Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
Posted: 3/20/2006 9:42:28 AM EDT
About 6 years ago I went through the police academy, graduated in the top 10% of the class, passed all of the physicals, orals, procedurals, and other tests for 5 different conditional offers.

At the same time, I had just started going through a divorce. Guess what. I failed all of the psychs. (MMPI's) Most of them wouldn't say why, they just said I "didn't meet their profile" . I finally got an answer from one department that said my test results said I was "too angry".

6 years later, happy as a clam, re-married, a great son, a good life, I'd like to take the test again to see what it says now.

I've looked all over and can't find any of the tests online. Anyone know anywhere I can take the test online?
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 9:45:02 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/20/2006 9:47:01 AM EDT by DK-Prof]
Try googling Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory and see if there's a place that can administer and score it for you.

It is a fairly large test, and the scoring can be complicated (and extensive) so it's probabyl the kind of thing you'd have to pay for.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 10:02:18 AM EDT
They told me I was depressed.

....whatever....

But they gave me the job anyway.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 10:14:55 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/20/2006 10:16:28 AM EDT by JRBL1A1]
Those MMPI exams are understood only by those freaks that administer them.

I have witnessed a few people in the past few years that have been turned away that would otherwise be more than healthy enough to be a LEO. Being a part of a "command staff" I am able to see and be a part of some discussions on particular individuals that have been turned away. Keep in mind that none of the MMPI exams have a universal "grade" applied to them. They are simply read by the shrink and the attributes that appear on the exams are applied to the job at hand and if there are any major concerns... a call is made either way. If certain "spikes" appear to show a pattern of undesired behavior under stress, obviously that isnt good. I do know that there are different standards applied for different LEO jobs. A jailer has different requirements than a officer. A reserve officer has different requirements than a jailer or a regular deputy. A transport officer has a different set of rules than the other three, etc.

But.... I will vouch that no matter how physically fit a person is and/or no matter how straight a person can shoot, if that person does not have a sane mind then it means nothing. See, I actually think that the requirements for being LEO should rely more on a sane and educated mind than being so phyically fit and having a certain level of uncorrected vision and hearing. Both the vision and hearing can be corrected (eye glasses and hearing aids), and tools can help make up the difference in a "lesser" physical apptitude (to a certain extent), but if the mind is not sane and/or true, then the body is of little use. Besides, how many LE agencies force their officers to maintain those levels of physical fitness??? Not many.

Link Posted: 3/20/2006 10:26:34 AM EDT
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 10:43:45 AM EDT

Originally Posted By shotar:
The test itself really tells nothing. Its about the psychologist who administers and intereprets the results with other facts known about the person thrown in. Anyone going through a divorce would be angry. Many of the questions are not geared towards a serving Police Officer who could not pass the test if the questions are answered as asked. Most police psychologists want more than just the paper when asked to give an opinion, they want to actually talk to the person.



That's what had me curious/frustrated. Most of the ones I took, I never really got to talk to the psych.

And how you can tell if a person is stable just because they like/don't like "alice in wonderland" I don't get.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 10:57:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/20/2006 10:58:50 AM EDT by DK-Prof]

Originally Posted By dayv27:

And how you can tell if a person is stable just because they like/don't like "alice in wonderland" I don't get.




The MMPI, and the profiles in it that are tied to the DSM-IV diagnostic tools, is interesting because it is relatively a-theoretical. It is largely based on observed correlations, and not necessarily theoretical or causal connections. Thus, if researchers have found that schizophrenics prefer to take baths over showers 90 to 10, then that can be a useful data point, if combined with lots of other things that happen to correlate with a particular mental disorder. If you have enough such variables, you don't actually need to know WHY shizophrenics prefer baths over showers, but it can allow you to accurately diagnose them.


It's a little like if a nurse practioner diagnoses you with a kidney disorder by looking at the color of your tongue or something. She doesn't actually need to understand the biology of chemistry of how a kidney disorder can discolor your tongue, but she can know what the sings and symptoms are. Throw in another 10 other physical signs of that kidney disorder, and a nurse can make a very accurate disagnosis, without actually undertanding any of the causal mechanisms involved.


(As a qualifier, I don't actually work with this kind of stuff, but I do have a layman's understanding of it, and remember back to abnormal psych classes in college)
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 11:33:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By dayv27:

And how you can tell if a person is stable just because they like/don't like "alice in wonderland" I don't get.




The MMPI, and the profiles in it that are tied to the DSM-IV diagnostic tools, is interesting because it is relatively a-theoretical. It is largely based on observed correlations, and not necessarily theoretical or causal connections. Thus, if researchers have found that schizophrenics prefer to take baths over showers 90 to 10, then that can be a useful data point, if combined with lots of other things that happen to correlate with a particular mental disorder. If you have enough such variables, you don't actually need to know WHY shizophrenics prefer baths over showers, but it can allow you to accurately diagnose them.


It's a little like if a nurse practioner diagnoses you with a kidney disorder by looking at the color of your tongue or something. She doesn't actually need to understand the biology of chemistry of how a kidney disorder can discolor your tongue, but she can know what the sings and symptoms are. Throw in another 10 other physical signs of that kidney disorder, and a nurse can make a very accurate disagnosis, without actually undertanding any of the causal mechanisms involved.


(As a qualifier, I don't actually work with this kind of stuff, but I do have a layman's understanding of it, and remember back to abnormal psych classes in college)



Ok, then two questions:

Do you think the MMPI, properly administered and analyzed, is a valuable tool for HR-type situations?

Do you think the MMPI is commonly properly administered and analyzed?
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 11:38:09 AM EDT
Like the Prof said, they are a diagnostic tool. The word "test" is a little misleading. Think of them as a psych version of those little hammers that your family doctor smacks you in the knee with.

There is no way to study for them, I'm told being coached makes it WORSE.

As an aside, I've often wondered how the more prolific anti-cop posters on here would fare on these things. Our Psych guys only interview around one out of every five that take the test. More recruits fail this portion more than any other in the applicant process.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 11:41:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By WinstonSmith:

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By dayv27:

And how you can tell if a person is stable just because they like/don't like "alice in wonderland" I don't get.




The MMPI, and the profiles in it that are tied to the DSM-IV diagnostic tools, is interesting because it is relatively a-theoretical. It is largely based on observed correlations, and not necessarily theoretical or causal connections. Thus, if researchers have found that schizophrenics prefer to take baths over showers 90 to 10, then that can be a useful data point, if combined with lots of other things that happen to correlate with a particular mental disorder. If you have enough such variables, you don't actually need to know WHY shizophrenics prefer baths over showers, but it can allow you to accurately diagnose them.


It's a little like if a nurse practioner diagnoses you with a kidney disorder by looking at the color of your tongue or something. She doesn't actually need to understand the biology of chemistry of how a kidney disorder can discolor your tongue, but she can know what the sings and symptoms are. Throw in another 10 other physical signs of that kidney disorder, and a nurse can make a very accurate disagnosis, without actually undertanding any of the causal mechanisms involved.


(As a qualifier, I don't actually work with this kind of stuff, but I do have a layman's understanding of it, and remember back to abnormal psych classes in college)



Ok, then two questions:

Do you think the MMPI, properly administered and analyzed, is a valuable tool for HR-type situations?

Do you think the MMPI is commonly properly administered and analyzed?




I really don't know enough about the different profiles available for the MMPI to answer that question well.

When I learned about the MMPI, its use seemed primarily to be for diagnosing mental disorders, so it doesn't seem to useful from an HR persepctive based on that. However, my GUESS is that perhaps there are many sub-profiles that have been developed that probably correlate highly with thing like "tendency towards agression" or some such label.

Imagine if you are a city, or police department, and you've recently lost several large lawsuits because of officers that were a little too eager with the beating stick, and had trouble controlling their tempers and agrgession. Suppose that you ran them though the MMPI and found that they all shared a profile of increased agreesion, and that your model officers did NOT have that profile.

While it might not be "fair" to applicants, it might be a good idea for recruiters for the police department to try to avoid hiring people that score particularly high on such a profile (and the city lawyers and administrators may also be driving such decisions).


From a general HR perspective, however, I don't really see how something liek the MMPI would be that useful, since it is not a personality instrument per se - just a diagnostic tool. Especially since there are good personality measures available out there commercially.

(Of course, tons of companies use the Myers-Briggs to "measure" personality, which is a complete joke. Might as well read their applicants' horoscopes or open a fortune cookie. )
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 1:44:50 PM EDT
I saw somewhere that half the people that take the MPPI test fail. This is just a weeding out process.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 2:00:40 PM EDT
That test is mentaly draining. I had to take it to be a MTI (DI for the army marine folk). If I remember correctly it was like 450 or so queations and some of them were the same or a little different. Like; Do you like your mother? Do you not like your mother? Do you like arranging flowers? Do you like unusal sexual positions (maybe its normal to me)? I was worn out after taking that test. Than a Dr. interviews you. I passed.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 2:03:51 PM EDT
An online test would be meaningless, a trained professional has to administer them.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 2:08:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dayv27:

Originally Posted By shotar:
The test itself really tells nothing. Its about the psychologist who administers and intereprets the results with other facts known about the person thrown in. Anyone going through a divorce would be angry. Many of the questions are not geared towards a serving Police Officer who could not pass the test if the questions are answered as asked. Most police psychologists want more than just the paper when asked to give an opinion, they want to actually talk to the person.



That's what had me curious/frustrated. Most of the ones I took, I never really got to talk to the psych.

And how you can tell if a person is stable just because they like/don't like "alice in wonderland" I don't get.



I got to talk to the shrink. I took three MMPIs and three CPIs in one year. That will make you stir crazy in itself. By the third test, I could finish it in 30-45 minutes. Needless to say, one answer indicated deception, as in they ask each key question 3 or 4 times in different ways. So, the shrink asked about it and I told him it was the third time I took the test that year, and he felt sorry for me.....

I would say it would be very hard to fail one of those tests.

"Would you like the job of a park ranger" "Would you like the job of a librarian" "Do parts of your body go numb?" Flashbacks, anyone?
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 2:10:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By dolanp:
An online test would be meaningless, a trained professional has to administer them.



I honestly don't know how that would make any difference. Care to elaborate? (this is not a polygraph exam.) It is computer scored and looks for trends and consistency.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 2:10:32 PM EDT
I took it once in High School (not just me everybody took it) and twice again for two different jobs. Never had a problem. Once I realize what we took in High School I wonder why we had to take it. I never liked the tests with "no right or wrong answers".

Link Posted: 3/20/2006 2:11:35 PM EDT

Originally Posted By wildearp:

Originally Posted By dayv27:

Originally Posted By shotar:
The test itself really tells nothing. Its about the psychologist who administers and intereprets the results with other facts known about the person thrown in. Anyone going through a divorce would be angry. Many of the questions are not geared towards a serving Police Officer who could not pass the test if the questions are answered as asked. Most police psychologists want more than just the paper when asked to give an opinion, they want to actually talk to the person.



That's what had me curious/frustrated. Most of the ones I took, I never really got to talk to the psych.

And how you can tell if a person is stable just because they like/don't like "alice in wonderland" I don't get.



I got to talk to the shrink. I took three MMPIs and three CPIs in one year. That will make you stir crazy in itself. By the third test, I could finish it in 30-45 minutes. Needless to say, one answer indicated deception, as in they ask each key question 3 or 4 times in different ways. So, the shrink asked about it and I told him it was the third time I took the test that year, and he felt sorry for me.....

I would say it would be very hard to fail one of those tests.

"Would you like the job of a park ranger" "Would you like the job of a librarian" "Do parts of your body go numb?" Flashbacks, anyone?




Yes, No, No
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 2:14:01 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/20/2006 2:14:19 PM EDT by DK-Prof]

Originally Posted By wildearp:

Originally Posted By dolanp:
An online test would be meaningless, a trained professional has to administer them.



I honestly don't know how that would make any difference. Care to elaborate? (this is not a polygraph exam.) It is computer scored and looks for trends and consistency.



+1

I believe it is taken and computer scored like a SAT. You fill out a bubble sheet, and it is computer scored - and various "profiles" are developed/graphed. Only at that point does a professional look at them, and interprets the profils.

So there definitely is some "interpretation" involved, but I don't believe it has to be administered by anyone in particular.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 2:24:41 PM EDT
I wonder what the results would come back on me...

"nuttier than a shithouse rat, but good with a 1911 so fit for duty"
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 2:52:13 PM EDT
I had to take that for my job at the nuke plant.
It was apparent to me what they wanted to see for answers and what they would flag.
Anyone who was crazy and smart would be able to fool it.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 2:56:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/20/2006 2:58:23 PM EDT by dolanp]

Originally Posted By DK-Prof:

Originally Posted By wildearp:

Originally Posted By dolanp:
An online test would be meaningless, a trained professional has to administer them.



I honestly don't know how that would make any difference. Care to elaborate? (this is not a polygraph exam.) It is computer scored and looks for trends and consistency.



+1

I believe it is taken and computer scored like a SAT. You fill out a bubble sheet, and it is computer scored - and various "profiles" are developed/graphed. Only at that point does a professional look at them, and interprets the profils.

So there definitely is some "interpretation" involved, but I don't believe it has to be administered by anyone in particular.



My mistake you are correct. My wife does this sort of thing and for some reason I thought MMPI was one of those that was like the WAIS. She says that it would be unethical to do one online though and that you have to have a kit which only a licensed psychologist can get.

She says the MMPI is considered by many not to be a very valid test and it has some issues.
Link Posted: 3/20/2006 3:02:48 PM EDT
These type of tests are death to those who over analyze things. If you agonize over multiple choice questions but breeze thru essay questions, beware. Nothing you can do about it, of course.

I took several in psych classes and again in the corporate world. Non of the embezzlers or scumbag vp's ever had an issue, but my boss got the "you have anger issues" bs (twice). Gee, I wonder why? Could it be the embezzlers and scumbag vp's pissing him off? Nooooooo.....

Our HR wanted to get a pre-employment screening test in place. They did everything wrong. They chose as the 'model' employees a bunch of ambitionless drones. Guess what happens two years down the road when you need to promote people into positions that require creativity and drive?

Top Top