Tests

Has anyone taken the MMPI -II and the Trauma Inventory tests? If so, can you tell me about them?

My counselor has suggested I take these tests.

Thanks.

I took the MMPI back in 1970 :-) Don't know if/how it might have changed. It's yes/no stuff about ambiguous questions. It will ask the same sorts of questions over and over (to check your consistency on something or other?) in slightly different words, it can be a bit wearing. It doesn't "allow" for black and white Truth. One question I remember was "I never lie" and I answered "True" because it was at the time, but "they" have "decided" :-) that everyone lies in some way or another at some time or another, we're not perfect :-) So watch for black and white thinking! I got confused because another question was "I loved my father" past-tense, and he was still alive :-) There's no right/wrong answers and there's a HUGE group of people over time who have taken the test that they have "sorted" so it's a fairly accurate test for whatever "they" have decided it is accurate for? It's not scary or "hard" but you see how it can kind of make you think/wonder what they're up to? But it's too huge/too many questions and level of complication to be able to really get any feel for what you might be "saying" until it's actually scored/interpreted. I recommend just relaxing and enjoying it and looking forward to anything it might shed light on for you and your helpers.

The MMPI II is a personality indicator test. Now, before you freak out, this doesn't mean you have a personality disorder. It is simply a tool used to help evaluate YOUR personality type. It can also indicate other problems that need to be addressed. Trauma Inventory is no big deal. . .basically answering questions about what happened to you.

Let me offer one bit of advice. . .QUIT TRYING TO FIND OUT ABOUT THE TESTS! Your therapist seems to think you might benefit from them, if you trust her, then go ahead and take them. If you find out about the testings ahead of time, common nature says that you're going to try to answer the questions one particular way or another. Throwing the test dowesn't help anyone, and even if you've no desire to do that, getting information ahead of time can cause this subconsciously to happen.

neither of the tests are hard indicators of any sort of diagnosis. They are only tools used to help yoru therapist and psychologist/psychiatrist to help you figure out what's going on.

Don't sweat it, ok?

I understand being inquisitive. I think sometimes its a function of our issues. Needing to be sure, be hypervigilent, know whats going on, figure out the situation. For me anyway, understanding what was going on was a way of keeping myself safe in therapy.

With that said, i also think that staying as focus on the true goal..getting better and openning up and trusting is also good.

I havent taken those tests though. I hope you feel safe taking them.

ev

Hi Raceka, do you know why your counselor wants you to take the tests? The question of taking tests is an interesting one, and I wonder if they are more useful for some people than others? For me, what would my therapist learn from a test that he could not learn from talking to me? I tend to present a brave front and make things out to be better than they are, so I am sure I would score higher on tests (more functional, less traumatized, less abused, less anxious, less depressed, etc.) than I really am. Whereas I am open with my T, and he knows and sees my truth. He does on occasion have to tell me to "quit minimizing" my issues, and I respond to that with greater honesty. So at least in my case, my T would get a more accurate measure of me and my issues by talking with me than by tests. Of the two therapists I've had, neither proposed tests. Is psychological testing something that T's with a particular therapeutic approach tend to use in practice?

Thanks everyone for your replies. I just like to research things.

He has not diagnoised me, but he's suspecting I have DID. He is experienced with trauma and working with survivors, but he said he is on a low level with DID. He gave me the option of transferring to another T who is highly trained and experienced in this area or staying with him. He wanted me to know that it will be a learning experience with him. I am sticking with him. I've been with him for 17 months now and I feel very comfortable and safe with him. I have total trust in him.

I just wanted to know what my support group thought of the tests.

Thanks again.

The MMPI is a standard test. It will ask you the same types of questions in different ways and you will respond by multiple choice. It makes statements similar to the quizzes you find here at PC. "I always say the wrong things." or such statements. It's easy, but lengthy and might take an hour or more to finish. You could take it home, if the doctor lets you, since it's just an inventory and it really doesn't matter where you answer it

Thanks Sky. T said it would take about 2 hours.

i've done the MMPI-II before. I wouldn't do it again. i don't really see what good it does either me or my t... if you need something new to put on your health insurance reimbursement sure go ahead. aside from that... what difference does a little label make? i really don't understand peoples desire to label... clinicians either. don't understand.

PS the MMPI-II doesn't screen for DID.

In one of my classes my prof. who is a neuropsycholist, says the less you know about these test , the accure it will be. He suggested that all T's takes some of these tests before we study about them, just to know ourself and to make sure we don't "tamper" with our answers, knowing what to say can change your results a lot.

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
alexandra_k said:
i've done the MMPI-II before. I wouldn't do it again. i don't really see what good it does either me or my t... if you need something new to put on your health insurance reimbursement sure go ahead. aside from that... what difference does a little label make? i really don't understand peoples desire to label... clinicians either. don't understand.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

In my experience, there's much more to be gained from an MMPI-2 than a diagnostic code. I'm interested in which traits are more pervasive versus underdeveloped and how they interact. The pattern of the scores across the different scales can suggest dynamics, conflicts, reactions to high stress, etc.

I'd never use an MMPI-2 just to obtain a diagnosis, but I do find the information I get from it to be clinically valuable. I also think that discussing the interpretation with the client and getting their feedback on how they experienced the test and their results has therapeutic value.

gg

> I'm interested in which traits are more pervasive versus underdeveloped and how they interact.

I guess I'm a little influenced from some of the social psychological 'situationism' literature which seems to undermine the notion of traits that are stable across variations in contexts, rather... I'm not sure that traits are useful or helpful constructs (internal validity sure but real world utility in anything other than a self fulfilling prophecy sense? i'm not terribly convinced).

> The pattern of the scores across the different scales can suggest dynamics, conflicts, reactions to high stress, etc.

So can talking to the client. The test is self report after all. If you want to learn about a persons personality one could of course... Talk to them.

I am under the understanding that the MMPI-II is a personality test and not a diagnosis. I thought it was just a tool for the T to use.

I'm also taking a Trauma Inventory test. That is to find out how extreme the trauma is.

That's all I know about the tests. I'm not trying to influence the test, just wanted to get an understanding of it. I will answer the test honestly.

Thanks everyone.

psychologists are fairly big on their tests because it is something distinctive that they do. they develop tests and they are trained to administer tests and they are trained to interpret findings. psychological testing is the domain of the psychologists (and they can be fairly... um... protective about their tests.

this isn't so unusual...

psychiatrists are fairly big on their medications because it is something distinctive that they do. they are trained to administer medications and prescribe them. medication is the domain of the psychiatrists (and they can be fairly... um... protective about their medication). 'cept for the anti-psychiatrists, of course, who are more into their psychoanalysis (thinking of Szasz in particular).

the MMPI test takes your self reported answers as input and delivers a score on a number of dimensions (or traits, i guess). probably best for you not to know what the dimensions / traits are or it will %#@&#! up your score because you will be trying to figure out what dimension each question is scoring you for. some of the questions are delightfully unobvious. there is also a surprising correlation that gives me a kick! but i don't think i should disclose that one... it is something along the lines of (making this up as an example) people with dimension x (anxiety, for example) tending to have an affinity for the colour blue and so if you answer 'blue is my favourite colour' you get a score towards anxiety!

so basically the data will look a bit like:
dimension 1: score
dimension 2: score
dimension 3: score
and so on. i think there might be some fancy math (woo hoo graduate level statistics is useful for something!!!!) to prioritise or whatever but the upshot is that you end up with a score on each dimension and then i guess there is some arbitrary threshold for when a score on a dimension is 'clinically significant'. if you are very very very lucky you might score clinically significant on about 9 dimensions as i was which greatly thrilled my psychologist because she figured she had about one or two years worth of work to do! (joke kinda semi sorta).

i'm skeptical about tests as you can see... if you or your therapist like to worry about all these little boxes that you might potentially fit when looking at you squinting then i guess it is an interesting exercise, however. almost like... reading hororscopes or runestones IMHO...

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
alexandra_k said:
> I'm interested in which traits are more pervasive versus underdeveloped and how they interact.

I guess I'm a little influenced from some of the social psychological 'situationism' literature which seems to undermine the notion of traits that are stable across variations in contexts, rather... I'm not sure that traits are useful or helpful constructs (internal validity sure but real world utility in anything other than a self fulfilling prophecy sense? i'm not terribly convinced).

> The pattern of the scores across the different scales can suggest dynamics, conflicts, reactions to high stress, etc.

So can talking to the client. The test is self report after all. If you want to learn about a persons personality one could of course... Talk to them.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Although I'm sure it happens, the test should never be interpreted blindly, as in "here's a report, tell me what it says about this person you've never laid eyes on." Talking to the client is still crucial.

And yes, while the test is self-report, the sheer number of items as well as the low face value of many of them make it hard to manipulate the results to come up with a specific profile. Also, while we might have a good sense of our personality, there may be certain patterns, behaviors, or dynamics that we experience but are too caught up in the middle of to be able to step back and articulate the "big picture". Interpretations about these types of patterns often are new information yet "ring true" to the client when presented to them, in my experience.

gg

</font><blockquote><div id="quote"><font class="small">Quote:</font>
RACEKA said:
I am under the understanding that the MMPI-II is a personality test and not a diagnosis. I thought it was just a tool for the T to use.

I'm also taking a Trauma Inventory test. That is to find out how extreme the trauma is.

That's all I know about the tests. I'm not trying to influence the test, just wanted to get an understanding of it. I will answer the test honestly.

Thanks everyone.

</div></font></blockquote><font class="post">

Raceka, I am not familiar with the Trauma Inventory test, sorry. I hope you have a positive experience with both of these and that you and your T find the information and experience useful.

Take care,

gg

Sorry, this has nothing to do with tests, but I just wanted to tell GG that I LOVE your signature line! Very thought-provoking.

OK, resume discussion . . .