A meta-analytical review of the responses in the MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF clinical and restructured scales of parents in child custody dispute

  1. Redondo, Laura
  2. Fariña, Francisca
  3. Seijo, Dolores
  4. Novo, Mercedes
  5. Arce, Ramón
Revista:
Anales de psicología

ISSN: 0212-9728,  1695-2294

Ano de publicación: 2019

Título do exemplar: January

Volume: 35

Número: 1

Páxinas: 156-165

Tipo: Artigo

DOI: 10.6018/ANALESPS.35.1.338381 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDIGITUM editor

Outras publicacións en: Anales de psicología

Resumo

La evaluación de las capacidades parentales para el ejercicio de la guarda y custodia de los hijos incluye el ajuste psicológico y la psicopatología. En esta evaluación, además, se ha de sospechar disimulación. El instrumento psicométrico de referencia para dicha evaluación es el MMPI. Para conocer de lo informado por los progenitores en disputa por la custodia nos planteamos una revisión meta-analítica de las escalas clínica y las escalas clínicas reestructuradas. Encontramos 21 estudios primarios con progenitores (se descartaron los diseños de simulación de progenitores en disputa) de los que obtuvieron 291 tamaños del efecto para las escalas clínicas y 1 para las reestructuradas. Los resultados mostraron un tamaño del efecto promedio positivo, significativo, y generalizable en las escalas Hy, Pd y Pa; negativo, significativo y generalizable en las escalas Ma y Si y no generalizable en las escalas Pt y Sc; y un tamaño del efecto promedio insignificante en las escalas Hs y D. Se estudió el género como moderador, no hallándose diferencias entre padres y madres. Se discuten las implicaciones de los resultados para la práctica forense.

€ Ver financiamento

Información de financiamento

This research has been sponsored by a grant of the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness (PSI2017-87278-R).

Financiadores

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Ackerman, J. J., y Pritzl, T. B. (2011). Child custody evaluation practices: A 20-year follow-up. Family Court Review, 49, 618-628. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2011.01397.x
  • Afifi, T. O., Cox, B. J., y Enns, M. W. (2006). Mental health profiles among married, never-married, and separated/divorced mothers in a nationally representative sample. Social Psychiatry and Epidemiology, 41 122-129. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00127-005-0005-3
  • Alonso, P., Moscoso, S., y Salgado, J. F. (2017). Structured behavioral interview as a legal guarantee for ensuring equal employment opportunities for women: A meta-analysis. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 9(1), 15-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpal.2016.03.002
  • Amado, B. G., Arce, R., Fariña, F., y Vilariño, M. (2016). CBCA reality criteria in adults: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 16(2), 201-210. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2016.01.002
  • Amado, B. G., Arce, R., y Herraiz, A. (2015). Psychological injury in victims of child sexual abuse: A meta-analytic review. Psychosocial Intervention, 24, 49-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psi.2015.03.002
  • American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
  • American Psychological Association. (2010). Guidelines for child custody evaluations in family proceedings. American Psychologist, 49, 677-680. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021250
  • Arce, R., Arch, M., Fariña, F., Muñoz, J. M., y Seijo, D. (2016). Estándares de evaluación psicológica forense en procesos de familia. En Sociedad Española de Psicología Jurídica y Forense y Asociación Española de Abogados de Familia (Eds.), Guía práctica sobre la prueba de especialistas en el marco del proceso de familia (pp. 31-41). Madrid: Sepin.
  • Arce, R., Fariña, F., y Seijo, D. (2005). Razonamientos judiciales en procesos de separación: Análisis cognitivo y de contenido de las motivaciones [Judicial reasoning in parental separation and divorce proceedings: Content and cognitive analysis of judicial reasoning]. Psicothema, 17, 57-63. Recuperado de http://www.psicothema.com/pdf/3064.pdf
  • *Arce, R., Fariña, F., Seijo, D., y Novo, M. (2015). Assessing impression management with the MMPI-2 in child custody litigation. Assessment, 22(6), 769-777. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1073191114558111
  • Arce, R., Fariña, F., y Vilariño, M. (2015). Daño psicológico en casos de víctimas de violencia de género: Un estudio comparativo de las evaluaciones forenses [Psychological injury in intimate partner violence cases: A contrastive analysis of forensic measures]. Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología y Salud, 6(2), 72-80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rips.2015.04.002
  • Archer, E. M., Hagan, L. D., Mason J., Handel, R., y Archer, R. P. (2012). MMPI-2-RF characteristics of custody evaluation litigants. Assessment, 19(1), 14-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1073191110397469
  • Baer, R. A., y Miller, J. (2002). Underreporting of psychopathology on the MMPI-2: A Meta-analytic review. Psychological Assessment, 24, 16-26. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.14.1.16
  • *Bagby, R. M., Nicholson, R. A., Buis, T., Radovanic, H., y Fidler, B. J. (1999). Defensive responding on MMPI-2 in family custody and access evaluations. Psychological Assessment, 11, 24-28. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.11.1.24
  • *Bathurst, K., Gottfried, A. W., y Gottfried, A. E. (1997). Normative data for the MMPI-2 in child custody litigation. Psychological Assessment, 9, 205-211. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.9.3.205
  • Ben-Porath, Y. S., y Tellegen, A. (2008/2011). MMPI-2-RF (Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Restructured Form): Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis. MN: University of Minnesota Press.
  • Blanco, V., Otero, P., López, L., Torres, Á., y Vázquez, F. L. (2017). Predictores del cambio clínicamente significativo en una intervención de prevención de la depresión [Clinically significant predictors of change in an intervention for the prevention of depression]. Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología y Salud, 8(1), 9-40. https://doi.org/10.23923/j.rips.2017.08.002
  • Bourassa, K. J., Allen, J. J., Mehl, M. R., y Sbarra, D. A. (2017). Impact of narrative expressive writing on heart rate, heart rate variability, and blood pressure after marital separation. Psychosomatic Medicine, 79, 697-705. http://doi.org/10.1097/PSY.0000000000000475
  • *Butcher, J. N. (1997). Frequency of MMPI-2 scores in forensic evaluations. MMPI-2 News and Profiles, 8, 2-4. Recuperado de http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.501.8539&rep=rep1&type=pdf
  • Butcher, J. N., Dahlstrom, W. G., Graham, J. R., Tellegen, A., y Kaemmer, B. (1989). Manual for the restandardized Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: MMPI-2. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
  • *Caldwell, A. B. (2004). [MMPI-2 child-custody dataset]. Inédito.
  • *Daskalakis, K. (2004). The use of the MMPI-2 in complex issues of high conflict child-custody disputes (Tesis doctoral, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada). Recuperado de http://search.proquest.com/docview/305082915/6411BF7FAC0B44F0PQ/5?accountid=17253
  • Ellis, E. (2000). Divorce wars: Interventions with families in conflict. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Ellis, E. M. (2012). Are MMPI–2 Scale 4 elevations common among child custody litigants? Journal of Child Custody, 9(3), 179-194. https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2012.715547
  • *Ezzo, F., Pinsoneault, T. B., y Evans, T. M. (2007). A comparison of MMPI-2 profiles between child maltreatment cases and two types of custody cases. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 7(2), 29-43. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228932.2012.674469
  • Fariña, F., Arce, R., y Novo, M. (2002). Heurístico de anclaje en las decisiones judiciales [Anchorage in judicial decision making]. Psicothema, 14, 39-46. Recuperado de http://www.psicothema.com/pdf/684.pdf
  • Fariña, F., Arce, R., y Real, S. (1994). Ruedas de identificación: De la simulación y la realidad [Lineups: A comparison of high fidelity research and research in a real context]. Psicothema, 6(3), 395-402. Recuperado de http://www.psicothema.com/pdf/935.pdf
  • Fariña, F., Arce, R., y Sotelo, A. (2010). ¿Es efectivo el estudio psicométrico estándar del peritaje del estado clínico y de la disimulación en progenitores en litigio por la guarda y custodia de menores? [Is effective the standard psychometric forensic evaluation of the mental health and faking good of the partners litigating by the child custody?]. Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología y Salud, 1, 65-79.
  • Fariña, F., Redondo, L., Seijo, D., Novo, M., y Arce, R. (2017). A meta-analytic review of the MMPI validity scales and indexes to detect defensiveness in custody evaluations. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 17(2), 128-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2017.02.002
  • First, M. B., Williams, J. B. W., Karg, R. S., y Spitzer, R. L. (2015). Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-5 Disorders, Clinician Version (SCID-5-CV). Arlington, VA, American Psychiatric Association.
  • Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis research. Educational Researcher, 5, 3-8.
  • Glass, G. V., McGraw, B., y Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  • *Gordon, R. M., Stoffey, R., y Bottinelli, J. (2008). MMPI-2 findings of primitive defenses in alienating parents. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 36, 221-228. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926180701643313
  • Graham, J. R. (2011). MMPI-2: Assessing personality and psychopathology (5a. ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  • Graham, J. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., y McNulty, J. L. (1999). MMPI-2 correlates for outpatient community health settings. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
  • *Gready, P. A. (2006). Use of the MMPI-2 in child custody evaluations and child protection evaluations: An examination of defensive responding and psychopathology (Tesis doctoral, Universidad de Hartford). Recuperado de https://search.proquest.com/docview/304958565/fulltextPDF/D9A6A25E7F2C4C8EPQ/1?accountid=17253
  • Greene, R. L. (2011). The MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF: An interpretive manual (3a. ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
  • Hathaway, S. R., y McKinley, J. C. (1940). A multiphasic personality schedule (Minnesota): I. Construction of the schedule. Journal of Psychology, 10, 249-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1940.9917000
  • *Hopkins, L. (1999). The role of the K scale as a validity measure in court-ordered child custody MMPI´s (Tesis doctoral, Kent State University). Recuperado de https://search.proquest.com/docview/619446221/184D9C7FCF38493DPQ/11?accountid=17253
  • Hunter, J. E., y Schmidt, F. L. (2015). Methods of meta-analysis: Correcting errors and bias in research findings (3a. ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Hunsley, J., Hanson, R. K., y Parkeret, K. C. H. (1988). A summary of the reliability and stability of MMPI scales. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 44-46.
  • *Kauffman, C. M., Stolberg, R., y Madero, J. (2015). An examination of the MMPI-2-RF (Restructured Form) with the MMPI-2 and MCMI-III of child custody litigants. Journal of Child Custody, 12(2), 129-151. https://doi.org/10.1080/15379418.2015.1057354
  • Konecni, V. J., y Ebbesen, E. B. (1992). Methodological issues on legal decision-making, with special reference to experimental simulations. En F. Lösel, D. Bender, y T. Bliesener (Eds.), Psychology and law: International perspectives (pp. 413-423). Berlín, Alemania: Walter de Gruyter.
  • *Mandappa, P. (2004). MMPI-2: The need for specific norms in child custody evaluations (Tesis doctoral, The Chicago School of Professional Psychology). Recuperado de https://search.proquest.com/docview/305057409/184D9C7FCF38493DPQ/6?accountid=17253
  • Martindale, D. A., Martin, L., Autin, W. G., & the Task Force Members (2007). Model standards of practice for child custody evaluations. Family Court Review, 45, 70-91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-1617.2007.129_3.x
  • Nichols, D. S. (2011). Essentials of MMPI-2 assessment (2a. ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
  • *Normington, D. (2006). Caregiver competency evaluations: An examination of psychological characteristics of caregivers who neglect their children (Tesis doctoral, Pacific Graduate School of Psychology). Recuperado de https://search.proquest.com/docview/304937462/C47F7B0B2ECA4917PQ/1?accountid=17253
  • *Ollendick, D. G., y Collings, R. P. (1984). MMPI characteristics of parents referred of child custody cases. Journal of Psychology, 117, 227-232. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.1984.9923682
  • *Pérez-Agüero, M. C., y Verduzco Álvarez-Icaza, M. A. (2014). Evaluación psicológica con el MMPI-2 a padres en litigio judicial de materia familiar. Revista Intercontinental de Psicología y Educación, 16(2), 71-91. Recuperado de http://www.redalyc.org/pdf/802/80231541005.pdf
  • *Peters, K. M. (2012). Marital conflict in child custody disputes and the corresponding psychological variables (Tesis doctoral, Immaculata University). Recuperado de https://search.proquest.com/docview/1464395031/184D9C7FCF38493DPQ/24?accountid=17253
  • Pope, H., Butcher, J., y Seelen, J. (2000). The MMPI and MMPI–2 in court: A practical guide for expert witnesses and attorneys (2a. ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Quinnell, F., y Bow, J. (2001). Psychological tests used in child custody evaluations. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 19, 491-501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/bsl.452
  • *Roma, P., Ricci, F., Kotzalidis, G. D., Abbate, L., Lubrano, A., Versace, G., Pazzelli, F., Malagoli, M., Girardi, P., y Ferracuti, S. (2014). MMPI-2 in child custody litigation: A comparison between genders. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 30, 110-116. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000192
  • Sánchez, G., Ampudia, A., Jiménez, F., y Amado, B. G. (2017). Contrasting the efficacy of the MMPI-2-RF overreporting scales in the detection of malingering. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 9(2), 51-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpal.2017.03.002
  • *Schenk, P. W. (1996). MMPI-2 norms for child custody litigants. The Georgia Psychologist, 50(2), 51-54.
  • Schmidt, F. L., y Hunter, J. E. (1981). Employment testing: Old theories and new research findings. American Psychologist, 36, 1128-1137. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.36.10.1128
  • Seijo, D., Fariña, F., Corras, T., Novo, M., y Arce, R. (2016). Estimating the epidemiology and quantifying the damages of parental separation in children and adolescents. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1611. http://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01611
  • Senín-Calderón, C., Rodríguez-Testal, J. F., y Perona-Garcelán, S. (2016). Las ideas de referencia y la preocupación por su presencia: estudio sobre su relevancia para la caracterización de las psicosis [The ideas of reference and worry for their presence: Study on their relevance to the characterization of psychosis]. Revista Iberoamericana de Psicología y Salud, 7(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rips.2015.10.004
  • Simms, L. J., Casillas, A., Clark, L. A., Watson, D., y Doebbeling, B. N. (2005). Psychometric evaluation of the restructured clinical scales of the MMPI-2. Psychological assessment, 17(3), 345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.17.3.345
  • *Strong, D. R., Greene, R. L., Hoppe, C., Johnston, T., y Olesen, T. (1999). Taxometric analysis of impression management and self-deception on the MMPI-2 in child-custody litigants. Journal of Personality Assessment, 73, 1-18. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA730101
  • Tellegen, A., Ben-Porath, Y. S., McNulty, J. L., Arbisi, P. A., Graham, J. R., y Kaemmer, B. (2003). MMPI–2 restructured clinical (RC) scales: Development, validation, and interpretation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
  • Vilariño, M., Arce, R., y Fariña, F. (2013). Forensic-clinical interview: Reliability and validity for the evaluation of psychological injury. European Journal of Psychology Applied to Legal Context, 5(1), 1-21. Recuperado de http://scielo.isciii.es/pdf/ejpalc/v5n1/original1.pdf
  • *Wakefield, H., y Underwager, R. (1990). Sexual abuse allegations in divorce and custody disputes. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 9(4), 451-468. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsl.2370090408
  • Wicker, A. W. (1975). An application of the multitrait-multimethod logic to the reliability of observational records. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1, 575-579. https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/014616727500100405
  • *Wisneski, J. L. (2006). The MMPI-2 in contested child custody cases: Differences for parents in entrenched disputes (Tesis doctoral, Hofstra University). Recuperado de https://search.proquest.com/docview/305324459/184D9C7FCF38493DPQ/7?accountid=17253
  • Zella, S. (2017). Marital status transitions and self-reported health among Canadians: A life course perspective. Applied Research in Quality of Life, 12, 303–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-016-9462-y
Fonte de datos: Dialnet