Three drug and alcohol use screening scales are embedded within the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2: the MacAndrew Alcoholism Scale (MAC) and its revised version (MAC-R), the Addiction Acknowledgement Scale (AAS), and the Addiction Potential Scale (APS). The current study evaluated the reliability reporting practices among 210 studies administering the MAC/MAC-R, APS, and/or AAS. Furthermore, reliability generalization methods were used to characterize the previously reported reliability estimates associated with each instrument. The vast majority of studies (90.6%) did not provide measurement reliability data, suggesting a need for improved psychometric reporting. Data from the remaining studies yielded mean and median score reliability estimates below.70 for each of the identified measures. Although limited in some instances by sample size constraints, results suggest that these instruments tend not to produce scores with acceptable levels of reliability for most research or clinical situations.

No description available.

The present study, conducted during the Fall 1996 and Spring 1997 academic terms, investigated the susceptibility of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 2$\sp{\rm nd}$ Edition (MMPI-2) to fake good behavior. The MMPI-2 was administered to a sample population of 114 teacher education students at a private California university. Administrations were in two sessions a minimum of four to six weeks apart, including one in which the subjects were instructed to respond honestly and another in which they were instructed to fake good. A questionnaire inquiring as to their veracity on each administration was also collected. The null hypotheses were that (1) there would be no statistically significant differences between standard and fake-good clinical scale scores in the subject population, (2) there would be no correlation between MMPI-2 validity indices and the degree of MMPI-2 clinical scale elevation from standard to fake-good conditions, (3) MMPI-2 scales would not be susceptible to fake-good behavior, and (4) there would be no correlation between a subject's perceived ability to fake good and their v actual fake-good performance. Each of the null hypotheses was rejected. Findings indicated that K (Consistency) corrected clinical scales on the MMPI-2, and to a lesser degree non-K corrected scales, were significantly susceptible to fake good behavior. The L (Lie) and K validity scales, however, were found to consistently detect the fake good behavior. Richwerger's (1989) results were generally confirmed, and recommendations for practical application of the instrument were addressed.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.