Cultic Studies Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, 1992, Page 63
Table 4 also presents the frequency and percent of subjects with BR‟S above 75 on the
MCMI-I scales prior to treatment and after treatment. With the exception of the Histrionic,
Narcissistic, Antisocial-aggressive, and Psychotic Depression scales, the percentage of
subjects with BR‟s above 75 drops by as much as over 50%. The rise in the above listed
personality scales is not unusual and has been documented in other studies as a positive
treatment effect (McMahon et al., 1986).
Profile Stability
Of the 66 subjects who took the MCMI-I at Time I and Time II, 47 out of 66 subjects
(71.2%) demonstrated a personality profile shift, as indicated by changes on the two
highest points on the first eight scales from Time I to Time II. At Time I, 32 of 66 (48.4%)
subjects had Dependent as the highest scale. At Time II, 26 of the 32 subjects (81.2%) with
Dependent as the highest scale showed entirely different profiles, that is, the two highest
scales were not in the same rank order after treatment. Indeed, in the majority of cases the
highest Time I scales were no longer the highest scales at Time II. For example, of those
subjects for whom Dependent was the second highest personality scale score at Time 1, 5
out of 5 (100%) had entirely different profiles on the two highest scales at Time II. The
overall stability of the two highest scales for Time I to Time II was only 22%. This contrasts
to Hyer et al.‟s (1989) study showing pre- to post-treatment stability of 84% on the two
highest personality scales.
In the current study only one scale, Drug Addiction, had a Time I to Time II coefficient
above r =.60 (see Table 5). Six of the first eight personality scales had the lowest
coefficients reported in the literature on the MCMI. On the clinical scales the current study
reported the lowest coefficients in five of the nine scales. The overall average for both the
personality, clinical, and total MCMI scales was the lowest reported in the literature thus far.
Table 4 also presents the frequency and percent of subjects with BR‟S above 75 on the
MCMI-I scales prior to treatment and after treatment. With the exception of the Histrionic,
Narcissistic, Antisocial-aggressive, and Psychotic Depression scales, the percentage of
subjects with BR‟s above 75 drops by as much as over 50%. The rise in the above listed
personality scales is not unusual and has been documented in other studies as a positive
treatment effect (McMahon et al., 1986).
Profile Stability
Of the 66 subjects who took the MCMI-I at Time I and Time II, 47 out of 66 subjects
(71.2%) demonstrated a personality profile shift, as indicated by changes on the two
highest points on the first eight scales from Time I to Time II. At Time I, 32 of 66 (48.4%)
subjects had Dependent as the highest scale. At Time II, 26 of the 32 subjects (81.2%) with
Dependent as the highest scale showed entirely different profiles, that is, the two highest
scales were not in the same rank order after treatment. Indeed, in the majority of cases the
highest Time I scales were no longer the highest scales at Time II. For example, of those
subjects for whom Dependent was the second highest personality scale score at Time 1, 5
out of 5 (100%) had entirely different profiles on the two highest scales at Time II. The
overall stability of the two highest scales for Time I to Time II was only 22%. This contrasts
to Hyer et al.‟s (1989) study showing pre- to post-treatment stability of 84% on the two
highest personality scales.
In the current study only one scale, Drug Addiction, had a Time I to Time II coefficient
above r =.60 (see Table 5). Six of the first eight personality scales had the lowest
coefficients reported in the literature on the MCMI. On the clinical scales the current study
reported the lowest coefficients in five of the nine scales. The overall average for both the
personality, clinical, and total MCMI scales was the lowest reported in the literature thus far.
