseenbyareasonableperson,iswrong
Thank you!
QUESTIONS?
Dr.MartinSellbom
28