Lorraine D. Eyde

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.

Assessment training in clinical psychology doctoral programs: what should we teach? What do we teach?

All clinical psychology doctoral programs accredited by the American Psychological Association provide training in psychological assessment. However, what the programs teach and how they teach it vary widely. So, also, do beliefs about what should be taught. In this study, program descriptive materials and course syllabi from 84 programs were analyzed. Findings highlight commonalities in basic course content and supervised practice in administering, scoring, and interpreting assessment instruments as well as differences in coverage of psychometric and other assessment-related topics and in the extent to which lectures, labs, and practica are integrated.

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.

Psychological decision support software for the public: Pros, cons, and guidelines ☆

Abstract Decision Support Systems, when based on psychological data, provide computer-based support for psychological decision making to the general public. These profitable computer products represent psychological applications of knowledge-based systems for use with microcomputers. This article reviews emerging problems with the scientific basis for these computer interpretations which are based on the results of psychological tests. It also covers promotional materials and user acceptability. The pros and cons of developing and marketing these psychological products are examined in terms of requirements for documenting the validity of tests and their potential development as psychological expert systems.

The Status of Women in State and Local Government

In the past decade women have become increasingly aware of their subordinate role in the world of work. During this period the number of publications on womens education and careers has increased substantially. Of the 334 major studies and reports about women published since 1960, 37% have appeared in 1970 and 1971 [3], and only five dealt specifically with women in public employment. This paper aims to update some of the information in a 1962 report prepared by the Public Personnel Association at the request of the Presidents Commission on the Status of Women [13] concerning the Equality of Opportunity for Women in Public Employment. Its purpose is to highlight positive actions being taken on behalf of women working for state and local government as well as to describe the concerns of women employees and the laws affecting them. This increased research interest in women in the work force also corresponded to the use women have been making of newly enacted laws and executive orders concerning equal employment opportunities. The section of the 1964 Civil Rights Act under Title VII that prohibits sex discrimination in private employment has been the concern of the Harvard Law Review [8] and Yale Law Journal [6]. About one-third of the Title VII cases involving all types of discrimination have been found to involve sex discrimination [15]. Executive Order 11375 issued by President Johnson in 1967, prohibiting sex discrimination in federal contracts and subcontracts, has been the basis for formal charges of sex discrimination filed by the Womens Equity Action League against more than 250 colleges and universities. Furthermore, as of February 1970 [20], 16 states had prohibited sex discrimination in public employment. The prohibition of sex discrimination was also included in the 1971 revision of Merit System Standards for federally grant-aided programs. The determination of the status of women in state and local government is difficult because of the lack of adequate documentation. In an effort to learn more about policies and programs affecting women employees for this report, I contacted eight states, three cities, one consolidated citycounty, and two counties in September 1971. This sample of 14 jurisdictions is undoubtedly biased since those included had a high probability of offering some special