Files
Abstract
The current study investigated the clinical utility of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory for Adolescents, Restructured Form (MMPI-A-RF) to identify differences among juvenile youth that reported experiencing trauma compared to those who did not, as well as, clinical scale differences in gender for individuals that reported trauma history. In addition, authors explored differences at the item level and predictive accuracy for statistically significant clinical scales and items for youth that experienced trauma. Method: Retrospective data of 308 adjudicated youth (79.5% males) referred for psychological services participated in the study. Results: A one-way MANOVA analysis demonstrated juvenile youth that have experienced trauma are likely to endorse higher clinical scale scores on 19 of 42 clinical scales. Another one-way MANOVA analysis revealed females are more likely to endorse higher clinical scale scores on 26 of 42 clinical scales. As a whole, Hierarchical Binary Logistic Regression analyses determined clinical scales significant for trauma are predictive by a rate of 64.9% accuracy. One clinical scale specifically was successful for predicting trauma, Malaise, however, a Stepwise Discriminant Analysis indicated two of eight items answered false on this scale were significant predictors for determining who does not have trauma. Overall, the MMPI-A-RF appears to be a useful tool to assist clinician’s assessment of trauma symptoms to inform treatment, though further research is necessary regarding the validity, reliability, and generalizability of the MMPI-A-RF.