Psychological Reports, 1992, 71, 699-705.
O Psychological Reports 1992
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MCMI-I1 SCALES AND NORMAL PERSONALITY TRAITS ' ROBERT J. CRAIG
lllinois School of Professional Psychology Chicago, Illinois
AND
RONALD E. OLSON
Oakland University Rochester, Michigan
Summary.-We correlated MCMI-I1 and 16 PF prof~le,of 145 couples in outpatient marital therapy and noted significant associations berueeen these tests that were consistently and logically related to constructs which underlie the meaning of the MCMI-I1 scales. T h s provided good concurrent validity for both the Personality and Clinical Scales of the MCMI-11. These results add credence to research designed to study Millon's basic styles in normal populations.
The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-I1 (MCMI-11) (Mdlon, 1987) has become a popular clinical and research instrument. The test has been recommended for training in graduate schools (Craig & Horowitz, 1990; Retzlaff, 1992), has become popular in health-care settings (Piotrowski & Lubin, 1990), and has been the subject of several literature reviews (Dana & Cantrell, 1988; Craig & Weinberg, in press; Wetzler, 1990) and two books (Choca, Shanley, & Van Denburg, 1992; Craig, in press). Much of this literature has dealt with the test's correlations with other instruments, particularly clinical tests. In samples of heterogeneous psychiatric patients and substance abusers, the intercorrelations between the MCMI scales and the MMPI scales have been low to moderate (generally below .50) (Dubro, Wetzler, & Kahn, 1988; Marsh, Stile, Stoughton, & Trout-Laden, 1988; Smith, Carroll, & Fuller, 1988), while correlations with the MCMI personality disorder scales and the MMPI have tended to be somewhat higher (McCann, 1989; Morey & Levine, 1988). Common factorial space has been reported between the MCMI and the MMPI (Ownby, Wallbrown, Carmin, & Barnett, 1990), with the California Psychological Inventory (Holliman & Guthrie, 1989), and with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (Gabrys, Utendale, Schumph, Phillips, Robertson, Sherwood, O'Haire, Allard, Clark, & Laye, 1988), with correlations generally in the low to moderate range. This suggests that these tests have shared and unique dimensions. Similar findings have been reported between the MCMI and more narrow band instruments, including the Profile of Mood States (McMahon & Davidson, 1985, 1986), the General Health Questionnaire (Leaf, DiGuiseppe, E h s , Wolfe, Yeager, & Alington, 1987), the Interpersonal Problem Check'Address reprint requests to Robert J. Craig, Ph.D., 220 S. State St., 5th Floor, Chicago, IL 60604.
700
R. J. CRAIG
&
R. E. OLSON
list (Morey, 1986), the Burns Perfectionism Scale (Broday, 1988), the Narcissistic Personahty Scale (Auerbach, 1984), and the Superiority and Goal Instability scales (Robbins, 1989). The results of these studies indicate that the MCMI taps dimensions from these instruments that are both similar yet unique. I t is evident that the above studies evaluated the relationship between clinical instruments designed for use with clinical populations. Hence it is quite appropriate to learn how the MCMI-I1 compares with similar instruments. However, while the test was designed for use with psychiatric populations, a number of studies have reported the use of this instrument with nonpsychiatric, medical patients [testicular cancer, breast cancer, chronic headache, chronic pain, chronic fatigue syndrome, choreoacanthocytosis, Workman's Compensation claimants, and surgical patients (gastric stapling for morbid obesity, lumbar laminectomy)]. See Craig and Weinberg (in press) for a detailed discussion of this literature. Since the MMPI began as an instrument for use with psychiatric groups but evolved as an instrument that had some utility with nonpsychiatric groups, it is also likely that the MCMI-I1 may evolve in such a manner. While researchers are increasingly using the MCMI-I1 with nonclinical groups, we have little knowledge of its psychometric properties with such groups. The purpose of this research was to assess the association between the MCMI-I1 scales and those of a personality instrument measuring normal personality traits, e.g., the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16 PF) (Cattell, Eber, & Tatsuoka, 1988). This type of research is necessary to evaluate the psychometric dimensions of this test with groups other than psychiatric patients.
METHOD hstrurnents The MCMI-I1 consists of 10 Basic Personality Scales: Schizoid, Avoidant, Dependent, Histrionic, Narcissistic, Antisocial, Aggressive/Sadistic, Compulsive, Passive-Aggressive, and Self-defeating, 3 Severe Personality Disorders: Schizotypal, Borderline, and Paranoid, and 9 Clinical Syndrome Scales: Anxiety, Somatoform, Bipolar: Manic Disorder, Alcohol Dependence, Drug Dependence, Thought Disorder, Major Depression, and Delusional Disorder. There are also four scales that assess response distortion: Disclosure, Desirability, Debasement, and a Random Index comprised of four items which, if answered in the endorsed direction, suggests careless responding or confusion. The 16 PF consists of 12 Primary Factor Scales: Cool vs Warm, Concrete vs Abstract Thinking, Affected by Feelings vs Emotionaly Stable, Submissive vs Dominant, Sober vs Enthusiastic, Expedient vs Conscientious, Shy vs Venturesome, Tough Minded vs Tender Minded, Trusting vs Suspicious, Practical vs Imaginative, Forthright vs Shrewd, Self-assured vs Ap-
MILLON I1 SCALES AND PERSONALITY TRAITS
701
prehensive; 4 Second-order Factors: Conservative vs Experimenting, Grouporiented vs Self-sufficient, Undisciplined Self-conflict vs Controlled, and Relaxed vs Tense; and 4 Secondary Factors: Extroversion vs Introversion, Low Anxiety vs High Anxiety, Sensitivity vs Tough Poise, Subdued vs Independent, and special scales, such as Behavior Control. Procedure The profiles used in this study were obtained from private practice files of patients in outpatient marital therapy. All subjects were white. There were 75 women (mean age of 38.1, SD: 10.9), and 70 men (mean age of 40.4, SD: 9.9). All were at least high school graduates. They had no prior history of psychiatric treatment. All profiles used in subsequent analyses were valid, based on computer-narrative statements derived from each test's validity indices. The MCMI-I1 was computer-scored from National Computer Systems and the 16 PF was computer-scored at the Institute of Personality and Ability Testing. All tests were given after the initial clinical interview but before the initiation of clinical interventions. There were a total of 145 MCMI-I1 and 16 PF profiles presented for analysis. All statistics were done by computer, using the SPSS statistical package.
RESULTS* Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were established between the MCMI-I1 and 16 PF scales. Only the statistically significant values will be discussed. Personality Disorder Scales The Schizoid and Avoidant Scales were designed to measure Mdlon's "passive detached" and "active detached" personality types, respectively. The Schzoid and Avoidant Scales showed similar patterns of correlation with 16 PF Scales. I n general, they were significantly and negatively correlated with Venturesome (-.61, -.54), Dominance (-.40), Extroversion (-.65, -.4S), Independence (-.46, -.28), and Warmth (-.4O, - 2 2 ) and positively correlated with Shrewd (.28) and Self-sufficient (.33, 2 2 ) . The Dependent and Histrionic Scales were designed to measure the "passive-dependent" and "active-dependent" personality types. The Dependent Scale was negatively correlated with Independent (-.42), Dominant (-,391, and Suspicious (-,211 and did not correlate positively with any 16 P F scale. The Histrionic Scale showed the highest correlations with the 16 PF. I t was associated with Extroversion (.64), Venturesome (.64), Enthusiastic
'Tables of means and SDs for each subscale of the inventories administered are given for women and men separately in Document NAPS-04970. Remit 9.25 for photocopy or $4.00 for fiche to Publications Service, c/o Microfiche Publications, POB 3513, Grand Central National Auxili Station, New Y X , NY 10163.
702
R. J. CRAIG
&
R. E. OLSON
(.61), Independent (.56), and Dominant (.48). It correlated negatively with Forthright (-.39) and Group Dependent (-.38). The Narcissistic and Antisocial Scales tap Millon's "passive-independent" and "active-independent" personality types. The Narcissistic Scale positively correlated with Independent (.61), Dominant (.57), Venturesome (.39), Extroversion (.39), and Enthusiastic (.39) and negatively with Forthright (-.42). The Antisocial Scale was positively associated with Dominant (.40), Independent (.35), Suspicious (.35), and Experimenting (.23) and negatively with Conscientious (-.24). The Aggressive/Sadistic Scale measures Millon's "active-discordant'' type. It was positively associated with Dominant (.53), Independent (.47), Suspicious (.39), Tough Poise (.30), and Experimenting (.23) and negatively associated with Forthright (-.24). The Compulsive Scale taps Millon's "passive-ambivalent" type, and the Passive-Aggressive Scale taps the "active-ambivalent" type. The Compulsive Scale correlated moderately with Emotionally Controlled (.52), Conscientious (.51), and Self-disciplined (.45). It had no significant negative correlations with any 16 PF scale. The Passive-Aggressive Scale correlated with Anxiety (.52), Tension (.39), and Dominant (.29) and negatively with Submissive (-.40), Calm and Stable (-.39), Venturesome (-.25), and Controlled (-.24). This is consistent with Millon's belief that this personality type has a strong element of anxiety and apprehension chat underlies behavior. The Self-defeating Scale measures Millon's "passive discordant" style. This is a new scale to MCMI-I1 and this study represents the first independent report of the scale's intercorrelations. The scale correlated positively with Anxiety (.56), Self-doubting (.46), and Tension (.37) and negatively with Emotional Stability (-.43), Venturesome (-.30), and Self-disciplined (-.27). The Schizotypal, Borderline, and Paranoid Scales measure the more pathological and dysfunctional variations of Millon's basic personality types. The Schizotypal Scale was positively associated with Self-doubting (.27), Self-sufficient (.27), and Independent (.25) and negatively correlated with Venturesome (-.41), Extroversion (-.40), Enthusiastic (-.35), and Emotionally Stable and Controlled (-.40). The Borderline Scale correlated with Anxiety (.46), Self-doubting (.35), Suspicious (.35), Tension (.34), and Dominant ( 2 1 ) and negatively with Self-disciplined (-.32) and Self-assured (-.32). The Paranoid Scale was ~ o s i t i v e lassociated ~ with Independent (.34), Dorninant (.31), Tough Poise (.25), and Suspicious (.23) and negatively associated with Forthright (-.28) and Abstract Thinking (-.22).
Clinical Scales The MCMI-I1 Anxiety Scale was designed to measure anxiety, tension,
MILLON I1 SCALES AND PERSONALITY TRAITS
703
restlessness, and apprehension. The MCMI-I1 Anxiety Scale showed significant associations between 16 PF Anxiety (.34), Apprehension (.29), and Tension (.29) Factors. The Somatoform Scale was designed to assess physical complaints of a vague and unsystematic nature. The Somatoform Scale was significantly associated with Shy (.24), Extroversion (.27), Control (.22), and Conscientious (.21). The Bipolar Manic Disorder Scale taps emotional lability, overactivity, and distractibility. It was moderately and positively associated with 16 P F Factors, Independent (.55), Dominant (.51), Venturesome (.51), Extroversion (.50), and Enthusiastic (.47) and negatively associated with Forthright (- .42). The Dysthyrnia Scale assesses apathy, guilt, self-deprecatory cognitions, and feelings of discouragement. I t was significantly associated with 16 PF Scale Anxiety (.40), Self-doubting (.32), Conservative (.32), and Tension (.27), suggesting a strong anxiety component associated with the scale. The Alcohol Dependence Scale measures social, occupation, and behavioral difficulties associated with problematic drinlung. I t was significantly associated with Anxiety (.35), Suspicious (.26), Submissive (.24), and Suspicious (.24). The Drug Dependence Scale measures problems with impulse control, lack of social conformity, and recurrent problems with drugs. The scale was significantly associated with Dominance (.44), Independence (.38), Suspicious (.36), Tough Poise (.24), and Expedient (21) and negatively associated with Controlled (-.25) and Forthright (-.24). The Thought Disorder Scale was constructed to tap disorganized thinking, confusion, delusions, and hallucinations. It was positively associated with Anxiety (.33) and Self-doubting (.24) and negatively associated with Venturesome (-.28), Extroversion (-.24), and Abstract Thinking (-.23). The Major Depression Scale was designed to measure symptoms associated with psychotic depression. I t was associated with Anxiety (.48), Selfdoubting (.35), and Tension (.33) and negatively associated with Emotionally Stable (- .34), Venturesome (-.34), and Extroversion (-.28). The Delusional Disorder Scale assesses grandiosity, delusional thinking, and periodlc belligerence. I t showed only one significant correlation, in the negative direction, with Abstract Thinking (-.24). Conclusions First, the pattern of results add to the growing literature on the concurrent validity of the MCMI-I1 Clinical Scales. They were correlated with 16 P F Scales in a meaningful and logical manner, given the underlying construct measured by the scales themselves. Keep in mind that the MCMI-I1 is a clinical test of personality, whereas the 16 P F is a test measuring normal per-
704
R. J. CRAIG & R. E. OLSON
sonality traits. The MCMI-I1 assesses maladjustment whereas the 16 PF describes trait-based, normal personality functioning. A general "maladjustment" factor would not be expected to appear in both tests. I n fact, the two tests compliment each other, and that is the reason both are used clinically and in combination with this sample. Second, these results suggest there may be normal behavioral variants associated with Millon's types, as suggested by the pattern of correlations with the 16 PF normal-trait scales. Although the magnitudes of the correlations were below .50 with many in the .20s, the fact that there were statistically significant associations between the scales of a clinical and nonclinical test of personality adds credence to Millon's belief that personality disorders are pathological variations of basic personality styles. Thus, explorations of Millon's basic types within the normal population (Strack, 1987) seem justified. REFERENCES
J. S. (1984) Validation of two scales for narcissistic personality disorder. Journal of AUERBACH, Personality Assessment, 48, 649-653. BRODAY, S. E. (1988) Perfectionism and Millon basic personality patterns. Psychological RPports, 63, 791-794. CATTELL, R. B., EBER,H. W., & TATSUOKA, M. M. (1988) Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16 P F ) . Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality & A b i t y Testing. CHOCA,J . P., SHANLEY,L. A., & VANDENBURG,E . (1992) Interpretive guide to the Millon ClinicaIMtiltiaxial Inventory. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. CRAIG, R. J. (In ress) The Millon Clinical Mulriaxial Inventory: a clinical and information synthesis. ~iflsdale,NJ: Erlbaum. M. (1990) Current utilization of psychological tests at diagnostic CRAIG,R. J., & HOROWITZ, practicum sites. Clinical Psychologist, 43, 29-36. CRAIG,R. J., & WEINBERG, D. (In press) The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory: literature review. In R. Craig (Ed.), The Millon Clinical Mtrltiaxial Inuentory: a clinical and information synthesis. H a d a l e , NJ: Erlbaum. DANA,R., & CANTKELL, J. (1988) An update on the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 760-763. DUBRO,A. F., WETZLER,S., & KAHN,M. W. (1988) A comparison of 3 self-report inventories for the diagnosis of DSM-I11 personality disorders. Journal of Personalio Disorders, 2, 256-266. K. A,, SCHUMPH,D., PHILLIPS, N., ROBERTSON, G., SHERWOOD, G., GABRYS,J. B., UTENDALE, O'HARE, T., ALLARD,I., CLARK,M., & LAYE,R. C. (1988) Two inventories for the measurement of ps chopathology: dimensions and common factorial space on Mdon's clinical and ~ ~ s e n c igeneral 's personality scales. Psychological Reports, 62, 591-601. HOLLIMAN,N., & GUTHRIE,P (1989) A comparison of the MCMI and the CPI in assessment of a nonclinical population. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45, 373-382. LEAF, R. C., DIGUISEPPE,R., ELUS,A,, WOLFE,J., YEAGER,R., & ALINGTON,D. (1987) Treatment intake status and the MCMI's "Axis 11" scale scores. In C. Green (Ed.), Conference on the Millon clinical inventories (MCMI, MBHI, MAPI). Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems. Pp. 21-29. ~ R S HD., T., STILE,S. A,, STOUGHTON, N . L., & TROUT-LADEN, B. L. (1988) Psychopathology of opiate addiction: comparative data from the MMPI and MCMI. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 14, 17-27. MCCANN, J. T. (1989) MMPI personality disorder scales and the MCMI: concurrent validity. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45, 365-369. MCMAHON, R. C., & DAVIDSON, R. S. (1985) An examination of the relationship between per-
MILLON 11 SCALES AND PERSONALITY TRAITS
705
sonality patterns and symptom/mood patterns. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 552-556. MCMAHON,R. C., & DAVIDSON,R. S. (1986) Concurrent validity of the clinical symptom scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42, 908-912. W O N ,T. (1987) Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-11: manual for the MCMI-11. Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems. MOREY,L. C. (1986) A comparison of three personality disorder assessment approaches. Journal o/Psychopathology and Behavior Assessment, 8, 25-30. MOREY,L. C., & LEVINE,D. J. (1988) A multitrait-multimethod examination of Minnesota Multiphasic Personaliry Inventory (MMPI) and Millon Chnical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI). Journal o/ Psychopathology and Behauioral Assessment, 10, 333-344. OWNBY,R. L., WWBROWN,F. H., C m , C. N., & BAR NET^, R. W. (1990) A combined factor analysis of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory and the MMPI in an offender population. ]ournu1 of Clinical Psychology, 46, 89-96. PIOTROWSKI,C., & LUBIN,B. (1990) Assessment ractices of health s y ~ h o l o ~ ~survey s ~ s of APA Division 38 clinicians. Professional ~ s ~ c ! ~ l Research o ~ y : ani~ractlce,2 1, 99-106. RETZLAFF, l? D. (1992) Professional training in psychological testing: new teachers and new tests. Journal of Training and Practice in Professional Psychology, 6, 45-50. Roesws, S. B. (1989) Validity of the Superiority and Goal Instability scales as measures of defects i n the self. ]ozrrnal of Personality Assessment, 53, 122-132. SMITH,D., CARROLL, J. L., & FULLER, G. (1988) The relationship between the W o n Clinical Multiaxial Inventory and the MMPI in a prlvate outpatient mental health clinic population. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 165-174. STUCK, S. (1987) Development and validation of an adjective checklist to assess the Millon personality types in a normal population. Journal ofPersonality Assesrment, 51, 572-587. WETZLER,S. (1990) The Mdlon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI): a review. Journal o/ Personality Assessment, 55, 445-464.
Accepted July 30, 1992.
O Psychological Reports 1992
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MCMI-I1 SCALES AND NORMAL PERSONALITY TRAITS ' ROBERT J. CRAIG
lllinois School of Professional Psychology Chicago, Illinois
AND
RONALD E. OLSON
Oakland University Rochester, Michigan
Summary.-We correlated MCMI-I1 and 16 PF prof~le,of 145 couples in outpatient marital therapy and noted significant associations berueeen these tests that were consistently and logically related to constructs which underlie the meaning of the MCMI-I1 scales. T h s provided good concurrent validity for both the Personality and Clinical Scales of the MCMI-11. These results add credence to research designed to study Millon's basic styles in normal populations.
The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-I1 (MCMI-11) (Mdlon, 1987) has become a popular clinical and research instrument. The test has been recommended for training in graduate schools (Craig & Horowitz, 1990; Retzlaff, 1992), has become popular in health-care settings (Piotrowski & Lubin, 1990), and has been the subject of several literature reviews (Dana & Cantrell, 1988; Craig & Weinberg, in press; Wetzler, 1990) and two books (Choca, Shanley, & Van Denburg, 1992; Craig, in press). Much of this literature has dealt with the test's correlations with other instruments, particularly clinical tests. In samples of heterogeneous psychiatric patients and substance abusers, the intercorrelations between the MCMI scales and the MMPI scales have been low to moderate (generally below .50) (Dubro, Wetzler, & Kahn, 1988; Marsh, Stile, Stoughton, & Trout-Laden, 1988; Smith, Carroll, & Fuller, 1988), while correlations with the MCMI personality disorder scales and the MMPI have tended to be somewhat higher (McCann, 1989; Morey & Levine, 1988). Common factorial space has been reported between the MCMI and the MMPI (Ownby, Wallbrown, Carmin, & Barnett, 1990), with the California Psychological Inventory (Holliman & Guthrie, 1989), and with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (Gabrys, Utendale, Schumph, Phillips, Robertson, Sherwood, O'Haire, Allard, Clark, & Laye, 1988), with correlations generally in the low to moderate range. This suggests that these tests have shared and unique dimensions. Similar findings have been reported between the MCMI and more narrow band instruments, including the Profile of Mood States (McMahon & Davidson, 1985, 1986), the General Health Questionnaire (Leaf, DiGuiseppe, E h s , Wolfe, Yeager, & Alington, 1987), the Interpersonal Problem Check'Address reprint requests to Robert J. Craig, Ph.D., 220 S. State St., 5th Floor, Chicago, IL 60604.
700
R. J. CRAIG
&
R. E. OLSON
list (Morey, 1986), the Burns Perfectionism Scale (Broday, 1988), the Narcissistic Personahty Scale (Auerbach, 1984), and the Superiority and Goal Instability scales (Robbins, 1989). The results of these studies indicate that the MCMI taps dimensions from these instruments that are both similar yet unique. I t is evident that the above studies evaluated the relationship between clinical instruments designed for use with clinical populations. Hence it is quite appropriate to learn how the MCMI-I1 compares with similar instruments. However, while the test was designed for use with psychiatric populations, a number of studies have reported the use of this instrument with nonpsychiatric, medical patients [testicular cancer, breast cancer, chronic headache, chronic pain, chronic fatigue syndrome, choreoacanthocytosis, Workman's Compensation claimants, and surgical patients (gastric stapling for morbid obesity, lumbar laminectomy)]. See Craig and Weinberg (in press) for a detailed discussion of this literature. Since the MMPI began as an instrument for use with psychiatric groups but evolved as an instrument that had some utility with nonpsychiatric groups, it is also likely that the MCMI-I1 may evolve in such a manner. While researchers are increasingly using the MCMI-I1 with nonclinical groups, we have little knowledge of its psychometric properties with such groups. The purpose of this research was to assess the association between the MCMI-I1 scales and those of a personality instrument measuring normal personality traits, e.g., the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16 PF) (Cattell, Eber, & Tatsuoka, 1988). This type of research is necessary to evaluate the psychometric dimensions of this test with groups other than psychiatric patients.
METHOD hstrurnents The MCMI-I1 consists of 10 Basic Personality Scales: Schizoid, Avoidant, Dependent, Histrionic, Narcissistic, Antisocial, Aggressive/Sadistic, Compulsive, Passive-Aggressive, and Self-defeating, 3 Severe Personality Disorders: Schizotypal, Borderline, and Paranoid, and 9 Clinical Syndrome Scales: Anxiety, Somatoform, Bipolar: Manic Disorder, Alcohol Dependence, Drug Dependence, Thought Disorder, Major Depression, and Delusional Disorder. There are also four scales that assess response distortion: Disclosure, Desirability, Debasement, and a Random Index comprised of four items which, if answered in the endorsed direction, suggests careless responding or confusion. The 16 PF consists of 12 Primary Factor Scales: Cool vs Warm, Concrete vs Abstract Thinking, Affected by Feelings vs Emotionaly Stable, Submissive vs Dominant, Sober vs Enthusiastic, Expedient vs Conscientious, Shy vs Venturesome, Tough Minded vs Tender Minded, Trusting vs Suspicious, Practical vs Imaginative, Forthright vs Shrewd, Self-assured vs Ap-
MILLON I1 SCALES AND PERSONALITY TRAITS
701
prehensive; 4 Second-order Factors: Conservative vs Experimenting, Grouporiented vs Self-sufficient, Undisciplined Self-conflict vs Controlled, and Relaxed vs Tense; and 4 Secondary Factors: Extroversion vs Introversion, Low Anxiety vs High Anxiety, Sensitivity vs Tough Poise, Subdued vs Independent, and special scales, such as Behavior Control. Procedure The profiles used in this study were obtained from private practice files of patients in outpatient marital therapy. All subjects were white. There were 75 women (mean age of 38.1, SD: 10.9), and 70 men (mean age of 40.4, SD: 9.9). All were at least high school graduates. They had no prior history of psychiatric treatment. All profiles used in subsequent analyses were valid, based on computer-narrative statements derived from each test's validity indices. The MCMI-I1 was computer-scored from National Computer Systems and the 16 PF was computer-scored at the Institute of Personality and Ability Testing. All tests were given after the initial clinical interview but before the initiation of clinical interventions. There were a total of 145 MCMI-I1 and 16 PF profiles presented for analysis. All statistics were done by computer, using the SPSS statistical package.
RESULTS* Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients were established between the MCMI-I1 and 16 PF scales. Only the statistically significant values will be discussed. Personality Disorder Scales The Schizoid and Avoidant Scales were designed to measure Mdlon's "passive detached" and "active detached" personality types, respectively. The Schzoid and Avoidant Scales showed similar patterns of correlation with 16 PF Scales. I n general, they were significantly and negatively correlated with Venturesome (-.61, -.54), Dominance (-.40), Extroversion (-.65, -.4S), Independence (-.46, -.28), and Warmth (-.4O, - 2 2 ) and positively correlated with Shrewd (.28) and Self-sufficient (.33, 2 2 ) . The Dependent and Histrionic Scales were designed to measure the "passive-dependent" and "active-dependent" personality types. The Dependent Scale was negatively correlated with Independent (-.42), Dominant (-,391, and Suspicious (-,211 and did not correlate positively with any 16 P F scale. The Histrionic Scale showed the highest correlations with the 16 PF. I t was associated with Extroversion (.64), Venturesome (.64), Enthusiastic
'Tables of means and SDs for each subscale of the inventories administered are given for women and men separately in Document NAPS-04970. Remit 9.25 for photocopy or $4.00 for fiche to Publications Service, c/o Microfiche Publications, POB 3513, Grand Central National Auxili Station, New Y X , NY 10163.
702
R. J. CRAIG
&
R. E. OLSON
(.61), Independent (.56), and Dominant (.48). It correlated negatively with Forthright (-.39) and Group Dependent (-.38). The Narcissistic and Antisocial Scales tap Millon's "passive-independent" and "active-independent" personality types. The Narcissistic Scale positively correlated with Independent (.61), Dominant (.57), Venturesome (.39), Extroversion (.39), and Enthusiastic (.39) and negatively with Forthright (-.42). The Antisocial Scale was positively associated with Dominant (.40), Independent (.35), Suspicious (.35), and Experimenting (.23) and negatively with Conscientious (-.24). The Aggressive/Sadistic Scale measures Millon's "active-discordant'' type. It was positively associated with Dominant (.53), Independent (.47), Suspicious (.39), Tough Poise (.30), and Experimenting (.23) and negatively associated with Forthright (-.24). The Compulsive Scale taps Millon's "passive-ambivalent" type, and the Passive-Aggressive Scale taps the "active-ambivalent" type. The Compulsive Scale correlated moderately with Emotionally Controlled (.52), Conscientious (.51), and Self-disciplined (.45). It had no significant negative correlations with any 16 PF scale. The Passive-Aggressive Scale correlated with Anxiety (.52), Tension (.39), and Dominant (.29) and negatively with Submissive (-.40), Calm and Stable (-.39), Venturesome (-.25), and Controlled (-.24). This is consistent with Millon's belief that this personality type has a strong element of anxiety and apprehension chat underlies behavior. The Self-defeating Scale measures Millon's "passive discordant" style. This is a new scale to MCMI-I1 and this study represents the first independent report of the scale's intercorrelations. The scale correlated positively with Anxiety (.56), Self-doubting (.46), and Tension (.37) and negatively with Emotional Stability (-.43), Venturesome (-.30), and Self-disciplined (-.27). The Schizotypal, Borderline, and Paranoid Scales measure the more pathological and dysfunctional variations of Millon's basic personality types. The Schizotypal Scale was positively associated with Self-doubting (.27), Self-sufficient (.27), and Independent (.25) and negatively correlated with Venturesome (-.41), Extroversion (-.40), Enthusiastic (-.35), and Emotionally Stable and Controlled (-.40). The Borderline Scale correlated with Anxiety (.46), Self-doubting (.35), Suspicious (.35), Tension (.34), and Dominant ( 2 1 ) and negatively with Self-disciplined (-.32) and Self-assured (-.32). The Paranoid Scale was ~ o s i t i v e lassociated ~ with Independent (.34), Dorninant (.31), Tough Poise (.25), and Suspicious (.23) and negatively associated with Forthright (-.28) and Abstract Thinking (-.22).
Clinical Scales The MCMI-I1 Anxiety Scale was designed to measure anxiety, tension,
MILLON I1 SCALES AND PERSONALITY TRAITS
703
restlessness, and apprehension. The MCMI-I1 Anxiety Scale showed significant associations between 16 PF Anxiety (.34), Apprehension (.29), and Tension (.29) Factors. The Somatoform Scale was designed to assess physical complaints of a vague and unsystematic nature. The Somatoform Scale was significantly associated with Shy (.24), Extroversion (.27), Control (.22), and Conscientious (.21). The Bipolar Manic Disorder Scale taps emotional lability, overactivity, and distractibility. It was moderately and positively associated with 16 P F Factors, Independent (.55), Dominant (.51), Venturesome (.51), Extroversion (.50), and Enthusiastic (.47) and negatively associated with Forthright (- .42). The Dysthyrnia Scale assesses apathy, guilt, self-deprecatory cognitions, and feelings of discouragement. I t was significantly associated with 16 PF Scale Anxiety (.40), Self-doubting (.32), Conservative (.32), and Tension (.27), suggesting a strong anxiety component associated with the scale. The Alcohol Dependence Scale measures social, occupation, and behavioral difficulties associated with problematic drinlung. I t was significantly associated with Anxiety (.35), Suspicious (.26), Submissive (.24), and Suspicious (.24). The Drug Dependence Scale measures problems with impulse control, lack of social conformity, and recurrent problems with drugs. The scale was significantly associated with Dominance (.44), Independence (.38), Suspicious (.36), Tough Poise (.24), and Expedient (21) and negatively associated with Controlled (-.25) and Forthright (-.24). The Thought Disorder Scale was constructed to tap disorganized thinking, confusion, delusions, and hallucinations. It was positively associated with Anxiety (.33) and Self-doubting (.24) and negatively associated with Venturesome (-.28), Extroversion (-.24), and Abstract Thinking (-.23). The Major Depression Scale was designed to measure symptoms associated with psychotic depression. I t was associated with Anxiety (.48), Selfdoubting (.35), and Tension (.33) and negatively associated with Emotionally Stable (- .34), Venturesome (-.34), and Extroversion (-.28). The Delusional Disorder Scale assesses grandiosity, delusional thinking, and periodlc belligerence. I t showed only one significant correlation, in the negative direction, with Abstract Thinking (-.24). Conclusions First, the pattern of results add to the growing literature on the concurrent validity of the MCMI-I1 Clinical Scales. They were correlated with 16 P F Scales in a meaningful and logical manner, given the underlying construct measured by the scales themselves. Keep in mind that the MCMI-I1 is a clinical test of personality, whereas the 16 P F is a test measuring normal per-
704
R. J. CRAIG & R. E. OLSON
sonality traits. The MCMI-I1 assesses maladjustment whereas the 16 PF describes trait-based, normal personality functioning. A general "maladjustment" factor would not be expected to appear in both tests. I n fact, the two tests compliment each other, and that is the reason both are used clinically and in combination with this sample. Second, these results suggest there may be normal behavioral variants associated with Millon's types, as suggested by the pattern of correlations with the 16 PF normal-trait scales. Although the magnitudes of the correlations were below .50 with many in the .20s, the fact that there were statistically significant associations between the scales of a clinical and nonclinical test of personality adds credence to Millon's belief that personality disorders are pathological variations of basic personality styles. Thus, explorations of Millon's basic types within the normal population (Strack, 1987) seem justified. REFERENCES
J. S. (1984) Validation of two scales for narcissistic personality disorder. Journal of AUERBACH, Personality Assessment, 48, 649-653. BRODAY, S. E. (1988) Perfectionism and Millon basic personality patterns. Psychological RPports, 63, 791-794. CATTELL, R. B., EBER,H. W., & TATSUOKA, M. M. (1988) Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire (16 P F ) . Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality & A b i t y Testing. CHOCA,J . P., SHANLEY,L. A., & VANDENBURG,E . (1992) Interpretive guide to the Millon ClinicaIMtiltiaxial Inventory. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. CRAIG, R. J. (In ress) The Millon Clinical Mulriaxial Inventory: a clinical and information synthesis. ~iflsdale,NJ: Erlbaum. M. (1990) Current utilization of psychological tests at diagnostic CRAIG,R. J., & HOROWITZ, practicum sites. Clinical Psychologist, 43, 29-36. CRAIG,R. J., & WEINBERG, D. (In press) The Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory: literature review. In R. Craig (Ed.), The Millon Clinical Mtrltiaxial Inuentory: a clinical and information synthesis. H a d a l e , NJ: Erlbaum. DANA,R., & CANTKELL, J. (1988) An update on the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 760-763. DUBRO,A. F., WETZLER,S., & KAHN,M. W. (1988) A comparison of 3 self-report inventories for the diagnosis of DSM-I11 personality disorders. Journal of Personalio Disorders, 2, 256-266. K. A,, SCHUMPH,D., PHILLIPS, N., ROBERTSON, G., SHERWOOD, G., GABRYS,J. B., UTENDALE, O'HARE, T., ALLARD,I., CLARK,M., & LAYE,R. C. (1988) Two inventories for the measurement of ps chopathology: dimensions and common factorial space on Mdon's clinical and ~ ~ s e n c igeneral 's personality scales. Psychological Reports, 62, 591-601. HOLLIMAN,N., & GUTHRIE,P (1989) A comparison of the MCMI and the CPI in assessment of a nonclinical population. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45, 373-382. LEAF, R. C., DIGUISEPPE,R., ELUS,A,, WOLFE,J., YEAGER,R., & ALINGTON,D. (1987) Treatment intake status and the MCMI's "Axis 11" scale scores. In C. Green (Ed.), Conference on the Millon clinical inventories (MCMI, MBHI, MAPI). Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems. Pp. 21-29. ~ R S HD., T., STILE,S. A,, STOUGHTON, N . L., & TROUT-LADEN, B. L. (1988) Psychopathology of opiate addiction: comparative data from the MMPI and MCMI. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 14, 17-27. MCCANN, J. T. (1989) MMPI personality disorder scales and the MCMI: concurrent validity. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 45, 365-369. MCMAHON, R. C., & DAVIDSON, R. S. (1985) An examination of the relationship between per-
MILLON 11 SCALES AND PERSONALITY TRAITS
705
sonality patterns and symptom/mood patterns. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49, 552-556. MCMAHON,R. C., & DAVIDSON,R. S. (1986) Concurrent validity of the clinical symptom scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 42, 908-912. W O N ,T. (1987) Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory-11: manual for the MCMI-11. Minneapolis, MN: National Computer Systems. MOREY,L. C. (1986) A comparison of three personality disorder assessment approaches. Journal o/Psychopathology and Behavior Assessment, 8, 25-30. MOREY,L. C., & LEVINE,D. J. (1988) A multitrait-multimethod examination of Minnesota Multiphasic Personaliry Inventory (MMPI) and Millon Chnical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI). Journal o/ Psychopathology and Behauioral Assessment, 10, 333-344. OWNBY,R. L., WWBROWN,F. H., C m , C. N., & BAR NET^, R. W. (1990) A combined factor analysis of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory and the MMPI in an offender population. ]ournu1 of Clinical Psychology, 46, 89-96. PIOTROWSKI,C., & LUBIN,B. (1990) Assessment ractices of health s y ~ h o l o ~ ~survey s ~ s of APA Division 38 clinicians. Professional ~ s ~ c ! ~ l Research o ~ y : ani~ractlce,2 1, 99-106. RETZLAFF, l? D. (1992) Professional training in psychological testing: new teachers and new tests. Journal of Training and Practice in Professional Psychology, 6, 45-50. Roesws, S. B. (1989) Validity of the Superiority and Goal Instability scales as measures of defects i n the self. ]ozrrnal of Personality Assessment, 53, 122-132. SMITH,D., CARROLL, J. L., & FULLER, G. (1988) The relationship between the W o n Clinical Multiaxial Inventory and the MMPI in a prlvate outpatient mental health clinic population. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 165-174. STUCK, S. (1987) Development and validation of an adjective checklist to assess the Millon personality types in a normal population. Journal ofPersonality Assesrment, 51, 572-587. WETZLER,S. (1990) The Mdlon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI): a review. Journal o/ Personality Assessment, 55, 445-464.
Accepted July 30, 1992.
