GAD and MMPI - 3

     I am excited to learn more about the MMPI-3. As briefly mentioned in class, I administered and scored the MMPI-2 routinely at the assessment clinic I worked at. However, I didn't interpret the results. Though we occasionally discussed cases as a clinic and the neuropsychologist explained the results of the assessments, I did not understand everything that the MMPI could tell us. I think the MMPI was helpful in conceptualizing clients when we only had about an hour of interview time and six hours worth of assessment material. It helped create a big picture of someone in a limited amount of time. I remember one case of a man I tested who was convinced (and tried to convince me) that he was a psychopath. When looking at his MMPI, it was clear that he was over-reporting in an attempt to portray himself in a better light. However, in interviews, he would say things to make himself seem dark and like something to be feared. After interviews and a series of assessments, the doctor concluded that he demonstrated narcissistic traits. He was a narcissist that wanted to be feared by others so he thought an ASPD diagnosis would do that for him. I think this will be a common experience for me as the MMPI is commonly used in forensics and I foresee it having a big part in my future. I remember watching the Johnny Depp and Amber Heard trials when a psychologist spoke on Amber's MMPI results. She spoke very well and did a good job of explaining a difficult concept to the jury. It made me wonder- how do I explain something so detailed in simple terms? How do I not say too much without saying too little? There are many avenues assessments can take you and it can feel overwhelming to relay it. 

    I am a fan of the MMPI because of the emphasis on over and under-reporting. Instead of just ruining the validity of the assessment, I like that it can possibly speak to the client's psychopathology. It can show the cognitive levels, point toward possible disorders, and provide the clinician with useful information. I was glad to see the nongendered norms development, however, I wonder if it really is as sound as they found. Considering Barlow's discussion of anxiety, it is most common in females, and being female is a factor in GAD development. Would getting rid of gendered norms then over-include or not include females on measures of anxiety? What about people whose gender is an important part of their identity? Is it better to routinely use the gendered or nongendered norms when gender may be a factor in understanding a person's psychopathology? I am excited to continue to learn more about interpretation and understand the utility of the MMPI. 

Grade- 18/20