Reliability and validity of psychology licensing exams: Multiple roles and redundant steps in development and screening.

Abstract

To put comments and criticisms raised by Koocher (1989) concerning the screening of psychology licensing examinations for accuracy into a comprehensive perspective, we discuss the process of development, finalization, and administration of the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP). We also address Koocher's objections to five items considered for inclusion in Draft 26 of the EPPP, which was used in April 1987, as well as the issue he raises of content validity, citing the Testing Standards (Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing, 1985). Koocher (1989) reinforced the importance for all psychologists of paying serious attention to their obligation to protect the public through the licensing exam. This responsibility is particularly noteworthy for psychologists who serve on state licensing boards and have prescreening functions in terms of specific exam questions.Even though the experts on the American Association of State Psychology Boards (AASPB) Examination Committee, and the content consultants whom the committee utilizes, bring particular expertise to the process of developing the examination, members of the individual licensing boards (where permitted by law) have a critical role to play in finalizing the exam protocols. In order to put both the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) and the concerns expressed by Koocher (1989) into context, it will be useful to review the process used in developing examinations.

The Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) in the era of evidence-based practice.

“…EPPP answer format. Rosen, Reaves, and Hill (1989) noted that test-takers are instructed to identify the "best answer available" and not necessarily the sole correct answer (see also ASPPB, 2007, p. 5). The implication of this is that one or more correct answer choices could be present but that they are not necessarily equally correct (i.e., some less correct answers may be used as distractors).…”

A survey of competencies for psychologists in developmental disability services

“…In recent years, increasing interest has been shown in the formulation of competencies necessary for practitioners to function effectively as psychologists. This interest has been reflected in a number of contexts, including tertiary educational settings (Belar & Perry, 1992), the establishment of professional standards (Overholser & Fine, 1990), and various aspects of the process of professional accreditation (Rosen, Reaves, & Hill, 1989;Bennett, 1992). Here in Australia, the recent work of the Steering Group for the Development of National Competency Standards has addressed several of these issues for the profession as a whole.…”

A Review on Ethical Issues and Rules in Psychological Assessment

“…According to Berndt (1984), psychologists should determine as to whether the sample of the test is similar to the individual being tested, as a means for generalizability of the results. Rosen, Reaves and Hill (1989) stated that, when choosing among the tests for a client, psychologists should pay regard to the validity and reliability level of the test and its compliance with the norms. The use of tests with high validity and reliability reduces biases and judgment mistakes; and tests enable comparison of individuals with normative groups (Turchik, Karpenko, Hammers and McNamara, 2007 , 2004]).…”