Amplifying issues related to psychological testing and assessment.

Abstract

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.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 9 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.