Psychiatrist v. Psychologist when considering patient’s credibility - Cross-Examining Psych Doctors, Tip #93

     Psychologists typically are trained and have more experience in administration, scoring and interpretation of psychological tests than psychiatrists.  This may be an important factor to consider in medical-legal cases where psychological test data is often the only form of objective information that can be presented for public inspection in open court and is useful in determining the patient’s credibility.  Point in case, a recent deposition transcript reveals a psychiatrist’s response to a question about the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2). This is approximately what the doctor said during his/her depo, “I really don’t know much about the MMPI-2.  I’m not a specialist in testing or I would have interpreted the results.  Maybe what you should do is have somebody else provide you with that information, I don’t.”  The MMPI-2, of course, is a version of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, a test that is the gold standard of psychological test batteries for medical-legal examinations.  In fact, the principal method for assessing the patient’s credibility is an objective psychological test battery containing such instruments as the MMPI that are capable of generating objective test scores that can be presented to the court to provide information both about the patient's credibility and any possible psychopathology.  For the reasons described above, considering the use of a psychologist for your medical-legal evaluations is strongly recommended.