{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03431708991077557, 'fraction_numerical': 0.016472203157172273, 'mean_word_length': 5.508928571428571, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Utility of the MMPI–2–RF Validity Scales in Detecting Underreporting

Abstract This study examined the validity of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory–2–Restructured Form (MMPI–2–RF; Tellegen & Ben-Porath, 2011) Uncommon Virtues (L-r) and Adjustment Validity (K-r) scales in detecting underreporting. The study aimed to increment the previous literature in this field using a New Zealand population. We used a combined sample of 784 university students, with 173 participants completing the MMPI–2–RF with instruction to underreport in the context of applying for a job, and 611 completing the test under standard instructions. Results indicated that individuals who completed the MMPI–2–RF with underreporting instructions exhibited significantly lower scores on the majority of the MMPI–2–RF substantive scales, and significantly higher scores on the L-r and K-r validity scales. Additionally, L-r and K-r added incremental predictive utility over one another when differentiating the standard instruction and underreporting groups. Classification accuracy analyses provided additional evidence for the utility of the L-r and K-r scales by supporting their respective cut scores listed in the MMPI–2–RF manual (Ben-Porath & Tellegen, 2011). The findings of this study provide further evidence for the utility of the L-r and K-r scales in detecting underreporting extension to both a preemployment evaluation context and a novel population.