Gary G. Kay

Psychological testing and psychological assessment. A review of evidence and issues.

This article summarizes evidence and issues associated with psychological assessment. Data from more than 125 meta-analyses on test validity and 800 samples examining multimethod assessment suggest 4 general conclusions: (a) Psychological test validity is strong and compelling, (b) psychological test validity is comparable to medical test validity, (c) distinct assessment methods provide unique sources of information, and (d) clinicians who rely exclusively on interviews are prone to incomplete understandings. Following principles for optimal nomothetic research, the authors suggest that a multimethod assessment battery provides a structured means for skilled clinicians to maximize the validity of individualized assessments. Future investigations should move beyond an examination of test scales to focus more on the role of psychologists who use tests as helpful tools to furnish patients and referral sources with professional consultation.

Amplifying issues related to psychological testing and assessment.

February 2002 • American Psychologist able to improve on the validity of their assessment conclusions (Garb, 1998; Grove, Zald, Lebow, Snitz, & Nelson, 2000). Because Meyer et al. (2001) provided an overly optimistic evaluation of current psychological assessment practices, many readers of their article are likely to conclude that the scientific status of psychological assessment is firmly established. Unfortunately, nothing could be further from the truth. A more accurate conclusion is that very little is known about the validity or utility of psychological assessment. This does not mean that psychological assessment is without merit; rather, it indicates that, as with so many aspects of psychological practice, psychologists lack scientific evidence that bears on assessment’s value. Psychologists must build a science of assessment, not just a body of research on tests and test subscales. If psychological assessment is to be promoted on the basis of science, it must be on the basis of relevant studies of assessment, not on unwarranted extrapolations from the literature on test validity.

Next-day residual effects of gabapentin, diphenhydramine, and triazolam on simulated driving performance in healthy volunteers: a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial

Next‐day residual effects of a nighttime dose of gabapentin 250u2009mg were evaluated on simulated driving performance in healthy participants in a randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind, multicenter, four‐period crossover study that included diphenhydramine citrate 76u2009mg and triazolam 0.5u2009mg.

Next-day residual effects of flibanserin on simulated driving performance in premenopausal women

The objective of this study was to determine the next‐day residual effects of acute and steady‐state nighttime dosing of flibanserin on simulated driving performance and cognitive function in healthy premenopausal women.