Michaels, M., (2006).

Ethical considerations in writing psychological assessment

reports. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(1), 47-58.

Purpose of Study:
• To address the ethical questions from three general areas: the balance between (a) providing
information and protecting client welfare, (b) providing information and protecting client
confidentiality, and (c) utilizing information that may be of assistance and ensuring information
is reliable and valid. Additionally, specific suggestions on how to deal with ethical concerns
when writing reports are discussed.
Methods Employed:
o Evaluation of the literature
Conclusions:
• Beneficence and autonomy
o Balance between a client’s right know (autonomy) and potentially harmful information
(beneficence)
o Harm
 Need to be aware of how conclusions or included data may harm the individual
 Direct impact (individual’s emotional state) or indirect impact (how others
behave toward the individual)
• Information may be used to omit access to services or funding
o Labeling
 Can be stigmatizing (when labeling, the least stigmatizing label should be used,
Standard 8.8 of the Standards of Educational and Psychological Testing), this
can be a problem when not giving a diagnosis prevents the client from receiving
resources.
• Beneficence can be given to both providing and not providing a label
o Provide and it causes emotional distress but gives them access to
resources
o Don’t provide and it avoids emotional stress but does not give
 them access to resources
 Caution when labeling a minor
• Results may be incorporated into other documents (IEPs) without the
context of the report and then transferred from year to year with the child.
o IQ scores
 Including scores allows for easy comparison OR it can become the focus and the
profile of the student is lost.
 Reporting IQ scores from older tests (<10 years old) are probably inaccurate.
• WAIS-III is anticipated to be 3 points higher than when the test was first
published in 1997.
• Beneficence and Confidentiality
o Reports often include very personal information about the client and the client’s family.
o Dilemma: if notable information emerges during an assessment, that was not part of the
original referral, should it be included in the report?
 Information could be helpful to the referral source and the individual
 Information that was not requested may violate the individual’s right to
confidentiality.
 Need to clarify in advance, how such information will be handled. If unable to
do this in advance, evaluators should be cautious and only keep information in
the report that relates to the referral question.
o Release of test data
 Dilemma: should raw data be included in a report?
• The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing encourages test
data to be left out of the report.
• In the absence of a release from the client, data should be provided only
as required by law or court order.
• SDTD several considerations are identified regarding disclosure of raw
test data.
o Consent to release information
 o Disclosure to unqualified individuals
o Test security and copyright obligations
o Conformity with legal statutes, regulatory mandates, and
organizational rules.
o Still unsure of which guidelines to follow because they do not
agree, however, clinicians should choose the more cautious
approach
o Release of test procedures and materials
 Keeping the copyright to the test material may conflict with legal and clinical
needs.
 Maintain the integrity and security of test materials and other assessment
techniques.
• Validity and utility
o Need to describe the strengths and limitations of test results and interpretation if they are
not instruments that have established validity and reliability.
o Should clarify the limitations of your observations and weigh the benefit of having less-
reliable information.
o Computer-Aided Assessment and ethics
 Incorporation of statements from computer-based test interpretation (CBTI) may
be a breech of ethics.
 Found that most studies support the accuracy of CBTI interpretation, though as
much as 50% of interpretative statements will not apply to a specific client.
• How to address ethical questions in the written report
o Decisions about including any interpretive statements should be
governed by the guiding principles of autonomy, beneficence,
confidentiality, and above nonmaleficence.
o Will it harm? If so leave it out or reword
o Do not include if it will clearly or very likely breech confidentiality
o Only include if it will benefit the individual
o Language
  Information should be provided in a positive way, focusing on
the individual’s strengths.
 Precise and thoughtful language helps address the issues of
harm, labeling, and confidentiality.
o Presenting the report
 Provide verbal feedback with written information to increase
therapeutic rapport and client self-perception
Limitations:
• Can’t tell if students are telling the truth
• Study only used one class: science

Critique:
Concerns
• Many of my concerns were addressed in the Future Needs section. I had many questions
regarding cultural concerns and report writing.
• I was also concerned about copies of the report going to people. What about custody situations
or school organizations that ‘pay’ for the assessment? Who does it belong to? Who should see
it? Who signs the consent for release?
• CBTI is another concern for me. Often psychologists are lured into purchasing scoring and
interpretive software. I believe that scoring software is helpful, however, the interpretation
needs to be in the hands of the psychologist not the computer.
Comforts
• Well written and easy to read
• Article points out limitations and areas for further research
• 42 references ranging in date from 1967-2006
• Author backed up what they were saying with examples