The art of assessment in psychology: Ethics, expertise, and validity

Abstract

Psychological assessment is a hybrid, both art and science. The empirical foundations of testing are indispensable in providing reliable and valid data. At the level of the integrated assessment, however, science gives way to art. Standards of reliability and validity account for the individual instrument; they do not account for the integration of data into a comprehensive assessment. This article examines the current climate of psychological assessment, selectively reviewing the literature of the past decade. Ethics, expertise, and validity are the components under discussion. Psychologists can and do take precautions to ensure that the "art" of their work holds as much merit as the science.

Transitional Assessment Model for Students With Severe and/or Multiple Disabilities: Competency-Based Community Assessment

“…For these individuals, formal assessment practices are often impractical for specific program-planning purposes and of dubious validity (Cates, 1999;Kamphaus et al, 1999;LaSasso, 1999;Lennox & Hiltenberger, 1989;Voelker, Shore, Hakim-Larson, & Bruner, 1997;Zanetti, Geroldi, Frisoni, Bianchetti, & Trabucchi, 1999). For this reason, reliance on third-party informants (Enderle & Severson, 2003) is often considered a valuable and necessary supplement for gathering relevant data about a particular individual (Voelker et al, 1997).…”

Personality Assessment in the Diagnostic Manuals: On Mindfulness, Multiple Methods, and Test Score Discontinuities

“…Although there are established strategies for validating scores derived from individual psychological tests (and subtests), there are no agreed-upon procedures for validating the results of psychological assessment. As Cates (1999) wryly observed, he would be at a loss for words if an astute attorney (or, for that matter, and oppositional reviewer from an MCO) asked him to provide evidence regarding the reliability and validity of an assessment battery. He went on to note that “the care provided in the development of psychological tests overlooks the use of these techniques in combination in a battery” (Cates, 1999, p. 632).…”

“…As Cates (1999) wryly observed, he would be at a loss for words if an astute attorney (or, for that matter, and oppositional reviewer from an MCO) asked him to provide evidence regarding the reliability and validity of an assessment battery. He went on to note that “the care provided in the development of psychological tests overlooks the use of these techniques in combination in a battery” (Cates, 1999, p. 632). The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA et al, 2014) does not address this question either; it is an issue that remains largely unexamined, and one that warrants additional attention from psychometricians and clinical researchers.…”

The psychological report: A review of current controversies

“…The above information indicates that psychologists need to evaluate each statement in CBTI's within the context of the client's other data and decide which statements are valid and applicable and which are not (Cates, 1999). This is a difficult task, as poor integration of CBTI and clinician data can result in reduced validity of the report (Snyder, 2000).…”

“…An integrated report is not merely the presentation of findings from each of these unique assessment tools, but the blending of these findings into a meaningful understanding of the client in the context of the client's life (Beutler & Groth-Marnat, 2003;Lewak & Hogan, 2003). Multiple measures are used in the integrated report to obtain new information or to better explain findings which may be only weakly supported or vague without the inclusion of additional techniques (Cates, 1999). Integrated reports rely on good clinical judgment skills to make sense of contradictory findings and best understand results in terms of the assessment context, the client's background, and the referral question.…”