An overview of the major changes in the 2002 APA Ethics Code.

Abstract

This article summarizes the major changes that were made to the 2002 Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct of the American Psychological Association. The 2002 Ethics Code retains the general format of the 1992 Ethics Code and does not radically alter the obligations of psychologists. One goal of the Ethics Committee Task Force was to reduce the potential of the Ethics Code to be used to unnecessarily punish psychologists. In addition, the revised Ethics Code expresses greater sensitivity to the needs of cultural and linguistic minorities and students. Shortcomings of the 2002 Ethics Code are discussed.

Culturally competent school assessment: Performance measures of personality

“…Cultural competency is consistent with the broad and specific objectives of the APA Ethics Committee Task Force (Knapp & VanderCreek, 2003), noted by Flanagan, Miller, and Jacob (2005) in drafting a code "more sensitive to the needs of disempowered or disenfranchised group members" (p. 441) and emphasizing the availability of resources for psychologists to selfdetermine their biases and cultural competency boundaries.…”

The 2002 revision of the American Psychological Association's ethics code: Implications for school psychologists

“…As Knapp and VandeCreek (2003) noted, new Standard 2.01b requires psychologists to consider client characteristics such as cultural background, disability, native language, or other diversity factors when assessing their own competence to provide services. Psychologists are obligated to be familiar with the professional literature that identifies skills and knowledge considered essential for working effectively with various groups; however, the standard "does not set an overly high bar" (Knapp & VandeCreek, 2003, p. 303).…”

“…The 2002 code has only five broad principles, with the titles chosen to be consistent with terminology used in the ethics literature (Knapp & VandeCreek, 2003). Consistent with the prior code, the General Principles are described as aspirational rather than enforceable standards.…”

“…A Code That is More Responsive to Diversity Knapp and VandeCreek (2003) indicated that another goal of the APA's Ethics Committee Task Force was to draft a code that was more sensitive to the needs of disempowered or disenfranchised group members. Consistent with this goal, the 2002 code provides a clearer mandate to respect cultural, individual, and role differences as well as to protect civil and human rights.…”

“…One goal of APA's Ethics Committee Task Force (ECTF) was to draft a code that would be broad enough to apply to diverse specialties, but specific enough to inform decision making (Knapp & VandeCreek, 2003). One way this has been achieved is to utilize qualifying modifiers (Nagy, 1999).…”