Date Approved


Degree Type

Open Access Dissertation

Degree Name

Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

Department or School


Committee Member

Eamonn P. Arble, PhD

Committee Member

Tamara Loverich, PhD

Committee Member

Chong Man Chow, PhD

Committee Member

Nicole Kletzka, PhD

Committee Member

Yossef S. Ben-Porath, PhD, ABPP


Examining the impact of different factors influencing the validity of an individual’s self-report during a psychological assessment is important in ensuring valid clinical findings and useful recommendations. These factors are often referred to as response biases. There are multiple types of response bias that can negatively influence the validity of self-reports in clinical assessment contexts. Specifically, individuals undergoing an assessment can be impacted by non-contentbased response bias, overreporting, and underreporting of psychological impairment and/or distress. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) instruments are amongst the leading tools within professional psychology used to identify response bias. The most recent iteration, the MMPI-3, incorporates the latest updates and normative comparison data into validity scales that are designed to capture the different domains of response bias. The current study sought to explore and identify different clinical and contextual factors that influence response bias amongst different groups of individuals involved in a forensic system using the MMPI-3. The results suggest that both situational context as well as psychological impairment and distress may play roles in different levels and types of response bias between different groups of people within a forensic system. This study serves as an important first step in better identifying the unique threats to assessment validity amongst different individuals involved in forensic systems.