Personality Assessment

PETITION FOR THE RECOGNITION OF A
PROFICIENCY IN PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

750 First Street, NE
Washington, D.C. 200024242
(202) 3365500
PETITION PACKAGE (RENEWAL)
NOTE: Complete responses to all questions posed in each of the criteria are required. Appendix
materials should not be considered as substitutes for the completion of responses to questions in the
criteria.
Title of proficiency: Personality Assessment
Definition: A proficiency is a circumscribed activity in the general practice of professional psychology

or one or more of its specialties that is represented by a distinct procedure, technique, or applied skill
set used in psychological assessment, treatment and/or intervention within which one develops
competence.
In order to educate and protect the public, the profession has the responsibility to exercise authority
over the process of proficiency recognition. Organization (s) responsible for the proficiency will define
how the proficiency meets public need and how practitioners acquire the psychological knowledge and
skills that represent the bases for its practice. In addition, organization (s) that are responsible for the
organized development of the proficiency are responsible for collaborating with other organizations to
ensure that appropriate education and training is provided in a sequential and integrated nature. When
education and training in a proficiency can be achieved through interdisciplinary study, organization
(s) responsible for the proficiency will describe how the proficiency meets the criteria within the
context of interdisciplinary education and training.
Petition Form
Page 2
Petition Sponsor
Criterion I. Administrative Organizations. The proposed proficiency is represented by one or

more organizations that provide systems and structures that are sufficient to support the
organized development of the proficiency, in terms of effectiveness, quality improvement, and
provider identification and evaluation.
Commentary: In order to ensure the management of the proficiency, having the resources of
national organization(s) willing to assume responsibility is important, so that psychology's
scientific and professional integrity can be preserved. These organizations meet regularly to
review and describe the proficiency and appropriate policies for education and training in the
proficiency.
1. Please provide the following information for the organization submitting the petition:
Name: Society for Personality Assessment (SPA)

Address: 6109H Arlington Blvd.
Falls Church, VA 22044
Office phone: (703) 534-4772
FAX (703) 534-6905
Email: manager@spaonline.org
Website: www.personality.org
2. Please provide the following information for the President or Chair of the organization:
Name: Robert Archer PhD APA membership status: Fellow

520 West 21st Street, Suite G2
Norfolk, VA 23517
(757) 407-1566 (office)
757-395-4223 (fax)
rarcher@bayforensicpsychology.com
3. Please provide the following information for the organization submitting the petition:
Year organization founded 1938
Organization incorporated Yes

In what state is the organization incorporated New Jersey
Describe the purpose and objectives of the administrative organization.

Petition Form
Page 3
Purpose and objectives: The overarching purpose of the Society for Personality Assessment is to
further the development of methods of personality assessment, the advancement of research on their
effectiveness, and the enhancement of applied practice in personality assessment. The Society
embraces the following objectives:
a. Development of methods of Personality Assessment.

b. The advancement of research on the effectiveness of Personality Assessment methods.
c. The exchange of ideas about theory, research, and practice of Personality Assessment.
d. Training in Personality Assessment.
e. Public education on Personality Assessment.
f. Formal recognition of contributors to the study and practice of Personality Assessment.
Please append the bylaws for the petitioning organization if bylaws are not provided on the website.
SPA Bylaws:
http://storage.jason-mohr.com/www.personality.org/General/pdf/2015%20Bylaws.pdf
. Please provide the following information for all officials in the organization, including the
Executive Officer or responsible petitioning staff person.
APA Status: Fellow

PAST PRESIDENT 516-877-4736 (office)
516-877-4754 (fax) Adelphi University
Robert F. Bornstein, Ph.D.
September 2015 - August 2017 bornstein@adelphi.edu Department of Psychology
212 Blodgett Hall
Garden City, NY 11530
APA Status: Fellow

PRESIDENT (757) 407-1566 (office)
Robert Archer, Ph.D. 757-395-4223 (fax) 520 West 21st Street,
September 2015 - August 2017 Suite G2
rarcher@bayforensicpsycholo
gy.com Norfolk, VA 23517
PRESIDENT-ELECT
918-631-2835 APA Status: None
John McNulty, Ph.D.
September 2015 - August 2017 john-mcnulty@utulsa.edu Psychology Department
University of Tulsa
Tulsa, OK
SECRETARY
301-571-7217 (home) APA Status: Member
Giselle Hass, Psy.D.
301-571-7250 (fax) 9309 Rockville Pike
September 2016 - August 2019
Giselle.Hass@gmail.com Bethesda, MD 20814
Petition Form
Page 4
TREASURER
612-725-2074 (office) APA Status: Member
Paul Arbisi, Ph.D.
September 2016 - August 2019 Arbis001@umn.edu University of Minnesota
REPRESENTATIVE-AT-LARGE 518-626-5339 (office) APA Status: None

Amanda Jill Clemence, Ph.D. ajillclem@gmail.com Albany Stratton VA Medical Center
113 Holland Avenue
Albany, NY 12208
APA Status: None

REPRESENTATIVE-AT-LARGE 979-571-0925 (home) Department of Psychology
Chris Hopwood, Ph.D. hopwood2@msu.edu University of California, Davis
September 2015 - August 2017 135 Young Hall
One Shields Avenue
Davis, CA 95616
REPRESENTATIVE-AT-LARGE
Jan Kamphuis, PhD
j.h.kamphuis@uva.nl APA Status: None
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Amsterdam, Netherlands
REPRESENTATIVE-AT-LARGE APA Status: None

Piero Porcelli, Ph.D. Porcellip@media.it Bari Italy
313-993-1440 (office) APA Status: Member

JPA EDITOR hupricst@udmercy.edu Department of Psychology
Steven K. Huprich, Ph.D. University of Detroit Mercy
4001 W. McNichols Road
Detroit, MI 48221
Petition Form
Page 5
SPA EXCHANGE EDITOR

905-522-1155, ext. 36809 APA Status: Fellow
David L. Streiner, Ph.D.
(office) 64 Flatt Avenue
905-575-6085 (fax) Hamilton, Ontario L8P 4N3
streiner@mcmaster.ca Canada
APA Status: Life Member

PUBLIC AFFAIRS DIRECTOR 510-549-0909 (office)
510-649-1133 (fax) 2041 Bancroft Way
Bruce L. Smith, Ph.D.
blsmith@socrates.berkeley.edu Suite 310
Berkeley, CA 94704
PROFICIENCY 408-460-9662 (cell) APA Status: Member

COORDINATOR hpade2@alliant.edu CSPP PsyD Program
Hadas Pade, Psy.D. proficiency@spaonline.org Alliant International University
(Pertaining to Proficiency) San Francisco, CA 94133CSPP
WEB SITE EDITOR jd.smith@northwestern.edu APA Status: None

J.D. Smith, Ph.D. 1250 S Michigan Ave
Unit 510
Chicago, IL 60605
LIAISON TO APA BOARD OF

EDUCATIONAL AFFAIRS 347-391-5104 (work) APA Status: Member
A. Jordan Wright, Ph.D. ajordanwright@gmail.com 19 West 34th Street, Penthouse
New York, NY 10001
STUDENT ASSOCIATION
(SPAGS) PRESIDENT
Crista Maracic, MA cristamaracic@mail.adelphi.edu APA Status: Student Member
March 2017 - March 2018 Adelphi University, Brooklyn,
NY
Petition Form
Page 6
Administrative Director
Monica Tune APA Status: N/A
703-534-4772 (office)
6109H Arlington Blvd.
866-849-3725 (toll-free)
Falls Church, VA 22044
703-534-6905 (fax)
manager@spaonline.org
Administrative Assistant
Saad Malik 703-534-4772 (office) APA Status: N/A
866-849-3725 (toll-free) 6109H Arlington Blvd.
703-534-6905 (fax) Falls Church, VA 22044
assistant@spaonline.org
Outline the structure and functions of the administrative organization (frequency of meetings,
number of meetings per year, membership size, functions performed, how decisions are made,
types of committees, dues structure, publications, etc.). Provide samples of newsletters,
journals, and other publications, etc.
The Board of Trustees, the governing entity of the Society for Personality Assessment, meets twice a
year, once at the annual convention for a daylong period, and a second time in early fall. The fall
meeting extends over a two-and-a-half-day period. Members are invited to attend the Board of
Trustees meeting held at the annual conference.
Current SPA membership size is approximately 1,200 members. The Society’s governance is
accomplished by the Board of Trustees, the Executive Committee of the Board (consisting of the
President, Past-President, President-Elect, Secretary, and Treasurer), and a number of standing
committees. The Board of Trustees is the primary entity that engages in decision-making, with
ongoing input from the membership. The Executive Committee is empowered to engage in decision-
making between meetings. The Committees provide suggestions and recommendations to the Board of
Trustees.
SPA committees: Executive Committee, Nominations Committee, Ad Hoc Finance Advisory

Committee Student Matters/Dissertation Grants Committee, Continuing Education Committee,
Membership Committee, Publications Oversight Committee, Proficiency Committee, Fellows
Committee, International Section Committee, Awards Committee, Website Editorial Board, Student
Association (SPAGS) Board. Appointments to the Standing Committees are of two-year duration.
These committees work throughout the year and report on their progress twice a year at the board
meetings.
Petition Form
Page 7
SPA Publications: The Journal for Personality Assessment (JPA)

http://www.personality.org/publications/journal-of-personality-assessment/
http://www.tandfonline.com/toc/hjpa20/current
The SPA Exchange Newsletter

http://www.personality.org/publications/exchange-newsletter/
SPA Dues Structure: Member/Fellow/Associate - $120.00

Undergraduate and Graduate Student Affiliate - $32.00
New Doctoral and Second-Year Doctoral Graduate - $70.00
Third-Year Doctoral Graduate - $70.00
4. Present a rationale that describes how your organization provides systems and structures which
make a significant contribution to the organized development of the proficiency. Describe the
role of your organization in collaborating with other organization/s to ensure the organized
development of the proficiency. Describe the role of your organization in providing oversight
to ensure a core of psychological knowledge and training is offered in a sequential and
integrated nature. Describe the role of your organization in providing oversight if the
proficiency is obtained in the context of interdisciplinary education and training.
For nearly 80 years, the Society has been making significant contributions to the proficiency of
Personality Assessment including three major areas: a) publications; b) education—formative and
continuing; and c) sponsored research.
a) Publications- The Journal of Personality Assessment (JPA) which includes articles describing
rigorous empirical investigations in the area of Personality Assessment, case studies, theoretical
papers, and reviews on texts and software covering topics in Personality Assessment. The
Journal is a tool for educating practitioners on assessment findings and their applications and
for enabling communication within the scientific community. The Journal, which has a very
favorable impact factor, includes most major universities and colleges among its subscribers.
The Society also offers a semi-annual newsletter, the SPA Exchange, to the membership and
the professional community. The Exchange focuses primarily on applied issues in Personality
Assessment. It includes regular features on ethics and legal issues, consultation and
supervision, and the teaching of Personality Assessment.
b) Education – The Society for Personality Assessment provides training at all levels, from basic,
graduate-level training to training of the advanced practitioner of Personality Assessment. The
Society offers workshops at its annual meeting. All of these workshops are CE credit bearing
except for those that are designed specifically for graduate students and postdoctoral
individuals. The Society also offers workshops outside of the annual meeting to increase the
accessibility of educational offerings to personality assessors and other mental health
professionals. Affiliate groups associated with the Society offer workshops on a local level.
Petition Form
Page 8
The Society also develops and promulgates educational standards. For example, the Board of
Trustees created a document titled “Standards for Education and Training in Psychological
Assessment: Position of the Society for Personality Assessment,” which was published in the
Journal of Personality Assessment, 47(3), 355-357 (see Appendix I).
c) Research – In addition to providing an outlet for researchers, the Society for Personality
Assessment sponsors research on critical questions in Personality Assessment. For example, a
past sponsored study focuses on the utility for Personality Assessment consultation for
improving ongoing psychotherapies in which significant treatment difficulties have arisen. A
more recent sponsored study focused on assessment supervision. The Board of Trustees, which
invariably includes major contributors to the Personality Assessment literature, identifies key
questions, the answers to which may significantly advance the profession. The Society has a
fund-raising arm that includes, within its scope, raising funds for sponsored research.
Collaborations with additional organizations: The American Board of Assessment Psychology

(ABAP), founded in 1993, is an international certification board for psychological assessors. ABAP
provides credentialing of specialists and has rigorous requirements including 5 years of assessment
experience, one of which may be pre-licensure. ABAP has an active ongoing relationship with the
Society of Personality Assessment and regularly offers sessions at the Society’s annual meeting on
preparing for the ABAP examination. SPA and ABAP have a number of common members, some of
whom have held leadership positions in one or both organizations.
Section IX, Assessment, of Division 12, Society of Clinical Psychology, is dedicated to the promotion
of both the science and practice of assessment. Its scope includes Personality Assessment in addition
to a number of other areas (e.g., neuropsychological assessment). Section IX has an active
collaborative relationship with SPA including the posting of each group’s information on one another’s
web page. A number of SPA members are active in both the leadership and membership of Section
IX. The President of APA Division 12 Section IX has written a letter in support of this application.
Oversight of the proficiency: Many administrative aspects of the oversight of proficiency recognition,
training, and evaluation of providers are undertaken by the Central Office of the Society for
Personality Assessment. The Central Office is managed by the Society’s Administrative Director. The
Director has worked closely with the Executive Committee, the Proficiency Coordinator, and the
Proficiency Committee to develop the processes, policies, and procedures for the proficiency. These
processes, policies, and procedures, including SPA’s credentialing criteria are described in detail in the
Proficiency of Personality Assessment Policies and Procedures Manual (submitted with original
petition for renewal in December 2016). The Proficiency Coordinator, with support of the Committee
and the Board of Trustees, recruited proficiency reviewers including psychologists who have been
recognized as Proficient and are either SPA Fellows or ABAP Diplomates.
To ensure proper monitoring of the proficiency process, the Society has bolstered its Central Office
Petition Form
Page 9
Staff. To help cover this expense, applicants for the proficiency are asked to pay an initial fee to apply
for the proficiency ($150). After being granted proficiency status they may pay a modest processing
fee to have the proficiency re-affirmed at regular intervals. Further, SPA has utilized such fees toward
establishing an online database to allow for convenient and user-friendly application, review, and
recognition process and clear maintenance of all proficiency related data. The Society has also created
short webinars and written handouts available on the website describing the application and
recognition process. The Treasurer in conjunction with Proficiency Coordinator developed a budget
that will be remanded for audit annually by the Board of Trustees.
5. List other organizations that are associated with, that promote, or that certify practitioners in
this psychological proficiency. Please provide letters of support from these other organizations
supporting your petition.
The two organizations that could provide information on the utility for the recognition of the
proficiency are Section IX (Assessment) of Division 12 (Society of Clinical Psychology) of the
American Psychological Association and the American Board of Psychological Assessment. Letters in
support of the proficiency are provided by Section IX President and ABAP President (see Appendix
II).
6. Signature of official (s) representing the organization submitting the petition:
name title date
Robert Archer, PhD SPA President 12/28/2017
Need and Distinctiveness
Criterion II. Public Need for Proficiency Practice. The services of a proficiency are responsive
to identifiable public needs
Commentary: Proficiencies may evolve from the profession’s recognition that there is a
particular public need. Proficiencies may also develop from advances in scientific psychology
from which applications to serve the public may be derived.
1. Describe with relevant references the public needs the proficiency fulfills and how the
proficiency meets those needs.
Personality Assessment provides a comprehensive picture of individual differences in personality

traits and functioning that serves as a foundation for effective counseling and decision-making in
health care (psychological and medical), legal, educational, rehabilitation, and employment settings.
The public is served by decision makers having accurate, individualized and meaningful information
about those with whom they are working. For example, Personality Assessment is helpful in:
Petition Form
Page 10
a) Facilitating the alleviation of psychological distress and impairment: the development of a

personality profile enables the planning of a useful and efficient course of therapy (Bram &
Peebles, 2014), and prevents false therapeutic starts based on misdiagnosis or missed
diagnosis. For example, personality assessment can enable a differentiation between those
therapeutic goals that are likely to be achieved in a relatively brief period versus those that may
require a longer course of treatment (Hunsley & Mash, 2007; Tharinger et al., 2013; Weiner &
Exner, 1991).
b) Identification of psychological strengths and resources to determine what stressors the

individual is likely able to withstand. For example, Personality Assessment frequently is required
prior to surgeries that place psychological demands upon the patient, such as gastric bypass
surgery or sex reassignment surgery.
c) Better management of risk through identification of risk factors for illness or injury.
d) Identification of functional status and rehabilitation potential for people with injuries or
disabilities, or age-related impairments.
e) Health-related assessment of factors such as coping and adjustment to physical illness.
f) Assessment of the impact of alleged injuries on plaintiff's personality functioning in personal

injury cases.
g) Identification of the personality resources and vulnerabilities of parents and children, and
assessment of the fit between parental characteristics and capacities and children's needs in child
custody cases.
h) Identification of the personality resources and vulnerabilities of older adults and, as

appropriate, their family caregivers (Loeckenhoff et. al., 2011), and assessment of the fit between
frail older adults’ physical and emotional needs and the environment of care (Kolanowski et. al.,
2011.
i) Assessment of personality characteristics that assist prediction of violent behavior or reoffending

and suitability for various case dispositions in pre-sentencing evaluations.
j) Identification of special needs of students in educational settings and formulation of appropriate

remedial plans.
k) Selection of employees who possess the personality features congruent with the demands of
various positions.
Petition Form
Page 11
l) Developing information for coaching individuals who want to maximize their career potential.
These goals and many others are served through the availability of Personality Assessments by
proficient practitioners (Baum et al., 2001; Evans & Finn, 2016; Frank & Elliott, 2000; Gacono,
Jumes, & Gray, 2008; Maruish, 1999; Ryan & Sackett, 1998). In essence, the public need served by
Personality Assessment is for an accurate understanding of individuals' characteristic ways of
understanding, feeling, coping, and adapting in particular types of circumstances in order to frame
effective and personalized decisions best suited to each individual. Because consequential decisions
about individuals’ lives are often based upon the results of Personality Assessment, it is important
that those conducting such assessments are deemed proficient to do so.
In addition, the education and training of competent professionals serves a public need, and in recent
years there has been increased discussion about the importance of competencies in professional and
health psychology (Hatcher, et al., 2013; Larkin & Klonoff, 2014). The Proficiency in Personality
Assessment is closely aligned with the goal and aspiration of developing competent psychologists to
serve the public and throughout this petition information is presented to support this.
2. Describe any regulatory, professional privileging, and/or educational statute or regulation of

this proficiency of which you are aware.
The APA Council currently recognizes this proficiency. Given the impact of Personality Assessment
upon individual lives, a broad array of standards, guidelines, privileging criteria, and rules that address
best practices in a variety of settings with different populations have been developed. The practice of
Personality Assessment, based on psychological theories, research, and instruments in mental health
and counseling settings typically requires state licensure. Most states require a doctoral degree from an
approved program, along with internships, supervised pre- and post-doctoral experience, and a passing
score on the national licensing examination. The practice of Personality Assessment in employment
and school settings requires a license in some states.
The APA Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct (APA, 2002, 2010) provides the essential standards
for all psychological practice in psychology. The Ethics Code includes a number of standards that are
relevant to the practice of Personality Assessment, including those governing the selection of
psychological tests, the boundaries of competence, and the necessity of feedback. Apart from the
Ethics Code, the most broadly applicable standards for Personality Assessment are found in the
Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (American Educational Research Association,
American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education, 2014).
One further set of standards of mostly historical importance are the Ethical Standards for the
Distribution of Psychological Tests and Diagnostic Aids (APA, 1950). These standards had significant
historical importance because they set forth a tripartite scheme wherein the qualification of test users
was connected to the demands of the instruments. Most of the instruments used in Personality
Petition Form
Page 12
Assessment would be designated as Level C tools and thereby demand that the assessor have at least a
master's degree in psychology and one year of supervised experience under a psychologist. Although
in the subsequent standards (referenced above), the tripartite system was not maintained, it continues
to be used by most publishers of cognitive tests and Personality Assessment tools. Their widespread
adoption demonstrates the recognition by not only the profession but also the test publishers
supporting Personality Assessment of the need for careful regulation of this professional activity.
APA has also promulgated many sets of guidelines that provide greater specificity and define best
practices in the various types of psychological assessment. These guidelines, designed to be
congruent with the Ethics Code, were created to specify both substantive and procedural issues
distinguishing one kind of assessment from another, as well as to recommend particular modes of
comportment for those practicing different types of assessment. They aim to "...inform psychologists,
the public, and other interested parties regarding desirable professional practices" (APA, 2002,
Criteria Section 2.5). Among many examples, are the following:
a) Guidelines for Test User Qualification (Turner, DeMers, Fox, & Reed, 2001). The effort of this
APA task force, designed specifically to serve the needs of the public, underscores the need for
the establishment of Personality Assessment as a proficiency because it focuses specifically on
the test user and argues that " ...most of the problems associated with test use are related to the
competence of individual test users" (DeMers et al., 2000; italics added).
b) The Rights and Responsibilities of Test Takers: Guidelines and Expectations (Test Taker Rights
and Responsibilities Working Group of the Joint Committee on Testing Practices, 1998). This
document, created by an interdisciplinary task force that included representatives from APA,
was intended to serve as a supplement to existing standards, such as those promulgated in the
Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Its focus is on the interaction between
test takers and testing professionals from the consumer's point of view.
c) Guidelines for Computer-based Tests and Interpretations (Committee on Professional

Standards and Committee on Tests and Assessments, 1986). These guidelines were developed
to ensure the responsible use of computerized narrative reports, primarily in personality testing.
Further guidelines that address professional practice, including Personality Assessment with
special populations, include the following:
a) Guidelines for Providers of Psychological Services to Ethnic, Linguistic and Culturally Diverse
Populations - APA Office of Ethnic Minority Affairs (1990).
b) Assessment of Individuals with Disabilities Sourcebook - Assessment of Individuals with

Disabilities Working Group and the Joint Committee on Testing Practices (1999).
Petition Form
Page 13
c) Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research, Practice, and

Organization Change for Psychologists - American Psychological Association (2003).
Additional guidelines have been necessitated by the fact that Personality Assessment is increasingly
used in a range of venues beyond traditional mental health settings. Specifically, Personality
Assessment is frequently used in personnel settings, general medical settings, Older Adults and
rehabilitation settings, and in forensic practice. For example, one influential analysis of test use in
child custody evaluations revealed that out of 43,195 evaluations examined 84% used the MMPI
(Hagen & Castagna, 2001). In the field of forensic assessment Borum and Grisso (1995) found that
100% of forensic psychologists in their survey reported using psychological tests in criminal
responsibility evaluations. Of those, 68% rated them as essential or recommended. Here is a
representative sampling of relevant guidelines:
a) Principles for the Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures (Society for Industrial
and Organizational Psychology, 2003). These guidelines, which have been adopted by American
Psychological Association Division 14, the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology,
offer assessment professionals guidelines for the evaluation, development, and employment of
assessment.
b) Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Older Adults (APA, 2014). These guidelines apply
not only to the work of specialists in geriatric assessment but to all clinical (including assessment)
services with older adults. Guidelines 10-12 specifically address areas of knowledge and
competency that are particularly important in conducting assessments with members of this
population.
c) Guidelines for Child Custody Evaluations in Family Law Proceedings (APA, 2009). According
to these guidelines, "Psychologists render a valuable service when they provide competent and
impartial opinions with direct relevance to the ‘psychological best interests’ of the child" (p. 4). In
order to offer such opinions, psychologists must have sufficient proficiency to interpret their
assessment data, as these data are affected by a variety of contextual factors. They must also know
the strengths and limitations of their instruments: "For example, psychologists may choose to
acknowledge, when reporting personality test results, how research on validity scale interpretation
demonstrates that child custody litigations often display increased elevations" (p.10). Accordingly,
these guidelines focus on best practices in the preparation for and conduct of an evaluation.
d) Guidelines for Psychological Evaluations in Child Protection Matters (2011). These guidelines
acknowledge that special competence is needed in carrying out psychological assessments that the
assessor provides to the relevant parties (e.g., the court or a state agency).
e) Guidelines for Psychological Practice with Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual clients (APA 2012).
These guidelines aim to provide a frame of reference for working with treatment of lesbian, gay, and
Petition Form
Page 14
bisexual clients. This covers the areas of assessment, intervention, identity, relationships, diversity,
education, training, and research.
f) Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychology (APA 2013). The goals of these Guidelines are to
improve the quality of forensic psychological services, enhance the practice and development of
forensic psychology, encourage a high level of quality in professional practice, and encourage
forensic psychologists to acknowledge and respect the rights of those they serve. Guideline 10
specifically addresses assessment issues from selecting measures to providing feedback.
Although personality assessment in employment settings is quite common, in the areas of pre-
employment screening and promotion decisions by employers, the Americans with Disabilities Act's
(1990; as amended in 2008) prohibition on the use of medical examinations as a condition of
employment or promotion restricts the use of clinical personality testing that is designed to reveal a
mental impairment (e.g., the MMPI-2) that may be considered overly "invasive," or that is designed
to measure an applicant's "psychological response to performing a task." Clinical personality testing
in employment settings is generally limited by federal law to administration on behalf of employers
only after a conditional offer of employment has been made and then only if it is required of all
entering employees in a similar job (see Karaka v. Rent A Center, 2005). Some personality tests
which are not designed to reveal a disability or to diagnose a psychiatric condition (e.g., honesty or
integrity tests) may be permissible in pre-employment screening (Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission, 2005).
These sets of guidelines and statutory rules are a sample of those that regulate the professional activity
of psychological assessment in general, and Personality Assessment specifically. To provide
competent services, the personality assessor must be familiar with all generally applicable laws,
standards, and guidelines, as well as those specific to a given psychologist's circumstances of practice.
Furthermore, the changing landscape of practice periodically leads to the development of new and
revised guidelines. Consequently, a practitioner who does not commit to continuing education in
Personality Assessment generally and with respect to particular applications of interest will be greatly
disadvantaged in his or her efforts to provide services that meet evolving standards of practice.
3. Describe how the recognition of this proficiency will increase the availability and quality of
services that professional psychologists provide without reducing access to needed services.
Availability of Services
According to Krishnamurthy et al. (2004), training in Personality Assessment requires both

coursework and fieldwork in eight different competencies, among which are a background in
psychometric theory, knowledge of the "scientific, theoretical, empirical, and contextual bases of
psychological assessment" (p. 732), the capability of each client's multiple contexts of operation, the
ability to establish and sustain a collaborative relationship, a deep grasp of the relationship between
Petition Form
Page 15
assessment and intervention, and a plentitude of specific technical skills (identifying a problem,
developing a set of tools to address the assessment problem, gathering data systematically, and so on).
Doctoral training in Personality Assessment, as several surveys show, is highly variable, with many
programs failing to provide the rudiments of Personality Assessment expected by internship training
directors (Belter & Piotrowski, 2001; Clemence & Handler, 2001; Stedman, Hatch, & Schoenfeld,
2000, 2001; Childs & Eyde, 2002; Matthews & Matthews, 2006; Ready & Veague, 2014). According
to Stedman, Hatch, and Schoenfeld (2001), only 25% of internship candidates are perceived by
internship directors as having sufficient report writing experience. Furthermore, evidence suggests
that today’s doctoral programs are emphasizing Personality Assessment less in course offerings than
in the past (Belter & Piotrowski, 2001; Ready & Veague, 2014).
The inadequacies of contemporary doctoral training might not be of such concern if internships
compensated for elements missing from pre-internship training. Yet, internship sites frequently fail to
offer adequate training in Personality Assessment (Clemence & Handler, 2001; Krishnamurthy et al.,
2004). In most surveys a majority of internship directors indicate that didactic work with interns
needs to be at a very introductory level given the backgrounds trainees typically bring to the internship
(e.g., Clemence & Handler, 2001; Ready & Veague, 2014). Finally, no demands are placed on the
postdoctoral year for the provision of supervised experiences in Personality Assessment. This situation
is no better in training in other applied areas (e.g., industrial-organizational, educational), where the
specific standards concerning Personality Assessment are negligible.
As a result of the de-emphasis on training in the foundational skills of Personality Assessment in

many APA-accredited doctoral programs and internships, as well as postdoctoral settings, there is an
undersupply of professional psychologists who are justly confident in their skills in providing this
service. Continued recognition of a proficiency in this area will encourage doctoral programs in
professional psychology, internship sites, post-doctoral programs, and providers of continuing
education that strive to be recognized as providing training at the level of proficiency to increase the
availability and quality of their training in Personality Assessment. The end result would be to
increase the supply of competent providers of related services.
Further, the practices and economics of managed care have had a direct and negative impact on the
practice of Personality Assessment in clinical settings. Utilization Review (UR) for personality
assessment tends to be stricter than for psychotherapy generally, and payment for assessment services
in managed care trends toward lower compensation than the equivalent amount of time spent
providing psychotherapy. Managed care routinely operates to limit the frequency of testing and to
direct psychologists to use brief symptom-focused inventories in lieu of a multi-method approach, the
latter of which is the gold standard in Personality Assessment. Such a multi-method approach typically
involves the use of instruments that are more time-intensive than symptom inventories and require
extensive interaction between the assessor and the client (Hopwood & Bornstein, 2014; Huprich,
2011; Piotrowski, 1999; Stedman et al., 2001).
Petition Form
Page 16
As a result, essential clinical assessment services designed to assist in diagnosis and treatment
planning or the resolution of therapeutic impasses tend to be underutilized in managed care settings,
and the supply of qualified professional psychologists to perform these services has diminished.
Continued recognition of a proficiency in Personality Assessment can be expected to increase the
availability of qualified professional psychologists who offer these services by increasing access to
high quality training and mentorship and enhancing psychologists' motivation to practice in this
underserved area of clinical practice that psychologists are uniquely qualified to provide. It will also
facilitate the identification of competent practitioners who practice in this area.
A continuation of the Proficiency in Personality Assessment can help to ameliorate the situation with
regard to managed care. As proficient practitioners are identified and clinicians encouraged to attain
proficiency, the quality of assessments that are conducted under managed care can be expected to
improve. As has been shown, competent assessment can shorten the course of treatment by ensuring
that correct decisions about the kind and course of treatment are made at the outset (Bram & Peebles,
2014, Hunsley & Mash, 2007; Tharinger et al., 2013; Weiner & Exner, 1991) and by improving the
initial therapeutic relationship (Poston & Hanson, 2010). Second, clinicians who can document their
proficiency in Personality Assessment will be in a stronger position when interacting with Utilization
Review (UR) managers (who in the area of assessment authorizations are usually themselves
psychologists) in managed care companies. Many UR managers have used their experience with
poorly planned and poorly executed assessments to justify their conservative approach to the
authorization of assessment services. Psychologists who can provide evidence of their proficiency are
likely to have more credibility in this process. Third, managed care companies and third party payers
can be encouraged to employ UR managers in the area of authorizing Personality Assessment who are
themselves proficient in this area, thereby leading to better informed and more clinically appropriate
authorizations.
As might be expected, restrictive treatment authorizations and reduced payments for both clinical
personality assessment and therapy services have resulted in an influx of psychologists into other
applications of Personality Assessment such as forensic evaluations, general medical consultation and
liaison services, and employment and disability evaluations, which are usually outside the reach of
managed care. Income from such assessment activities can compensate for the diminished revenue
from traditional clinical personality assessment and psychotherapy. In particular, Personality
Assessment has been practiced in forensic and employment settings where the decisions are often
highly consequential (e.g., prison v. mental hospital, hire v. not hire). In the case of public safety
occupations such as police, firefighters, or air traffic controllers, the safety of the general public is at
stake in the hiring decision. It is, therefore, imperative that the assessments conducted be competent
and based upon the latest scientific evidence. Proficiency in Personality Assessment can help to
ensure that those conducting these assessments possess the requisite skill and knowledge to do so
competently.
At the same time, and in part for the same reasons, non-psychologist provider groups have been
moving aggressively in state legislatures and licensing boards for authorization to perform mental
Petition Form
Page 17
health evaluations (Dattilio et al., 2007). The increased attractiveness of Personality Assessment to
non-psychologist practitioners also provides a basis for granting proficiency status to psychologists
practicing Personality Assessment. Such a status will help the public differentiate between proficient
professional psychologists and those counselors, social workers, and others who may be offering less
comprehensive and less sophisticated services under the banner of Personality Assessment. It will also
make it easy for referral sources to identify efficiently who are appropriate psychologists to provide
such services, which will increase the frequency of such referrals.
In this context it is important to note that although it is anticipated that recognition of the proficiency
will discourage some poorly trained or unqualified practitioners from offering inadequate and
incompetent services, it is likely that the net impact of the proficiency will be an overall increase in
access to services. First, those professional psychologists who do not seek recognition of their
proficiency in Personality Assessment will of course still be permitted to continue to practice as
provided by their licensure or other applicable credentials (albeit their market share vis-a-vis
psychologists with documented proficiency may suffer). Second, continued recognition of the
proficiency will ultimately make it easier for psychologists at all stages of training and career
development who wish to enhance their competence in Personality Assessment to identify those
programs and training opportunities that will most efficiently bring them up to current practice
standards and to maintain their skills. It will also revitalize and strengthen the practice culture of
Personality Assessment, making it more attractive and available to greater numbers of practitioners.
Quality of Services
Currently, no mechanism exists to ensure that those who practice Personality Assessment have a set of
fundamental skills, knowledge, and professional attitudes. Consequently, a credential in Personality
Assessment is manifestly necessary. As noted previously, the goal of having competent psychologists
provide services to the public, including personality assessment services, is a central one (Hatcher et
al., 2013). Such a credential in this particular area of practice will increase the likelihood that
individuals who practice assessment have appropriate training, and that individuals who have achieved
proficiency maintain it through the pursuit of lifelong learning in the area.
Certification by the American Board of Assessment Psychology does identify psychologists with high
levels of expertise in personality testing by granting them the ABAP Diplomate. However, the
diplomate is geared for an advanced level of practice and consequently, is available only to a small
percentage of assessing psychologists. Another important certifying body, the American Board of
Professional Psychologists, offers no formal certification to those who are expert in Personality
Assessment. The basic gap within the profession is the absence of any recognition system for those
practitioners who, while not yet being expert, are nonetheless fully competent in Personality
Assessment. Proficiency status would enable members of the public to identify psychologists
specializing in this form of assessment, and to do so with greater confidence.
Petition Form
Page 18
Proficiency is necessary to ensure adequate quality of services based on the following factors: a)
training trends; b) research trends; and c) professional identity factors.
Training Trends
As noted earlier, training in Personality Assessment requires both course and fieldwork in eight
different competencies among which are training in psychometric theory, knowledge of the theoretical,
empirical, and contextual bases of psychological assessment, understanding of each client's multiple
contexts of operation, the ability to establish and sustain a collaborative relationship, a firm
grasp of the relationship between assessment and intervention, and an array of specific technical
skills (identifying a problem, developing a set of tools to address the assessment problem,
gathering data systematically, and so on; see Krishnamurthy et al., 2004). Surveys indicate that
doctoral training in Personality Assessment is highly variable in this regard, with many programs
failing to provide the rudiments of Personality Assessment expected by internship training directors
(Stedman et al., 2001, 2002). According to Stedman et al. (2001), only 25% of internship candidates
are perceived by internship directors as having sufficient report writing experience.
Furthermore, evidence exists suggesting that doctoral programs are emphasizing Personality
Assessment less in course offerings (Belter & Piotrowski, 2001; Ready & Veague, 2014). Evans and
Finn (2016) discuss the increased difficulty for graduate psychology students to be prepared in
personality assessment. Blais and Hopwood (2015) further describe the complexity of psychological
assessment as a professional skill, thus making it a challenge to teach and learn. They note how the
investment of resources and time in teaching assessment has decreased in psychological training
programs over the last few decades. Finally, Mihura et al. (2016) reported that even though doctoral
programs include many assessment topics and measures via course work, there seems to be a shortage
in opportunities for applied assessment training. Mihura et al. (2016) recommend that programs
increase familiarity with internships' assessment expectations as well as professional guidelines for
assessment training, and APA’s requirements for assessment competencies.
The inadequacies of doctoral training might not be of such concern if the internship compensated for
elements missing from pre-internship training, but internship sites often fail to offer intensive training
in Personality Assessment (Clemence & Handler, 2001; Krishnamurthy et al., 2004) so that earlier
deficits are not fully corrected. As noted, 56% of internship directors indicated that didactic work
with interns needs to be at a very introductory level given the backgrounds trainees typically bring to
the internship (Clemence & Handler, 2001). Finally, no demands are placed on the postdoctoral year
for the provision of supervised experiences in Personality Assessment.
As noted above, doctoral and internship training in clinical and applied psychology do not by any
means guarantee a high level of competence in Personality Assessment. Such general training is
usually inadequate in preparing for professional practice in applications of Personality Assessment
outside of traditional mental health practice (see Society of Consulting Psychology, 2004; Society for
Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 1998, Vodanovich & Piotrowski, 1999). Practitioners who
Petition Form
Page 19
are unaware of deficiencies in their training may practice without the requisite knowledge skills and
professional attitudes. Recognition of a proficiency in Personality Assessment would increase
professional awareness of what elements are necessary for competent practice and provide a pathway
to proficiency. The existence of a credentialing mechanism would increase the number of proficient
personality assessors. This credentialing system would also provide counsel to doctoral programs who
wish to equip their students to practice proficiently upon achievement of the license.
Finally, the Proficiency in Personality Assessment provides clarity that has not existed before
regarding the standards and expectations of competency within this area of practice (SPA website &
Policies and Procedures Manual). This can help further education and training curriculum goals and
skills taught in order to gain competency. In fact, the Proficiency Report Review Form (SPA website
& Policies and Procedures Manual) is now included in the most current edition of the Handbook of
Psychological Assessment (Groth-Marnat & Wright, 2016), one the most widely used texts in
psychological assessment graduate courses.
Research Trends
Continued recognition of this proficiency would enhance the quality of Personality Assessment
because psychologists would be motivated to pursue continuing education in Personality Assessment
to obtain the credential and, even more important to maintain it. This commitment to continued
education is especially important because the field of Personality Assessment is highly research-based
and research is rapidly accumulating, resulting in changes in the kinds of data collected in a
Personality Assessment, as well as in how these data are interpreted and applied. The following are
examples of major developments vis-a-vis three of the most commonly used Personality Assessment
tools:
a) Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory- This test is the most commonly used clinical
Personality Assessment tool. It was developed by Hathaway and McKinley and released to the
assessment community in 1940. Throughout the decades, it spawned a great deal of research but in
1989, it was restandardized and underwent a major revision (Butcher, Dahlstrom, Graham,
Tellegen, & Kaemmer, 1989), in which some of the concerns associated with the original
instrument were addressed. The MMPI-2 generated a great deal of research to determine whether
the psychological correlates of the MMPI code types also applied to the revised instrument. Then,
only 14 years later, continuing concern about problems such as scale heterogeneity and overlap of
items among the scales, led to the development of the Restructured (RC) scales (Tellegen et al.,
2003). Following the publication of the RC scales, a literature base of studies (e.g., Handel &
Archer, 2008) addressing their internal psychometric properties and their predictive and concurrent
validity (e.g., Castro, Gordon, Brown, Anestis, & Joiner, 2008) has been rapidly emerging and
accumulating. The publisher of the MMPI-2 has released a shortened and substantially revised
version of this instrument based on the RC scales. Known as the MMPI-2-Restructured Form
(MMPI-2-RF), the new version is leading to still more research and new applications for
practitioners. One objective of the MMPI-2RF was to further link this widely-used measure with
Petition Form
Page 20
contemporary concepts and models of personality and psychopathology (Ben-Porath, 2012).
b) Rorschach Inkblot Method- Another widely used Personality Assessment instrument is the
Rorschach Inkblot Method. Originally published by Herman Rorschach in 1921 this instrument fell
into disfavor several decades ago in part because the ways in which it was administered, scored, and
interpreted were so various. In 1974, John E. Exner, Jr. introduced a methodology for administering,
scoring, and interpreting the Rorschach Inkblot Method that was based on extant well-designed
research, including Exner's own data collection efforts. Exner's Comprehensive System (CS)
revitalized the Rorschach and ultimately became the standard method used for training, research,
and clinical practice. The CS has been the object of a prodigious research effort leading to major
ongoing modifications in the system, which helped increase its psychometric soundness and clinical
usefulness. Beginning in1974, Exner, now deceased, published three revisions of his initial text
with each revision introducing modifications and improvements in the CS. In the most recent
edition, Exner addressed problems with the initial standardization sample. More recently, other
investigators have been providing additional normative information (Mihura et al., 2012) and great
attention has been given to the development of international norms, an important effort given that
the original standardization sample was developed within the United States. Building upon the
strengths of the CS, the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) has led such efforts.
"The R-PAS is an evidenced-focused internationally oriented approach to using the inkblot test
based on the latest available research" (Meyer et al., 2011, p. 2).
c) Wechsler Intelligence Tests - Personality assessors commonly use intelligence tests to

investigate the interplay between cognitive and affective features characterizing an individual. The
intervals between publications of new editions of Wechsler tests has progressively diminished,
necessitating increasing time and energy on the part of the practitioner to keep abreast of emerging
developments in this area. For example, the interval between the WAIS and the WAIS-R was 26
years, between the WAIS-R and WAIS III, 16 years, and the WAIS-III and WAIS-IV, only 9 years.
Each time a revision has occurred, the changes have been substantive and require an immersion for
the assessor in an ongoing and thorough continuing education experience.
Many other examples exist of research-based changes in Personality Assessment. The rapidity of
change places great burden upon the personality assessor to update him or herself continuously
regarding new developments. With Personality Assessment recognized as a proficiency, the
availability of continuing education courses, the course of studies we recommend for proficiency, the
availability of supervisors, and the availability of our journal will provide avenues through which
personality assessors may update and strengthen their skills.
Practice Trends
The economics of managed care have had particularly direct and negative effects on the practice of
Personality Assessment. The advent of managed care has seen an influx of psychologists into the area
Petition Form
Page 21
of Personality Assessment because assessment activities can compensate for the diminished revenue
from psychotherapy. Furthermore, Personality Assessment provides access to areas of practice such
as forensic work that are outside of the scope of managed care. At the same time and in part for the
same reasons, other professions have been moving aggressively in state legislatures and licensing
boards for authorization to perform mental health evaluations (Dattilio et al., 2007). The increased
attractiveness of Personality Assessment to a wide range of practitioners also provides a basis for
granting proficiency status to Personality Assessment. Such a status will highlight for the public who
is a competent practitioner and helps the public to delineate the differences between Personality
Assessment and other types of assessment.
Managed care also has affected the practice of Personality Assessment in ways that are at odds with
good practice. Managed care routinely operates to limit the frequency of testing and to direct
psychologists to use brief symptom-focused inventories over a multi-method approach, the latter of
which is the gold standard in Personality Assessment (Bornstein, 2017; Hopwood & Bornstein, 2014).
Such a multi-method approach typically involves instruments that are more time-intensive than
symptom checklists and require extensive interaction between the assessor and the client (Piotrowski,
1999; Stedman et al., 2001). Renewal of the recognition of the proficiency would be helpful to
assessing psychologists in their conversations with managed care entities by establishing in
conjunction with managed care entities the necessity of expertise of personality assessors. Clients
would be empowered to obtain the services of individuals with appropriate credentials. A power shift
would be effected in consumers' and psychologists' interactions with managed care.
A recently published survey (Wright et al., 2016) supported the common perception that, in general,
assessment represents a smaller part of the practices of professional psychologists than was true before
the advent of managed care. However, the survey showed that for psychologists in certain settings or
specialty areas such as forensics or inpatient, assessment represents a significant portion of their work.
Regardless of setting or direct work, the large majority of psychologists believed that psychological
assessment is valuable in making diagnostic decisions and treatment recommendations.
Professional Identity Factors
A proficiency in Personality Assessment will encourage practitioners in this area to identify

themselves as having a special interest and competence in this area of practice. Being recognized as
proficient in Personality Assessment and holding oneself out to colleagues and the public provides
powerful motivation to practice at high standards of ethics and competence and to maintain one's
knowledge and skills. Many professional psychologists continue to practice personality assessment
based on knowledge they have retained from their graduate studies and based on testing skills that
have failed to incorporate recent developments in the area. Continued recognition of this proficiency
would encourage assessors to think of their Personality Assessment practice as an important
component of their professional identity. The standards promulgated for the proficiency will help
Petition Form
Page 22
them to increase their awareness and gauge their levels of competence. It is likely to motivate them to
identify gaps in training and pursue continuing education in the area of Personality Assessment.
Implications of training, research, and practice trends and professional identity factors
These three factors, the unevenness of doctoral, internship, and postdoctoral training; the rapid
accumulation of research on all aspects of Personality Assessment; and the enhancement of practice by
further integrating it with professional identity, all speak to the need for Personality Assessment to be
continued as a proficiency requiring formal recognition. A practitioner who performs assessment
based on inadequate training or outdated knowledge or skills is likely to be challenged in observing the
core ethical principle of non-maleficence—the responsibility to do no harm to the consumers of
Personality Assessment. This concept is re-affirmed in the Society for Personality Assessment's
Standards for Education and Training (SPA Board of Trustees, 2006): "Inappropriate or untrained use
of psychological assessment instruments exposes patients to harm. Unreliable or invalid conclusions
drawn from psychology assessment can be more dangerous than ineffective psychotherapy..." (p. 356).
Assessors who are either inadequately trained or out of date with respect to knowledge, skills, and/or
attitudes are at great risk for making errors that injure consumers.
The potential for harm is increased by the fact that psychological assessments become a permanent
part of the evaluee’s record. Relative to psychotherapy notes, they are more likely to follow the
evaluee throughout his or her life, influencing later important decisions--medical, employment, or
otherwise--about that person. Additionally, assessment reports are used as the basis for high stakes
decisions such as culpability for criminal behavior, disability determinations, release from inpatient
care, parenting time for children in divorced homes, removal of children in termination of parental
right and placement of children in foster care versus extended family systems. Evans and Finn (2016)
further note concerns expressed about the quality of personality assessment reports and related
services. This includes generally ethical and responsible psychologists who may know little about
recent assessment research, or write ineffective and non-individualized reports that lack in meaning.
Evans and Finn (2016) explain that even when such assessments may not cause harm, consumers of
personality assessment services, including clients and other providers, who know little about what
constitutes high-quality assessment might conclude after a less than positive experience that it is not
useful. Such an inaccurate and negative appraisal reflects poorly on the profession of psychology as a
whole. The proficiency in personality assessment takes steps to directly address this risk by reviewing
psychologists’ reports and providing feedback, regardless of proficiency recognition, to enhance
practice standards.
References
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National

Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for educational and psychological
testing. Washington DC: American Educational Research Association.
Petition Form
Page 23
American Psychological Association. (1991). Guidelines for providers of psychological services to

ethnic, linguistic, and culturally diverse populations. Washington DC: Author.
American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct.
American Psychologist, 47, 1597-1611.
American Psychological Association. (2003). Guidelines on multicultural education, training,

research, practice, and organizational change for psychologists. American Psychologist, 58,
377-402.
American Psychological Association (2014). Guidelines for psychological practice with older adults.
.
American Psychological Association. (2010). American Psychological Association ethical principles

of psychologists and code of conduct. Available from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html
American Psychological Association. (2010). Guidelines for child custody evaluations in legal
proceedings. American Psychologist, 65, 863-867.
American Psychological Association. (2011). Guidelines for psychological evaluations in child

protection matters. Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychological Association. (2012). Guidelines for psychological practice with gay,
lesbian, and bisexual clients. American Psychologist, 67, 10-42.
American Psychological Association. (2013) Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists.

American Psychological Association Task Force on Guidelines for Assessment and treatment of
Persons with Disabilities. (2011). Guidelines for assessment of and intervention with
persons with disabilities. Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychological Association Office of Ethnic Minority Affairs. (1990). Guidelines for
providers of psychological services to ethnic, linguistic, and culturally diverse populations.
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 42 U.S.C.A. 12101 et seq. (West 2009).
Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-
Hall.
Petition Form
Page 24
Assessment of Individuals with Disabilities Working Group of the Joint Committee on Testing
Practices (1999). Assessment of individuals with disabilities sourcebook. Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Baity, M.R. & Kellogg, J. (2014, March). Your Erlibnistypus is showing: Panic, professionalism, and
practicum training. In R. Krishnamurthy (Chair), From Novice to Proficient: Sequential
Development of Personality Assessment Competency through Graduate Education and
Training. Symposium conducted at the Midwinter Meeting of the Society for Personality
Assessment, Arlington, VA.
Baum, A., & Revenson, T. A., & Singer, J.E, (2001). Handbook of health psychology. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ben-Porath, Y. (2012). Interpreting the MMPI-2RF. University of Minnesota Press.
Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2013). Understanding and using the MMPI-2-RF. In G. P. Koocher, J. C.,

Norcross, & B. A. Greene (Eds.), Psychologists’ desk reference (pp. 129-133). New York, NY:
Oxford University Press
Blais, M. & Hopwood, C. (2015). Model-Based Approaches for Teaching and Practicing
Personality Assessment Journal of Personality Assessment, Vol. 97
Bornstein, R. F. (2017). Evidence based psychological assessment. Journal of Personality

Assessment, 99, 435-445.
Borum, R.; Grisso, T. (1995). Psychological test use in criminal forensic evaluations. Professional
Psychology: Research and Practice, 26, 465-473.
Camara, W. J., Nathan, J. S., & Puente, A. E. (2000). Psychological test usage: Implications of
professional psychology. Professional Psychology Research and Practice, 31, 141-154.
Castro, Y., Gordon, K. H., Brown, J. S., Anestis, J. C., & Joiner, T. E. (2008). Examination of racial
differences on the MMPI-2 clinical and restructured clinical scores in an outpatient sample.
Clemence, A., & Handler, L. (2001). Psychological assessment on internship: A survey of training
directors and their expectations for students. Journal of Personality Assessment, 76, 18-47.
Code of Federal Regulations 712.33 (2005). (Department of Energy qualifications for psychologists
designated to evaluate individuals for work with "special nuclear material.)
Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists (1991). Specialty guidelines for forensic
Petition Form
Page 25
psychologists. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 655-665.
Dattilio, F. M.; Tresco, K. E.; Siegel A. (2007). An empirical survey on psychological testing and the
use of the term psychological: testing battles or clinical necessity? Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 38, 682-689.
DeMers, S. T., Turner, S. M., Andberg, M., Foote, W., Hough, L., Ivnik, R. Meier, S., Moreland, K., &
Rey-Casserly, C. M. Report of the task force on test user qualifications. pp. 1-88.
Durand, V. M., Blanchard, E. B., & Mindell, J. A. (1988). Training in projective testing: survey of
clinical training directors and internship directors. Professional Psychology: Research and
Practice, 19, 236-238.
Economic Employment Opportunity Commission, U.S. Department of Labor (2005). Enforcement

guidance: Preemployment disability-Related questions and medical examinations (EEOC
Notice Number 915.002). Retrieved from EEOC website:
http://www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/preemp.html
Evans, B. F. & Finn, S. E. (2016). Training and Consultation in Psychological Assessment with
Professional Psychologists: Suggestions for Enhancing the Profession and Individual Practices.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 98, 1-11.
Frank, R. G. & Elliott, T. R. (2000). Handbook of rehabilitation psychology. Washington, DC:

Gacono, C. B., Jumes, M. T., & Gray, B.T. (2008). Use of the Rorschach in forensic treatment
planning. Chapter 11 in C. B. Gacono & F. B. Evans (Eds.), the handbook of forensic
Rorschach assessment. New York: Erlbaum.
Garb, H. N. (1998). Studying the clinician: Judgment research and psychological assessment.
Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Garfield, S. L., & Kurtz, M. R. (1973). Attitudes toward training in diagnostic testing: a survey of
directors of internship training. Journal of Consulting Clinical Psychology, 40, 350-355.
Graham, J. R. (2012). MMPI-2: Assessing personality and psychopathology (5th Ed.). New
York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Greene, R. L., & Rouhbakhsh, P. (1998). Teaching the MMPI-2. In L. Handler and M. &. Hilsenroth,
(Eds.) Teaching and learning psychological assessment (pp. 149-164). Mahway, NJ: Erlbaum.
Groth-Marnat, G. & Wright, A. J. (2016). Handbook of psychological assessment, (6 th Edition).

Petition Form
Page 26
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Hagen, NA; Castagna, B (2001). The real numbers: psychological testing in custody evaluations.
Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 32, 269-271.
Handel, R. W., & Archer, R. P. (2008). An investigation of the psychometric properties of the MMPI-2
Restructured Clinical (RC) Scales with mental health inpatients. Journal of Personality
Handler, L., & Meyer, G. (1998). The importance of teaching and learning Personality Assessment. In
L. Handler and M. Hilsenroth (Eds.) Teaching and learning Personality Assessment (p. 3).
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hatcher, R. L., Fouad, N. A., Grus, C. L., Campbell, L. F., McCutcheon, S. R., & Leahy, K. L.
(2013). Competency benchmarks: Practical steps toward a culture of competence. Training and
Education in Professional Psychology, Vol 7(2), 84-91
Hopwood, C. J., & Bornstein, R. F. (2014). Toward a framework for integrating multimethod clinical
assessment data. In C. J. Hopwood & R. F. Bornstein (Eds.), Multimethod clinical assessment
(pp. 427-441). NY: Guilford Press.
Hopwood, C.; Morey, L., Orlando-Edelen, M.; Shea, M., Grillo, C., & Sanislow, C. (2008). A
comparison of interview and self-report methods for the diagnosis of borderline personality
disorder criteria. Psychological Assessment, 20, 1, 81-85.
Hunsley, J., & Mash, E. J. (2007). Evidence-based assessment. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology,
3, 29-51.
Huprich, S. K. (2011). Reclaiming the value of unconscious and subjective psychological experience.
Joint Committee on Testing Practices. (1998). Rights and responsibilities of test takers: Guidelines and
expectations. Retrieved on November 11, 2008 from http://www.apa.org/science/ttrr.html
International Association of Police Chiefs, Police Psychological Services Section (2004).

Psychological Fitness-for-Duty Evaluations. Los Angeles, CA.
International Association of Police Chiefs, Police Psychological Services Section (2006). Guidelines
for Consulting Police Psychologists. Boston, MA.
Karraker v. Rent-A-Center 411 F.3d 831 (7th Cir. 2005)

Petition Form
Page 27
Kolanowski, I., Litaker, M., Buettner, L., Moeller, J., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (2011). A randomized clinical
trial of theory-based activities for the behavioral symptoms of dementia in nursing home
residents. Journal of American Geriatrics Society. 59(6), 1032-1041.
Krishnamurthy, R, VandeCreek, L.; Kaslow, N. J.; Tazeau, Y.N.; Miville, M. L., Kerns, R., Stegman,
R., Suzuki, L., & Benton, S. A. (2004). Achieving competency in psychological assessment:
directions for education and training. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 725-739
Kubiszyn, T., Meyer, G. J., Finn, S. E., Eyde, L. D., Kay, G., Moreland, K. L., Dies, R. E. R., &
Eisman, E.T. (2000). Empirical support for psychological assessment in clinical health care
centers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31, 119-130.
Larkin, K.T. & Klonoff, E. A. (2014). Specialty Competencies in Clinical Health Psychology
(Specialty Competencies in Professional Psychology) 1st Edition, Oxford University Press
Lockenhoff, C. E., Duberstein, P. R., Friedman, B., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (2011). Five-factor personality
traits and subjective health among caregivers: The role of caregiver strain and self-efficacy.
Psychology and Aging, 26(3) 592-604.
Maruish, M. E. (1999). Introduction. In M.E. Maruish (Ed.). The use of psychological testing for
treatment planning and outcome assessment (2nd ed., pp. 1-39). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Meyer, G. J., Finn, S. E., Eyde, L. D., Kay, G., Moreland, K. L., Dies, R. R., Eisman, E. T., Kubiszyn,
T., & Reed, G. M. (2001). Psychological testing and psychological assessment: a review of
evidence and issues. American Psychologist, 56, 128-165.
Meyer, G.J., Viglione, D.J., Mihura, J.L., Erard, R.E., & Erdberg, P. (2011). Rorschach performance
assessment system: Administration, coding, interpretation, and technical manual. Toledo, OH:
Rorschach Performance Assessment System, LLC.
Meyer, G. J., Viglione, D. J., & Giromini, L. (2014). An introduction to Rorschach assessment. In R.
P. Archer and S. R. Smith (Eds.), Personality Assessment, 2nd Ed. (pp. 301-369). New York,
NY: Routledge.
Mihura, J. L., Roy, M. & Gracefoo, R. A. (2016). Psychological Assessment Training in

Clinical Psychology Doctoral Programs. Journal of Personality Assessment 98, 1-12.
Miller, P. (2001). Inpatient diagnostic assessments: 2. Interrater reliability and outcomes of structured
vs. unstructured interviews. Psychiatry Research, 105, 265-271.
Miller, P., Dasher, R., Collins, R., Griffiths, P., & Brown, F. (2001). Inpatient diagnostic assessments:
Petition Form
Page 28
1. Accuracy of structured vs. unstructured interviews. Psychiatry Research, 105, 255-264.
Piotrowski, C. (1990). Assessment practices in the era of managed care: current status and future
directions. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 55, 787-796.
Poston, J. M. & Hanson, W. E. (2010) Meta-analysis of psychological assessment as a therapeutic

intervention. Psychological Assessment, 22:203-212.
Ryan, A. M., & Sackett, P. R. (1998). Individual assessment: The research base. In R. Jeanneret & R.
Silzer (Eds.) Individual Psychological Assessment: Predicting Behavior in Organizational
Settings (pp. 54-87). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Seppa, N. (2007). APA Awards Proficiency Certification to Qualified Practitioners. Retrieved on

February 16, 2008, from APApractice.org.
Shemberg, K. M.; Keeley, S. M. (1974). Training practices and satisfaction with pre-internship
preparation. Professional Psychology, 5, 98-105.
Society of Consulting Psychology. (2004). Guidelines for education and training at the doctoral and
postdoctoral level in consulting psychology/organizational consulting psychology. Retrieved
from http://www.apa.org/governance/cpm/div13guidelines.pdf
Society for Personality Assessment. (2006). Standards for education and training in psychological
assessment: Position of the Society for Personality Assessment - An official statement of the
Board of Trustees of the Society for Personality Assessment. Journal of Personality
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (1998). Guidelines for education and training at
the doctoral level in industrial and organizational psychology.
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. (2003). Principles for the validation and use of
personnel selection procedures. (4th Ed.). Retrieved from
http://www.siop.org/_Principles/principles.pdf
Stedman, J. M.; Hatch, J. P., & Schoenfeld, L. S. (2001). The current status of psychological
assessment training in graduate and professionals school. Journal of Personality Assessment,
77, 3, 398-407.
Tellegen, A., Ben-Porath, Y. S., McNulty, J. L., Arbisi, P. A., Graham, J. R., & Kaemmer, B. (2003).
MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical (RC) scales: Development, validation, and interpretation.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Petition Form
Page 29
Tharinger, D. J., Gentry, L. B., & Finn, S. E. (2013). Therapeutic Assessment with adolescents and
their parents: A comprehensive model. In D. H. Saklofske, C. R. Reynolds, & V. L. Schwean
(Eds.), Oxford handbook of child psychological assessment (pp. 385–420). New York, NY:
University Press.
Turner, S. M., DeMers, D. T., Fox, H. R., & Reed, G. (2001). APA guidelines for test user
qualifications: An executive summary. American Psychologist, 56, 1099-1113.
Vodanovich, S. J., & Piotrowski, C. (1999). Training in personnel selection assessment: Survey of
graduate I/O programs. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 26, 201-205.
Weiner, I. B., & Exner, J. E. (1991). Rorschach changes in long-term and short-term psychotherapy.
Wright, C. V., Beattie, S. G., Galper, D. I., Church, A. S., Bufka, L. F., Brabender, V. M., & Smith, B.
L. (2016, July 11). Assessment Practices of Professional Psychologists: Results of a National
Survey. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice. Advance online publication.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pro0000086
Criterion III. Diversity. The organization(s) responsible for the proficiency demonstrates
recognition of the importance of cultural and individual differences and diversity in education
and training in the proficiency.
Commentary: The proficiency provides trainees with relevant knowledge and experiences
about the role of cultural and individual differences and diversity in psychological phenomena
as it relates to the science and practice of the proficiency in each of the following areas: i)
development of a proficiency-specific scientific and theoretical knowledge; ii) preparation for
practice; iii) education and training; iv) continuing education and professional development;
and v) evaluation of effectiveness.
1. Describe how education and training of cultural and individual differences and diversity are
integrated into the curriculum. Include information on coursework and training experiences.
Training for this proficiency builds upon what typical doctoral level clinical training provides. This
includes formal classroom instruction and supervised clinical experience with a diverse clientele across
training levels. Psychologists proficient in Personality Assessment gain familiarity with the strengths
and limitations of various assessment techniques and instruments in working with a particular
population of interest. Thus, when working with child or Older Adults populations; with criminal
populations or with civil litigants; with cultural, ethnic, or linguistic minorities; with persons with
disabilities; with candidates for sensitive employment positions; or with medically ill patients, they
must maintain familiarity with specific tests for specific subjects, the theoretical, empirical, and
normative literature concerning Personality Assessment in general, and the use and interpretation of
Petition Form
Page 30
particular tests and techniques specific to members of that population. The proficiency review form
includes several items that specifically address understanding and application of information related to
diversity, both in terms of individual test interpretation and its use of and/or limitation because of
limited normative information available for specific measures (i.e., “Test interpretations are consistent
with the empirical literature and accepted clinical practice,” and “Test interpretations are sensitive to
issues of culture and diversity, including ethnicity, race, gender, age, sexual orientation, age, religion,
ability, etc.”). Thus, those deemed proficient through the proficiency review process must demonstrate
the ability to understand and apply knowledge related to diversity and culture in personality
assessment.
Particular needs for didactic experience and supervised practice will vary according to the specialized
practice interest of a given assessment professional, but all those proficient in Personality Assessment
must have foundational training in the field of human diversity and multicultural competence. Such
competence is achieved not only through didactic work but through supervised experience with
different populations. Those proficient in Personality Assessment must be familiar with both the
normative bases and limitations of the instruments and techniques they use and the particular
requirements for sensitive and effective administration of their instruments in diverse population
settings. Proficiency in personality assessment requires familiarity with applicable guidelines (e.g.,
AERA, APA, & NCME, 2014; APA, 1990, 1994, 1999, 2003) and the scientific literature on the
impact of a particular minority status on the meaning of assessment data (e.g., Clark, 2000;
Constantine, 1998; Dana, 1986, 1998; Ridley, Hill, & Li, 1998; Pope-Davis & Coleman, 1998;
Samuda, 1998; Sandoval, Frisby, Geisinger, Scheuneman, & Grenier, 1998; Suzuki & Ponterotto,
2008). Recently, the Journal of Personality Assessment devoted a special section on cultural
considerations in therapeutic models of assessment (e.g., B.L. Smith, 2016; J.D. Smith, 2016), and
recent texts have highlighted gender and sexuality factors (Brabender & Mihura, 2016) and diversity
factors more broadly (Smith & Krisnamurthy, in press). Specific methods of teaching and supervising
multiculturally-sensitive Personality Assessment are also addressed in the literature (e.g., Dana,
Aguilar-Ktibutr, Diaz-Vivar, & Vetter, 2002; Yalof, in press). The Society for Personality Assessment
provides frequent continuing education opportunities in the form of an annual conference and other
events in the areas of multicultural assessment and assessment with specific populations (see below).
Further, the Proficiency Committee of SPA has recently convened a Diversity Subcommittee, which
will work on making recommendations for doctoral programs, internships, postdoctoral programs, and
continuing professional development opportunities related to diversity in personality assessment. Once
recommendations have been developed for the sequential and systematic training regarding diversity
issues in personality assessment, the Proficiency Committee will work with other organizations (such
as APA’s Board of Educational Affairs, ASPPB, NCSPP, and others) to disseminate that information
to the relevant training programs. Several initiatives have already been undertaken, including a CE
workshop at next year’s SPA meeting specifically on culture and diversity in proficiency in personality
assessment.
One source that provides clear input regarding competency in diversity as it relates to training in
psychology are the Competency Developmental Achievement Levels (DALs) by the National Council
Petition Form
Page 31
of Schools and Programs in Professional Psychology (NCSPP, 2007). The DALs describe the need to
identify and understand issues of individual and cultural difference as well as power, privilege and
oppression. Such abilities clearly inform all professional interactions and decisions including within
the context of personality assessment. SPA’s Diversity Subcommittee of the Proficiency Committee
will work to align recommendations for each level of training in diversity in personality assessment
with these principles.
2. Describe how knowledge of cultural and individual differences and diversity are applied in
practice.
Culturally competent services are also discussed the DALs (NCSPP, 2007) and entail
conceptualization and integration of information in an individualized manner. The Proficiency in
Personality Assessment specifically addresses such integration and individualization of information.
Psychologists proficient in this area of practice apply their general knowledge of diverse and individual
differences similarly to their colleagues in general practice. In addition, they consider diversity factors
and the individual context of each client when accepting referrals, developing assessment goals,
choosing measures to administer, analyzing test scores and related norms, making interpretations,
writing reports including diagnosis, when applicable, and recommendations and finally, when
communicating assessment feedback to clients and/or third parties involved. Personality assessment
psychologists must be aware of individual diversity factors that may hinder or enhance the likelihood
of individuals following through with assessment recommendations. They also have to keep up to date
with developments in the field regarding specific measures, updated norms, and other relevant issues.
Specifically, those proficient in Personality Assessment must apply their knowledge of cultural and
individual differences and diversity in two primary ways. First, they must use appropriate test norms
as related to the individual client being assessed, whenever possible. That is, proficient practitioners
must understand and utilize knowledge that different cultural groups may have different cut-off
thresholds on specific tests, subtests, or indices on tests. Many tests (such as the MMPI-2) have
specific norms for different cultural groups. In the absence of such norms, proficient practitioners
must understand the limitations of comparing an individual’s test scores to “general” population norms
for any given test, and adapt their interpretation of those test scores accordingly. Second, in addition to
culturally-relevant interpretation of individual test scores, those proficient in personality assessment
must situate all interpretations and findings from data sources within a cultural context. While the
former task deals with individual test scores from different measures, this latter task relates to
integrating the test data into a conceptualization of the individual being assessed that is sensitive to
culture and diversity.
3. Describe the opportunities for continuing professional development and education related to
cultural and individual differences in diversity.
Petition Form
Page 32
SPA regularly and consistently includes diversity related information via their publications and annual
convention sessions. The latter include continuing education workshops, symposia, master lectures,
case presentations, and round table sessions as well as poster presentations to facilitate continued
professional development and education on cultural and individual issues in diversity, particularly as it
pertains to personality assessment. Because SPA is an APA-approved Continuing Education provider,
diversity issues are addressed explicitly in all SPA-sponsored CE offerings. The SPA website includes
the convention book for the upcoming convention and last year’s sessions as an example; a selection of
sessions from recent conventions which illustrate the breadth of SPA’s diversity offerings are also
noted below. Currently, SPA is committed to increasing collaborations with other psychology
organizations and societies as well as close disciplines outside the field of psychology (e.g.
neuroscience) to further explore and enhance the understanding of diversity issues and personality
assessment. The Diversity Subcommittee of SPA’s Proficiency Committee will work to increase
offerings (through workshops at SPA and APA, webinars that are accessible to those who do not attend
SPA and APA conferences, and potentially home study opportunities) for CE related to diversity in
Personality Assessment.
Several sessions will be offered at the upcoming SPA convention (March 2018) specifically targeting
cultural and diversity issues within personality assessment, graduate level training, and clinical
practice:
Roundtable Discussion: Fostering Cultural Competency in Graduate Students Conducting Assessments
Roundtable Session: Diversity-Minded Personality Assessment as a Tool to Make the World More
Inclusive and Just?
Integrated Paper Session: Advanced in the Assessment of Personality and Identity across Diverse
Populations
Roundtable Discussion: Personality Assessment Practice in Diverse Settings
Select session examples from the SPA Annual Convention 2013-2017

Paper Session: Clinical, Cultural, and Physiological Research with Implications for the R-PAS
Paper Session: Cross-Cultural Validity of the Affect in Play Scale: Is Play the Same in US and Italian
Children?
Paper Session: Current Topics in Personality Assessment and Diversity: Tips, Insights, and Guidelines
for Graduate Students (sponsored by SPAGS, our student association)
Workshop: Making Meaning from Assessment Findings Writing Therapeutic Stories for Children,
Adolescents, and Adults
Symposium: Therapeutic Assessment around the World
Symposium: An International Perspective: Assessment’s Role in Uncovering and Coping with Client
Trauma
Paper Session: Assessing Children and Adolescents; Symposium: Hidden Social and Cultural
Influences to Assessor’s Practices in Therapeutic Assessment
Petition Form
Page 33
Symposium: Diversity at the Crossroads: Intersectionality and Personality Assessment

Workshop: Multicultural Evidence-based Assessment of Child, Adult and Family Psychopathology
Paper Session: Self-Report Inventories in Varied Populations
Roundtable Discussion: Women in Personality Assessment
Paper Session: Adolescent Assessment: Issues and Methods
Symposium: Diversity Training in Personality Assessment: Teaching and Supervising Cultural
Awareness and Competence
Symposium: Case Studies in Forensic Assessment in Immigration Court
Workshop: Applying R-PAS to Children
Workshop: Multicultural Tasks of Emotional Development
Symposium: Collaborative/Therapeutic Assessment Approaches with Transgender Individuals and
Their Families.
4. Describe how students are evaluated. How is competency measured? Please include samples
of evaluation tools related to an understanding of cultural and individual differences and diversity.
Pre- and post-doctoral students receive formalized didactic and field based training in this area.
Standard and ongoing evaluation of diversity based skills is similar to that in other areas of
professional skills including therapy and assessment as well as professional conduct. Students may be
evaluated using common tools such as exams; observed and rated, self-evaluations; standardized tests
(EPPP for general knowledge); and practical exams. Initial and ongoing competency is continuously
evaluated, first within the classroom setting, typically via exams and submitting practice assessment
cases with peers or volunteers with grading considering diversity factors considered and incorporated
appropriately. Next, students are evaluated via supervised experiences under the supervision of a
licensed psychologist who has demonstrated a certain level of knowledge and skill in this area of work.
Field experience including supervision and evaluation would identify work with clients needing
specialized practice approaches based on their individual differences or diversity status as well as
diversity factors of the student and relevance to the relationship and interactions with clients. Thus,
during such training, trainees are encouraged to recognize and be mindful of their own individual
differences, limitations, and preferences as these may also affect their scope of practice and are
relevant to this section of questions.
The recognition process for this proficiency includes a work sample (assessment report) for most
applicants (with exception of those who have already demonstrated a higher skills level), and the tool
used to evaluate reports submitted (Proficiency Report Review Form, see SPA website) covers various
aspects pertaining to demonstrating an understanding of the individual assessed, and the consideration
of relevant diversity factors. This evaluation tool includes 5 categories: Comprehensiveness, Validity,
Petition Form
Page 34
Integration, Client-Centered, and Overall Writing; multiple items are included under each category that
need to meet proficiency level. All categories reviewed and evaluated via this tool consider diversity
factors and a specific item is also included to ensure diversity is addressed properly in the assessment
process and resulting report, reflecting one’s level of competency. Specifically, those applying for
proficiency have their reports and test data evaluated for cultural competence by explicit evaluation (by
proficiency reviewers) of test data being interpreted with diversity and culture-related information
attended to. Test results must be sensitive to diversity issues, including relevant normative information
and situating of data in a cultural context.
As mentioned above, ongoing maintenance of state licensure as a psychologist and related continuing
education requirements further support familiarity and awareness of diversity issues. Training related
to multicultural and diversity issues is required for basic competence in any area of practice as a
licensed psychologist. Such competence is usually acquired via coursework, practica, internships, and
postdoctoral training. Oversight for such training and evaluation occurs at the university program level
and APA accreditation and approval. APPIC has oversight of internship experiences. For postdoctoral
training, such as continuing education, the vast majority of course work offered would be reviewed by
APA or APA affiliated organizations granting APA approved CE credit. SPA also provides approved
continuing education credits that are more directly related to this proficiency and incorporating
diversity issues. For renewal of proficiency recognition, applicants are asked to state explicitly that at
least 6 hours of continuing professional development activities have been dedicated to issues related to
diversity in personality assessment.
References

testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

ethnic, linguistic, and culturally diverse populations. Washington, DC: Author
American Psychological Association Committee on Professional Practice Standards. (1994).

Guidelines for child custody evaluations in divorce proceedings. American Psychologist, 49,
677-680.
American Psychological Association Committee on Professional Practice Standards (1999). Guidelines

for psychological evaluations in child protection matters. American Psychologist, 54, 586-593.
American Psychological Association (2003). Guidelines on multicultural education, training, research,

practice, and organizational change for psychologists. American Psychologist, 58, 377-402.
Brabender, V.M. & Mihura, J.L. (Eds.) (2016). Handbook of Gender and Sexuality in Psychological
Petition Form
Page 35
Assessment. NY: Routledge.
Clarke, I, III. (2000). Extreme response style in multicultural research: An empirical investigation.
Journal of Social Behavior & Personality, 15, 137—152.
Constantine, M. (1998). Developing competence in multicultural assessment: Implications for

counseling psychology training and practice. The Counseling Psychologist, 6, 922—929.
Dana, R. H. (1996). Culturally competent assessment practice in the United States. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 66, 472-487.
Dana, R. H. (1998). Understanding cultural identity in intervention and assessment. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Dana, R. H., Aguilar-Ktibutr, A., Diaz-Vivar, N., & Vetter, H. (2002). A teaching method for
multicultural assessment: Psychological report contents and cultural competence. Journal of
La Roche, M. J., & Christopher, M. S. (2010). Cultural diversity. In J. C. Thomas & M. Hersen (Eds.),
Handbook of clinical psychology competencies (pp. 95-122). New York: Springer.
National Council of Schools and Programs in Professional Psychology (2007) Competency

Developmental Achievement Levels (DALs). Retrieved from:
http://www.thencspp.com/DALof%20NCSPP%209-21-07.pdf
Pope–Davis, D. B., & Coleman, H. L. K. (1997). Multicultural counseling competencies: Assessment,

education and training, and supervision. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ridley, C., Hill, C., & Li, L. (1998). Revisiting and refining the multicultural assessment procedure.
Counseling Psychologist, 6, 939-947.
Samuda, R. J. (1998). Psychological testing of American minorities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sandoval, J., Frisby, C. L., Geisinger, K. F., Scheuneman, J. D., & Grenier, J. R. (Eds.). (1998). Test
interpretation and diversity: Achieving equity in assessment. Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association.
Smith, B.L. (2016). Context matters: Commentary on papers by Aschieri, Chudzik, Evans, and
Fantini. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98, 594-597.
Smith, J.D. (2016). Introduction to the special section on cultural considerations in collaborative and
therapeutic assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98, 563-566.
Petition Form
Page 36
Smith, S.R., & Krishnamurthy, R. (Eds.) (in press). Diversity-Sensitive Personality Assessment. NY:
Routledge.
Suzuki, L., & Ponterotto, J. (Eds.) (2008). Handbook of Multicultural Assessment: Clinical,
Psychological, and Educational Applications. San Francisco: Wiley and Sons.
Yalof, J. (in press). Supervision and training in personality assessment with multicultural and diverse
clients. In Smith & Krishnamurthy (Eds.). Diversity-Sensitive Personality Assessment. NY:
Routledge.
Criterion IV. Distinctiveness. A proficiency is represented by a distinct procedure, technique, or

applied skill set used in psychological assessment and/or treatment within which one develops
competence.
Commentary: A proficiency typically reflects the development of a competence in a

circumscribed activity beyond broad and general doctoral training. While it is recognized that
there may be overlap among the knowledge and skill bases of various psychological
applications (i.e. procedure, technique, or applied skill set), the proficiency does not overlap
completely with any other psychological applications.
1. Provide a brief description of the proficiency by responding to the questions below (limit 400
words total; reading level should be approximately 8th grade). This provides the foundation for
what will appear on the APA website upon recognition of the proficiency and should be
understandable to the general public. Descriptions will be edited for consistency to conform to
the CRSPPP website standards.
a. Provide a brief (2-3 sentences) definition of the proficiency.
Personality Assessment involves the administration, scoring, interpretation, and integration of

empirically supported (i.e., with evidence of reliability, validity, and utility) measures of personality
traits and styles in order to: a) refine clinical diagnoses when relevant; b) structure and inform
psychological interventions; c) heighten understanding of the personality of the individual being
assessed; and d) increase the accuracy of behavioral prediction in a variety of contexts and settings
(e.g., clinical, forensic, organizational, educational). Integration in Personality Assessment takes place
at three levels: across scales in a multi-scale measure (e.g., integration across MMPI-2-RF scales);
across test methods in a multimethod evaluation, which include self-reports, observer ratings, and
performance tasks (e.g., integration of MMPI-2 results with Rorschach Performance Assessment
System results); and across life domains, as test-based inferences are integrated with contextualizing
information from interview, history, observed behavior, and collateral sources.
b. What specialized knowledge is key to the proficiency?

Petition Form
Page 37
In addition to conducting an effective clinical interview and establishing rapport, Personality

Assessment requires expertise in the use of empirically supported measures of personality traits and
styles in several applied settings. The empirical support for these measures is based on evidence of
reliability and validity, including available data on incremental validity and utility. Proper
administration, scoring, and interpretation of personality tests and measures require specialized
training and experience. Because Personality Assessment involves appraisal, clarification, and
integration of often conflicting and ambiguous evidence and evaluation of multiple hypotheses, it
requires considerable clinical expertise, knowledge of research regarding assessment instruments, and
an attitude of scientific inquiry as well (see Bornstein, 2017; Cates, 1999; Handler & Meyer, 1998;
Meyer, 1997).
Personality Assessment draws upon a distinctive set of skills not characteristic of existing
proficiencies. Psychologists proficient in Personality Assessment must be well versed in:
a) evaluating evidence for the reliability, construct validity, incremental validity, and applied
utility of a broad array of psychological assessment tools;
b) constructing an appropriate assessment battery to address a specific referral question;
c) administering and scoring these measures so they yield valid and useful information;
d) interpreting the results of individual Personality Assessment instruments; and
e) integrating data from different instruments and methods in the broader context of the referral
question, additional psychological data (e.g., intellectual test results), and other relevant
information about the person being tested (e.g., life history data).
Personality Assessment also addresses goals not addressed by existing proficiencies:

It is distinctive in its use of psychological test data to increase the accuracy of behavioral predictions in
a variety of contexts and settings (e.g., clinical, forensic, organizational, educational; see, e.g.,
Chiaburu, Oh, Berry, Li, & Gardner, 2011; Hurtz & Donovan, 2000; Ozer & Benet-Martínez, 2006;
Roberts, Kuncel, Shiner, Caspi, & Goldberg, 2007), and in its use of psychological test data to enhance
the effectiveness of psychological treatments (e.g., psychotherapy) and other behavioral interventions
(e.g., learning disability accommodations, coaching). Testing, a significant aspect of personality
assessment, can help identify aspects of the client that are relevant to his or her distress and difficulties,
but that he or she may be unaware of or unable to articulate. Such information may be critical to
effective therapy or other future interventions (Bram & Peebles, 2014). It is uncommon for research to
comparatively evaluate the reliability and descriptive validity of psychological test instruments relative
to the ubiquitous informal assessment procedures used in applied contexts and settings (e.g., clinical,
forensic, organizational, educational), such as impressions of the client based on unstructured
encounters or unstructured interviews. This is because the ubiquitous informal assessment procedures
Petition Form
Page 38
lack quantified information that could be used in comparative research. Thus, there is nothing that can
be compared. However, unlike unstructured or informal interviews, which lack evidence of reliability
or validity, Personality Assessment relies on instruments that have documented evidence of reliability
and validity (e.g., Meyer, 2004; Meyer et al., 2001), including evidence for incremental validity (e.g.,
Mihura, Meyer, Dumitrascu, & Bombel, 2013). Although historically understudied (Meyer et al.,
2001), positive evidence from single-case time-series analyses and contrasted groups research is
increasingly accumulating about the applied utility of Personality Assessment (Aschieri & Smith,
2012; De Saeger, Bartak, Eder & Kamphuis, 2016; De Saeger et al., 2014; Durosini, Tarocchi, &
Aschieri, 2017; Fantini & Smith, 2018; Hanson & Poston, 2011; Hansson, Hansson, Danielsson, &
Domellöf, 2016; Poston & Hanson, 2010; Smith, Eichler, Norman & Smith, 2015; Smith & George,
2012; Smith, Handler, & Nash, 2010; Smith, Nicholas, Handler, & Nash, 2011; Tarocchi, Aschieri,
Fantini, & Smith, 2013; Tharinger et al., 2009).
Finally, Personality Assessment draws upon a distinctive body of knowledge. This body of knowledge
includes research on the construct validity of individual Personality Assessment tools, the ways in
which data from individual Personality Assessment instruments can be combined to increase their
utility and heuristic value, and the effective use of norms--including norms from members of different
ethnic and racial groups--in interpreting test results.
c. What are the essential skills and procedures associated with the proficiency?
The major procedures and techniques used by psychologists proficient in Personality Assessment are
those involved in the administration, scoring, and interpretation of personality tests (see Bornstein,
2017; Butcher, 2002; Groth-Marnat & Wright, 2016; Handler & Meyer, 1998; Weiner & Greene,
2008). Personality Assessment typically proceeds in three phases:
● Testing, which involves administering a battery of measures using standardized

procedures to obtain a set of scores that can be compared to established norms.
● Interpretation and integration of test results, a process whereby separate test-derived

pieces of information obtained from multiple methods of assessment are analyzed in the
context of historical information, referral information, and behavioral observations to
generate a cohesive and comprehensive understanding of the person being evaluated.
● Report writing and feedback, which consists of providing to the test taker and referent a
summary of test results and their implications; typically, the feedback provided to a test
taker is framed in easily understood language whereas feedback to a referent may be
more detailed and use more technical language and specialized professional
terminology
2. Provide a detailed description of how this proposed proficiency differs from and is similar to
existing proficiency practices. Provide a detailed description of how one develops and is evaluated for
Petition Form
Page 39
competency to practice the proficiency. The comparison and differentiation must address the distinct
procedure, technique or skill set used in the practice of the proficiency. In addition, the comparison and
differentiation must address how a knowledge base and competency in the proficiency is gained
beyond broad and general doctoral training.
Personality Assessment is distinct from the proficiencies currently recognized by the American
Psychological Association in that it requires expertise in the use of empirically supported measures of
personality traits and styles in several applied settings. 1 Proper administration, scoring, and
interpretation of personality tests and measures require specialized training and experience. Because
Personality Assessment involves appraisal, clarification, and integration of often conflicting and
ambiguous evidence and evaluation of multiple hypotheses, it requires considerable clinical expertise,
knowledge of research regarding assessment instruments, and an attitude of scientific inquiry as well
(see Bornstein, 2017; Cates, 1999; Handler & Meyer, 1998).
As noted earlier, Personality Assessment draws upon a distinctive set of skills not characteristic of
existing proficiencies. Thus, psychologists proficient in Personality Assessment must be well versed
in:
a) evaluating the reliability and construct validity of a broad array of psychological assessment tools;
b) constructing an appropriate assessment battery to address a specific referral question;
c) administering and scoring these measures so they yield valid and useful information;
d) interpreting the results of individual cognitive and Personality Assessment instruments; and
e) integrating data from different instruments in the broader context of the referral question, additional
psychological data (e.g., intellectual test results), and other relevant information about the person being
tested (e.g., life history data).
Personality Assessment also addresses goals not addressed by existing proficiencies: It is distinctive in
its use of structured and normed psychological test data with evidence of reliability and validity to
increase the accuracy of behavioral predictions in a variety of contexts and settings (e.g., clinical,
forensic, organizational, educational), and in its use of psychological test data to increase the
effectiveness of psychological treatments (e.g., psychotherapy) and other behavioral interventions
(e.g., learning disability accommodations, coaching).
Finally, Personality Assessment draws upon a distinctive body of knowledge. This body of knowledge
1
The proficiency for Addiction Psychology (AKA Treatment of Alcohol and Other Psychoactive Substance Use Disorders)
also relies on assessment measures with evidence for reliability, validity, and clinical utility. However, those measures are
focused on screening for and assessment of substance use problems, as opposed to personality traits and styles.
Petition Form
Page 40
includes research on the reliability and construct validity of individual Personality Assessment tools,
the ways in which data from individual Personality Assessment instruments can be combined to
increase their utility and heuristic value, and the effective use of norms--including norms from
members of different ethnic and racial groups--in interpreting test results.
Overlap with Existing Proficiencies
Personality Assessment’s goals, body of knowledge, and the skills required to be proficient in this area
overlap modestly with two recognized proficiencies: Assessment and Treatment of Serious Mental
Illness and Addiction Psychology (AKA Treatment of Alcohol and other Substance Use Disorders). In
these two areas Personality Assessment data may be used to obtain information regarding individuals’
current psychological functioning that can then be used to guide and structure interventions. In
addition, in both areas, Personality Assessment may be used to help measure intervention
effectiveness; by contrasting pre- and post-intervention assessment data, salient outcomes as well as
narrower domains/components of outcome may be quantified. However, both of these other
proficiencies have a narrower focus than Personality Assessment. The proficiency in Assessment and
Treatment of Serious Mental Illness is focused on serious mental illness and thus emphasizes the
quantification of functional capacities, including neuropsychological strengths and deficits that may
relate to them. The proficiency in Addiction Psychology utilizes measures that are focused on
screening for and assessment of substance use problems, as opposed to personality traits and styles
Personality Assessment’s goals, body of knowledge, and the skills required to be proficient in this area
do not overlap with those of Psychopharmacology and Sport Psychology, although Personality
Assessment may sometimes be appropriate in determining suitability for some applications in these
areas, and in assessing the effectiveness of their interventions.
General clinical knowledge and skills including interviewing and establishing rapport, and in some
cases psychopathology and diagnosis, as well as knowledge of relevant diversity factors and potential
impact on services, along with ethical considerations are additional factors that overlap across
proficiencies including Personality Assessment.
Evidence of Distinctiveness
a) Specific Populations
Because Personality Assessment is useful in addressing a wide range of questions regarding

individuals’ psychological functioning, its use is not limited to specific populations. Personality
Assessment is applicable to a wide range of ages, ethnic, racial, and linguistic backgrounds, medical
and psychological problems, and groupings of individuals. Thus, evidence of distinctiveness is to be
found not in its limited use with particular populations, but rather in the unique contributions of
Personality Assessment to psychological and social problems, and in the procedures and techniques
used to address these problems.
Petition Form
Page 41
b) Psychological, Biological, or Social Problems
Personality Assessment is commonly used in clinical (i.e., inpatient and outpatient) settings and is
increasingly used in medical settings as well. Personality Assessment is also applied in long-term care
settings. Personality Assessment is widely used in forensic settings (e.g., to render custody evaluations,
to help determine the mental state of criminal defendants or civil litigants, to assess claimed emotional
injuries in civil suits), in organizational settings (e.g., to prescreen job applicants and aid in placement
of newly hired employees), and in educational settings (e.g., as part of learning disability assessments
and formulation of accommodation plans).
Personality Assessment data can enhance the accuracy of behavioral prediction in a broad array of
contexts by documenting salient domains of psychological functioning, thereby providing unique
information which complements that obtained in interviews and archival records (Meyer et al., 2001;
Shedler & Westen, 2007). Personality Assessment data can also be used to refine diagnoses insofar as
understanding a patient’s underlying personality structure may help the clinician differentiate between
two syndromes with similar or overlapping surface characteristics (Bornstein, 2007; Widiger &
Samuel, 2005). Finally, Personality Assessment data can help inform and structure psychological
treatment and other forms of intervention in ways that other types of information (including diagnostic
data) cannot (Bram & Peebles, 2014; De Saeger et al., 2014; Hanson & Poston, 2011; Hansson et al.,
2016; Millon & Grossman, 2007; Smith et al., 2015; Tharinger et al., 2009; Weiner & Greene, 2008).
Among the kinds of assessment data useful in this regard are those bearing on self-concept, underlying
and expressed motives, impulse control, defense and coping style, perceptual style, and cognitive
complexity (Butcher, 2002; Livesley, 2002; Huprich & Ganellen, 2006). In addition, Personality
Assessment data are used to evaluate progress during psychological treatment (Porcerelli et al., 2006),
and studies confirm that a thorough assessment coupled with feedback to the patient prior to the start
of psychotherapy can enhance the likelihood of positive treatment outcome and diminish the likelihood
of premature termination (Hilsenroth & Cromer, 2007).
c) Procedures and Techniques
The major procedures and techniques used by psychologists proficient in Personality Assessment are
those involved in the administration, scoring, and interpretation of personality tests (see Butcher, 2002;
Groth-Marnat & Wright, 2016; Handler & Meyer, 1998; Weiner & Greene, 2008). Personality
Assessment typically proceeds in three phases:
● Testing, which involves administering a battery of measures using standardized

procedures to obtain a set of scores that can be compared to established norms.
● Interpretation and integration of test results, a process whereby separate test-derived

pieces of information obtained from multiple methods of assessment are analyzed in the
context of historical information, referral information, and behavioral observations to
generate a cohesive and comprehensive understanding of the person being evaluated.
Petition Form
Page 42
● Report writing and feedback, which consists of providing to the test taker and referent a
summary of test results and their implications; typically, the feedback provided to a test
taker is framed in easily understood language whereas feedback to a referent may be
more detailed and use more technical language and specialized professional
terminology
References
Aschieri, F., & Smith, J. D. (2012). The effectiveness of therapeutic assessment with an adult client: A
single-case study using a time-series design. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94, 1-11. doi:
10.1080/00223891.2011.627964
Ben-Porath, Y. (2012). Interpreting the MMPI-2RF. University of Minnesota Press.
Bornstein, R. F. (2007). From surface to depth: Diagnosis and assessment in personality pathology.
Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 14, 99-102.
Bornstein, R. F. (2017). Evidence based psychological assessment. Journal of Personality

Bram, A. & Peebles, M. (2014). Psychological Testing That Matters: Creating a Road Map for
Effective Treatment. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Butcher, J. N. (Ed.) (2002). Clinical Personality Assessment (2nd edition). NY: Oxford University
Press.
Cates, J. A. (1999). The art of assessment in psychology: Ethics, expertise, and validity. Journal of
Clinical Psychology, 55, 631-641.
Chiaburu, D. S., Oh, I.-S., Berry, C. M., Li, N., & Gardner, R. G. (2011). The five-factor model of
personality traits and organizational citizenship behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 96, 1140-1166. doi: 10.1037/a0024004
De Saeger, H., Bartak, A., Eder, E. E., & Kamphuis, J. H. (2016). Memorable experiences in
Therapeutic Assessment: Inviting the patient’s perspective following a pretreatment
randomized controlled trial. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98, 472-479.
doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2015.1136314
De Saeger, H., Kamphuis, J. H., Finn, S. E., Smith, J. D., Verheul, R., van Busschbach, J. J., . . . Horn,
E. K. (2014). Therapeutic assessment promotes treatment readiness but does not affect
Petition Form
Page 43
symptom change in patients with personality disorders: Findings from a randomized clinical
trial. Psychological Assessment, 26, 474-483. doi: 10.1037/a0035667
Durosini, I., Tarocchi, A., & Aschieri, F. (2017). Therapeutic Assessment with a client with persistent
complex bereavement disorder: A single-case time-series design. Clinical Case Studies, 16,
295-312. doi: 1534650117693942
Fantini, F., & Smith, J. D. (2018). Using R-PAS in the Therapeutic Assessment of a university student
with emotional disconnection: A single-case study. In J. Mihura & G. Meyer (Eds.),
Applications of the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (pp. 138-157). New York, NY:
Guilford.
Groth-Marnat, G. & Wright, A. J. (2016). Handbook of psychological assessment, (6th Edition).

Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Handler, L., & Meyer, G. J. (1998). The importance of teaching and learning Personality Assessment.
In L. Handler & M. J. Hilsenroth (Eds.), Teaching and learning Personality Assessment (pp. 3-
30). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hanson, W. E., & Poston, J. M. (2011). Building confidence in psychological assessment as a

therapeutic intervention: An empirically based reply to Lilienfeld, Garb, and Wood (2011).
Psychological Assessment, 23, 1056-1062. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025656
Hansson, A., Hansson, L., Danielsson, I., & Domellöf, E. (2016). Short- and long-term effects of child
neuropsychological assessment with a collaborative and therapeutic approach: A preliminary
study. Applied Neuropsychology: Child, 5, 97-106. doi: 10.1080/21622965.2014.996646
Hilsenroth, M. J., & Cromer, T. D. (2007). Clinician interventions related to alliance during the initial
interview and psychological assessment. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training,
44, 205-218.
Huprich, S. K., & Ganellen, R. J. (2006). The advantages of assessing personality disorders with the
Rorschach. In S. K. Huprich (Ed.), Rorschach assessment of the personality disorders (pp. 27-
56). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Hurtz, G. M., & Donovan, J. J. (2000). Personality and job performance: The Big Five
revisited. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 869-879. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.85.6.869
Livesley, W. J. (2002). Treating the emotional dysregulation cluster of traits. Psychiatric Annals, 32,
601-607.
Meyer, G. J. (1997). On the integration of personality assessment methods: The Rorschach and MMPI.
Petition Form
Page 44
Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 297-330. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa6802_5
Meyer, G. J. (2004). The reliability and validity of the Rorschach and TAT compared to other
psychological and medical procedures: An analysis of systematically gathered evidence. In M.
Hilsenroth & D. Segal (Eds.), Personality assessment. Volume 2 in M. Hersen (Ed.-in-Chief),
Comprehensive handbook of psychological assessment (pp. 315-342). Hoboken, NJ: John
Wiley & Sons.
Meyer, G. J., Finn, S. E., Eyde, L., Kay, G. G., Moreland, K. L., Dies, R. R., … & Reed, G. M. (2001).
Psychological testing and psychological assessment: A review of evidence and issues.
Mihura, J. L., Meyer, G. J., Dumitrascu, N., & Bombel, G. (2013). The validity of individual
Rorschach variables: Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of the Comprehensive System.
Psychological Bulletin, 139, 548-605. doi:10.1037/a0029406
Millon, T., & Grossman, S. (2007). Resolving difficult clinical syndromes: A personalized
psychotherapy approach. NY: Wiley.
Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential
outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401-421. doi:
10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190127
Porcerelli, J. H., et al. (2006). Social Cognition and Object Relations Scale: Convergent validity and
changes following intensive inpatient treatment. Personality and Individual Differences, 41,
401-417.
Poston, J. M., & Hanson, W. E. (2010). Meta-analysis of psychological assessment as a therapeutic

intervention. Psychological Assessment, 22, 203-212. doi: 10.1037/A001s679
Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N. R., Shiner, R., Caspi, A., & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The power of
personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive
ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 313-
345. doi: 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00047.x
Shedler, J., & Westen, D. (2007). The Shedler-Westen Assessment Procedure (SWAP): Making
personality diagnosis clinically meaningful. Journal of Personality Assessment, 89, 41-55.
Smith, J. D., Eichler, W., Norman, K., & Smith, S. R. (2015). The effectiveness of a therapeutic model
of assessment for psychotherapy consultation: A pragmatic replicated single-case study Journal
of Personality Assessment, 97, 261–270. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2014.955917
Petition Form
Page 45
Smith, J. D., & George, C. (2012). Therapeutic assessment case study: Treatment of a woman
diagnosed with metastatic cancer and attachment trauma. Journal of Personality Assessment,
94, 331-344. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2012.656860
Smith, J. D., Handler, L., & Nash, M. R. (2010). Therapeutic Assessment for preadolescent boys with
oppositional-defiant disorder: A replicated single-case time-series design. Psychological
Assessment, 22, 593-602. doi: 10.1037/a0019697
Smith, J. D., Nicholas, C. R. N., Handler, L., & Nash, M. R. (2011). Examining the potential impact of
a family session in therapeutic assessment: A single-case experiment. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 93, 204-212. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2011.559497
Tarocchi, A., Aschieri, F., Fantini, F., & Smith, J. D. (2013). Therapeutic Assessment of complex
trauma: A single-case time-series study. Clinical Case Studies, 12, 228-245. doi:
10.1177/1534650113479442
Tharinger, D. J., Finn, S. E., Gentry, L., Hamilton, A. M., Fowler, J. L., Matson, M., Walkowiak, J.
(2009). Therapeutic Assessment with children: A pilot study of treatment acceptability and
outcome. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 238-244. doi: 10.1080/00223890902794275
Weiner, I. B., & Greene, R. L. (2008). Handbook of Personality Assessment. NY: Wiley.
Widiger, T. A., & Samuel, D. B. (2005). Evidence-based assessment of personality disorders.

Psychological Assessment, 17, 278-287.
Criterion V. Parameters of practice. A proficiency may be described by a circumscribed set of

activities that may be applied to specific populations, settings, and biopsychosocial problems.
Commentary: This parameter consists of the descriptions of specific procedures and techniques
utilized in the proficiency and to the populations to which they apply. This includes assessment
techniques, intervention strategies, consultative methods, diagnostic procedures, ecological
strategies, and applications from the psychological laboratory to serve a public need for
psychological assistance.
1. Provide a description of the procedures and techniques utilized in the practice of the
proficiency. The narrative should include a description of the assessment techniques,
intervention strategies, consultative methods, diagnostic procedures and ecological strategies
used in the practice of the proficiency. In addition, the description should describe the settings
in which the techniques and strategies are applied, the specific populations served by those
practicing in the proficiency, and the biopsychosocial problems the proficiency addresses.
Petition Form
Page 46
a) Specific Populations
Personality Assessment serves a diverse range of populations across a wide variety of settings
(Harwood, Beutler, & Groth-Marnat, 2011; Groth-Marnat & Wright, 2016). Instruments commonly
used in Personality Assessment are often available in translation for use in several languages (see
Butcher, 2004; Weiner & Greene, 2008), and their norms are frequently checked for applicability to
minority populations and across a range of settings (e.g., with traditional mental health patient groups,
medically ill populations, criminal populations, civil forensic populations) and age groups (e.g. older
as well as younger adults). Personality Assessment of adults is used in treatment and career planning
and also in providing expert opinions to courts in both civil and criminal matters. Special instruments
or adaptations of adult instruments have been designed specifically for children, adolescents, and older
adults. Personality Assessment of children and youth is helpful in planning clinical and educational
services and placements for those with significant emotional, educational, or interpersonal problems.
Special instruments or specially normed or adapted adult instruments are often used in the assessment
of Older Adults populations. With couples and families, Personality Assessment can be useful in
identifying conflicts and dynamics within the family system that should become a central focus for
marital or family therapy (e.g., Hiembo & Butcher, 1991).
Psychologists who are proficient in Personality Assessment are familiar with the theoretical, empirical,
and normative literature concerning using psychological tests with members of diverse populations and
across a variety of settings. This knowledge base has special applicability for older adults, many of
whom are also members of ethnic or racial minority groups and who may live in special settings.
Psychologists adapt their assessment techniques, apply norms, and obtain informed consent in a
manner that is suitable for the characteristics of the individuals assessed and the settings in which
assessment takes place.
Personality Assessment provides reliable, valid, and useful information concerning psychological,
biological, and social problems in a wide range of settings, including but not limited to, the following.
A list of relevant and current references per each setting/specialty area noted below is included later in
this petition under Criterion VIII.
Inpatient and outpatient psychiatric settings – Because the symptoms of most mental disorders are best
understood in terms of how they interact with the patients’ overall personality functioning (PDM Task
Force, 2006, 2017; Krueger, 2005; Krueger & Tackett, 2006; Millon & Davis, 1996; Westen, Gabbard,
& Blagov, 2006), Personality Assessment often plays a central role in psychodiagnostic evaluations.
Understanding affect regulation, interpersonal interactions and self-perceptions, reality testing and
perceptual organization, level of distress, the broader adaptive strengths or coping skills, defensive
style, conflicts, strivings and aversions, and problem-solving preferences of a patient’s personality is
usually vital in planning effective clinical interventions. (Kubiszyn Meyer, Finn, Eyde, Kay, Moreland,
Dies, & Eisman; 2000; Meyer, 2002). Although not every patient with a primary psychiatric disorder
requires a personality assessment, an evaluation can often be valuable to clinicians in clarifying
complex diagnostic issues, assisting in developing appropriate treatment plans, or identifying
Petition Form
Page 47
personality characteristics and patterns of thinking, relating, and reacting that may interfere with
developing a therapeutic alliance and benefitting from treatment. In addition, findings from a
psychological evaluation can provide objective evidence to aid in identifying patients who deliberately
report psychological symptoms, personal problems, and limitations in functioning in an unrealistic,
exaggerated manner to obtain a tangible reward, such as being granted disability benefits, escaping
unwanted responsibilities, or avoiding unpleasant situations (Ganellen, 2007; Weiner & Greene, 2008).
In addiction treatment settings, Personality Assessment has been shown to be useful in assigning
patients to types of treatment well suited to their individual needs (e.g., Gilmore, Lash, Foster, &
Blosser, 2001).
Medical settings – Personality Assessment of patients with a primary medical problem can provide
valuable information objectively showing whether a patient would benefit from treatment for a co-
morbid psychiatric disorder, such as depression or an anxiety disorder; whether psychological factors
interacting with the patients’ biological conditions contribute to their report of symptoms; perception
of their capabilities and limitations; or need to seek attention, support, and reassurance from others by
calling attention to their medical symptoms; or whether response to treatment may be complicated by a
patient’s personality characteristics, psychological needs, and style of relating to others (Berry, Elliott,
& Rivera, 2007; Sirri, Fabbri, & Fava, 2007).
Older Adults and rehabilitation settings – Personality Assessment in Older Adults settings can be used
to help identify both strengths and liabilities relevant to planning for special services and living
arrangements. Such assessments are particularly helpful in distinguishing between emotional and
social problems and cognitive or medical-biological problems in this population. Personality
Assessment is used with physically and mentally disabled people in appraising the emotional impact of
the disability, evaluating motivational factors, and developing rehabilitation and accommodation plans
(e.g., Trezona, 1991 and Rossi et. al., 2014).
Legal/Forensic settings – Personality Assessment may be used in a broad range of legal and forensic
contexts, in both the civil and criminal arenas (e.g., Archer & Wheeler, 2013). Among these are: the
psychological assessment of personality factors as they relate to civil and criminal competencies;
assessments of mens rea and violence risk potential in criminal prosecutions and sentencing
proceedings; the psychological assessment of litigants in a personal injury context; and family
assessments in child custody disputes and juvenile and foster placements (see Melton, Petrila,
Poythress, & Slobogin, 2007). In correctional settings, Personality Assessment can also be a critical
resource in screening for individuals at risk of violent or self-destructive behavior or for psychotic
decompensation and in identifying appropriate treatment assignments and placements for incarcerated
offenders (Gacono, 2000; Gacono & Evans, 2007; Gacono & Meloy, 1994). Personality Assessment
also plays an important role in forensic decision-making, whether in the context of bail proceedings,
probation and parole determinations, or specifying conditions for management and supervision.
Educational settings – Personality Assessment is used in pre-school, school, and university settings to
assess students’ dispositions in the physical, social, and academic environment of the classroom. These
Petition Form
Page 48
include appraisal of students’ cognitive and emotional resources, as well as aptitudes and skills,
necessary for academic performance and for successful social and behavioral adaptation to the
educational environment. Personality Assessment is used in the diagnosis of behavioral and learning
problems, which inform individual educational plans and eligibility for special accommodations.
Personality Assessment is vital in identifying both biologically based pervasive developmental
disabilities (e.g., autism, Asperger’s syndrome) and more circumscribed disabilities (e.g., ADHD, non-
verbal learning disability) in children (e.g., Yalof, 2006). Early interventions with such problems can
dramatically improve their adjustment to their home and school environments.
References
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National

Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for Educational and Psychological
Testing. Washington, D.C.: American Educational Research Association.
Archer, R.P. & Wheeler, E.A. (Eds.). (2013). Forensic uses of clinical assessment instruments (2 nd
Edition). NY: Routledge Press.
Berry, J. W., Elliott, T. R., & Rivera, P. (2007). Resilient, undercontrolled, and overcontrolled
personality prototypes among persons with spinal cord injury. Journal of Personality
Blau, T. H. (1994). Psychological services for law enforcement. NY: Wiley.
Butcher, J. N. (2004). Personality Assessment without borders: Adaptation of the MMPI-2 across
cultures, Journal of Personality Assessment, 83, 90-104.
Campbell, D. T., & Fiske, D. W. (1959). Convergent and discriminant validation by the
multitrait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 56, 81-105.
Committee on Ethical Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists (1991). Specialty guidelines for forensic
psychologists. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 655-665.
Dana, R. H., Auilar-Ktibutr, A., Diaz-Viva, N. & Vetter, H.A (2002). A teaching method for
Finn, S. E. (1996). Assessment feedback: Integrating MMPI-2 and Rorschach findings. Journal of
Petition Form
Page 49
Finn, S. E., & Tonsager, M. E. (1992). Therapeutic effects of providing MMPI-2 test
feedback to college students awaiting therapy. Psychological Assessment, 4, 278-287.
Finn, S. E., & Tonsager, M. E. (1997). Information-gathering and therapeutic models of assessment:
Complementary paradigms. Psychological Assessment, 9, 374-385.
Fischer, C. T. (2000). Collaborative, individualized assessment. Journal of Personality

Gacono, C. B. (2000). The clinical and forensic assessment of psychopathy. Mahwah,

NJ: Erlbaum.
Gacono, C. B. & Evans, F. B. (2007). The handbook of forensic Rorschach Assessment. Mahwah, N.
J.: Erlbaum.
Gacono, C. B., & Meloy, J. R. (1994). The Rorschach assessment of aggressive and
psychopathic personalities. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ganellen, R. J. (2007). Assessing normal and abnormal personality functioning: Strengths and
weakness of self-report, observer, and performance-based methods. Journal of Personality
Garner, D. M., Olmstead, M. P., & Polivy, J. (2006). Development and validation of a
multidimensional eating disorder inventory for anorexia nervosa and bulimia. International
Journal of Eating Disorders, 2, 15-34.
Gilmore, J. D., Lash, S. J., Foster, M. A., & Blosser, S. L. (2001). Adherence to substance abuse
treatment: Clinical utility of two MMPI-2 scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 77, 524-
540.
Hiembo, S., & Butcher, J. N. (1991). Couples in marital distress: A study of personality factors as
measured by the MMPI-2. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 216-237.
Hyer, L., Molinari, V., Mills, W., & Yeager, C. (2008). Personological assessment and treatment of
older adults. In T. Millon and C. Bloom (Eds.). The Millon inventories: A practitioner’s guide
to personalized clinical assessment (pp. 296-326). New York: Guilford Press.
Kreuger, R. F. (2005). Continuity of Axes I and II: Toward a unified model of personality, personality
disorders, and clinical disorders. Journal of Personality Disorders, 19, 233-261.
Krueger, R. F., & Tackett, J. L. (2006). Personality and psychopathology: Building bridges. New
York: Guilford.
Petition Form
Page 50
Kubiszyn, T. W., Meyer, G. J., Finn, S. E., Eyde, L., Kay, G. G., Moreland, K. L., Dies, R. R., &
Eisman, E. J. (2000). Empirical support for psychological assessment in clinical health care
settings. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31, 119-130.
Luzzo, D. A. (2000). Career counseling for college students: An empirical guide to strategies that
work. Washington, D.C.: APA Books.
Melton, G. B, Petrila, J., Poythress, N. G., & Slobogin, C. (2007). Psychological evaluations for the
courts: A handbook for mental health professionals and lawyers. (3rd Ed.). New York:
Guilford Press.
Meyer, G. J. (2002). Implications of information-gathering methods for a refined taxonomy of

psychopathology. In L. E. Beutler & M. Malik (Eds.). Rethinking the DSM: Psychological
perspectives (pp. 69-105). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Millon, T. & Davis, R. D. (1996). Disorders of personality: DSM–IV and beyond. New
York: Wiley.
Otto, R.K., & Heilbrun, K. (2002). The practice of forensic psychology: A look to the
future in light of the past. American Psychologist, 57, 5-18.
PDM Task Force (2006). Psychodynamic diagnostic manual. Silver Spring, MD:
Alliance of Psychoanalytic Organizations.
PDM Task Force (2017). Psychodynamic diagnostic manual, 2nd edition (PDM-2). New York:
Guilford Press.
Rossi, G., Van den Broeck, E. D., Segal, D. L., & Sebastiaan, P. J. (2014). Personality assessment
among older adults: The value of personality questionnaires unraveled. Aging and Mental
Health, 18(8), 936-940.
Sirri, L. Fabbri, S., Fava, G. A., & Sonino (2007). New strategies in the assessment of psychological
factors affecting medical conditions. Journal of Personality Assessment, 89, 216-229.
Smith, J.D. (2016). Introduction to the special section on cultural considerations in collaborative and
therapeutic assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment. 98, 563-566.
Trezona, R. R. (1991). The assessment of rehabilitation potential: Emotional factors. In R. J. Hartke

(Ed.), Psychological aspects of geriatric rehabilitation, Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers,
+pp. 115-134.
Petition Form
Page 51
Weiner, I. B., & Greene, R. L. (2008) Handbook of Personality Assessment. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Westen, D., Gabbard, G. O., & Blagov, P. (2006). Back to the future: Personality structure as a
context for psychopathology. In R.F. Krueger & J.L. Tackett (Eds.), Personality and
psychopathology: Building bridges, (pp. 335-384). New York: Guilford Press.
Yalof, J. (2006). Case illustration of a boy with nonverbal learning disorder and Asperger’s features:
Neuropsychological and Personality Assessment. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87, 15-34.
Education and Training
Criterion VI. Initial acquisition of knowledge and skills. A proficiency is acquired through a
defined program of study and training that enables psychologists to develop the necessary
competence to use this proficiency.
Commentary: Education and training in a proficiency may occur at the doctoral or postdoctoral
level or through an organized continuing education program. Irrespective of when it is offered,
education and training in a proficiency is of a sequential, integrated nature with organized
oversight of didactic and appropriate supervised experience related to the knowledge base and
skill sets distinctive to the proficiency. Background of relevant competencies of
faculty/instructors are described as well as learner evaluation procedures. In addition, there are
organizational mechanisms in place that provide oversight and coordination of the education
and training in the proficiency. When education and training in a proficiency is achieved
through interdisciplinary study, organization/s(s) responsible for the proficiency will describe
how the proficiency meets the criteria within the context of interdisciplinary education and
training. If the proficiency is interdisciplinary be sure to highlight the training component that
is specifically relevant to psychologists.
Education and training in Personality Assessment is acquired in a sequential and graded fashion
through formal coursework and practical training in graduate school, and then further developed and
refined during the pre-doctoral internship, field work, and/or postdoctoral specialty training. At the
postdoctoral level, there must be continuing educational experiences that maintain the proficiency and
further elaborate relevant knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Achieving and maintaining proficiency in
personality assessment is a lifelong endeavor.
APA’s (2017) Standards of Accreditation for Health Service Psychology (SoA) articulates the
requirement that APA-accreditation doctoral graduate programs and internships need to assure that
their students acquire competency in assessment as part of their profession-wide competency
development, as well as the other discipline-specific knowledge areas that underlie its scientific basis.
The associated Implementing Regulation (C-8 D; July, 2017 revision) specifies six areas of expected
Petition Form
Page 52
competency that include knowledge of diagnosis, understanding behavior in contexts, application of

knowledge of functional and dysfunctional behavior, selection/use of tests and data collection “using
multiple sources and methods,” interpreting assessment results, and communication of findings.
Furthermore, academic knowledge is expected to be integrated with practical experience. However, as
noted by Childs and Eyde (2002), previous and current accreditation guidelines do not specify the
content to be taught, the number and quality of courses required, or the methods to be used in
providing assessment training or that any particular emphasis be placed on Personality Assessment. In
other words, not all doctoral programs may provide the foundation needed for students to develop
basic competency in Personality Assessment, much less proficiency. Furthermore, there are differences
in the level of “projective” (also called performance-based) personality assessment training across
Practitioner-Scholar, Scientist-Practitioner, and Clinical-Science programs, and declining emphasis in
this area in many programs (Ready & Veague, 2014). Although, as noted earlier, recent surveys have
found that internships continue to place heavy emphasis on assessment training (e.g., Clemence &
Handler, 2001; Piotrowski & Belter, 1999), many graduate schools fail to prepare students adequately
for assessment at the internship level (as described previously). Many internship supervisors are
dissatisfied with the preparation of graduate students for the assessment component of their internship
duties, to the point where remedial instruction is often required. Thus, despite admirable efforts by
accrediting bodies to ensure the quality of assessment training in graduate and internship training, far
too many psychology doctoral programs graduate young professionals who are inadequately prepared
for basic, much less proficient, assessment practice (Clemence & Handler, 2001; Stedman et al. 2001).
The emphasis on doctoral, postgraduate, and continuing education training depends in large part on the
sufficiency of the doctoral training. When a doctoral program has provided substantial training in
interviewing and relational skills of assessment, case formulation, psychological testing, and ethical
and professional development in assessment (NCSPP, 2007), postdoctoral training can then be devoted
to the acquisition of more advanced skills and the application of knowledge to new settings and
populations. When doctoral training has been deficient in any of these areas, however, the formative
training must occur on a post-graduate basis (either in the postdoctoral year or in a CE context). While
graduate courses clearly cover important information about testing and assessment, Bram and Peebles
(2014) note that "few training programs offer guidelines for how to synthesize the gathered
information into a formulation" (p. 18).
Competent Personality Assessment skills, developed in graduate school and refined in postdoctoral
programs, may gradually mature into proficiency during professional practice through professional
experience under the guidance of professional consultations, continuing education workshops, and
attendance at national conferences. A high level of commitment to continuing education is crucial,
regardless of the quality of doctoral or postdoctoral training, because it is through continuing education
that practitioners learn about the substantial research that is being done in the field, which has strong
implications for practice. Regarding the latter, it may be noted that an annual national conference,
devoted to Personality Assessment has been held continuously for over 70 years by the Society for
Personality Assessment and that workshops and papers in the area of Personality Assessment are
featured prominently at the annual APA Convention (particularly under the auspices of APA Division
Petition Form
Page 53
12). Professionals also acquire proficiency in Personality Assessment through study of the vast and
expanding research literature. Not only do all of the major psychologically-focused publishers produce
numerous texts each year, but there also are hundreds of peer-reviewed articles published annually
both in APA and non-APA journals, most prominently Psychological Assessment, the Journal of
Personality Assessment, and Assessment.
In a continued effort to promote the development of competency in personality assessment via training,
the upcoming SPA Convention (March 2018) will offer two roundtable discussion sessions that
specifically and directly (among several other more general ones) address issues in training and
personality assessment. The first is titled Graduate Training in Test Administration and Scoring:
Barriers, Processes and Rubrics; and the other is The Utility of the Proficiency Report Review Form in
Assessment Coursework and Clinical Training.
1. Identify the type of organization or consortium of organizations that provide oversight of

education and training programs in the proficiency.
Organizations that provide oversight including education and training programs related to this
proficiency are the same as those that provide the typical doctoral level clinical training. These include
universities, clinical practicum, internship, and post-doctoral fellowship and various settings for such
training and experience. Personality assessment opportunities are often available at all training levels
and within a multitude of settings including outpatient clinics, inpatient/hospitals, forensic settings,
schools, etc. Training in personality assessment occurs via formal didactic seminars and supervised
practicum experience, and then continue with more specialized training in clinical internships and post-
doctoral research and clinical experiences. Individuals who seek qualification in this proficiency will
have such didactic class experiences and field based supervised experience as well as post license
experience providing assessment services.
2. Describe how the oversight organization/s:
● Defines the learning objectives in terms of competencies within the proficiency, and ensures
that these learning objectives are assessed as program outcomes;
● Develops curriculum guidelines regarding the didactic and supervised practice experiences
required to acquire competence in the proficiency. These shall include the content areas to be
addressed, the populations worked with, and the procedures undertaken; and,
● Provides to CRSPPP, the Board of Educational Affairs, and APA members on a regular,
periodic basis an update of the knowledge base, documentation of evidenced-based practice
developments, and education and training program outcomes in the proficiency.
Currently, SPA has defined the requirements for obtaining this proficiency. Application materials are
available to those seeking to become recognized via the SPA website. In addition to documenting
Petition Form
Page 54
licensure in good standing and having adequate experience with assessment, psychologists must be
providing personality assessment services to the public, either directly or via supervision or
consultation. In addition, most applicants must submit a report sample with testing data. Each
application is reviewed by three reviewers who have been recognized as proficient and are either
ABAP Diplomates or SPA Fellows, thus have already demonstrated a certain level of expertise in
assessment. The review of submitted reports is completed using the Proficiency Report Review Form
(See Proficiency in Personality Assessment Policies and Procedures Manual Attachment I). This
evaluation tool was developed by SPA including many of the leading psychologists in the field of
personality assessment. The form was then reviewed and approved by the SPA Board of Trustees.
The form covers five main areas that are considered necessary to demonstrate proficiency:
comprehensiveness, validity, integration, client-centered, and overall writing. Each category includes
multiple items (with overall total of 22). Certain items are considered critical and must meet
proficiency in order to meet overall proficiency determination (For example, use of at least 3 methods
of assessment such as an interview, self-report, and performance based). This evaluation tool is readily
available for potential applicants to become familiar with respect to proficiency expectations. A
couple of proficiency-based workshops have already been offered at the SPA annual convention and
the APA annual convention and more will be available.
The upcoming SPA Convention (March 2018) will offer two half-day Continuing Education
workshops will directly address the proficiency in personality assessment, with one focused on report
writing (Proficiency in Personality Assessment: Producing an Integrated Report) and the other on
diversity and cultural considerations (Developing Proficiency in Diversity-Sensitive Personality
Assessment).
All proficiency based materials available via the SPA website may be utilized by graduate program
instructors as well as assessment supervisors at all levels of training as a guiding tool. Updates to the
knowledge base and practice developments are expected every 5 years through the renewal of the
proficiency recognition. The Proficiency Coordinator along with the Proficiency Committee and
Board of Trustees with support of the Central Office staff provide oversight for reviewers, reviews,
applications and recognition process. The Proficiency Committee is also working towards developing
more specific materials to introduce the proficiency and provide resources towards competency
training in personality assessment. These include a formal letter directed at APA approved clinical
psychology programs and pre-doctoral internships introducing the concept of proficiency in
personality assessment and its importance. In addition, brief Power Point presentations, for instructors
as well as students about the proficiency are being developed. Finally, a companion resource guide is
also being developed to complement the Proficiency Report Review Form, to help support coursework
teaching as well as field training and supervision within the context of striving towards proficiency.
3. Provide examples of the kinds of settings where education and training for the proficiency is
acquired (e.g., residency, postdoctoral training experience, continuing education, didactic and
experiential sequence in a doctoral program).
Petition Form
Page 55
Education and training for the proficiency in personality assessment can potentially be acquired in any
of the standard training settings, including practicum, internship, doctoral program, postdoctoral
training, and continuing education. Course work in assessment includes personality assessment. A
foundation of various assessment measures, administration, scoring, interpretation, integration of
multi-method approach, and report writing are all addressed in some capacity. Whether under the
supervision of an instructor administering measures to peers or volunteers or working within a clinical
setting providing direct assessment services to clients in various setting, one develops their skills.
The knowledge and skill acquisition obtained for meeting this proficiency is sequential and builds
upon the foundation provided in the previous level of training. The model requires continued
engagement. Numerous parties facilitate training. Program directors for doctoral programs in
psychology that train practitioners are the most notable who directly perform these duties. Practicum,
internship, and postdoctoral trainers are also active trainers. SPA counts among its members many
such individuals and reaches out to such individuals with convention programming on training issues.
SPA also maintains an interest group specific to the education and training of personality assessment.
The group brings together assessment instructors and supervisors at various levels of training. The
group members share resource and opportunity for consultation is available at the annual convention.
SPA is currently in the process of establishing specific website pages for the various interest groups,
education & training included. The pages would include assessment syllabi, resources recommended
to enhance the training of personality assessment and links to relevant sites and organizations. This
forum will also provide an additional opportunity to discuss the proficiency and its applicability to
training at all levels.
4. Describe the types of mechanisms that programs offering education and training in the
proficiency use to ensure oversight and coordination of a program of study in the proficiency.
Training for this proficiency does not occur in a centralized training site or through one single
program. Instead, it occurs in multiple venues coordinated by varied universities, practicum sites, and
internship and postdoctoral training sites. Programs offering such education and training are accredited
programs meeting regional and any special program requirements for training psychologists who will
seek licensure. Such programs are regularly reviewed by regional and program accreditors, as are any
associated internship training opportunities. Program faculty are otherwise subject to general ethical
guidelines for practice in terms of the trainers remaining proficient to do their jobs and work within
their scope of practice.
5. Describe how the program sponsor ensures that psychology trainees enrolled in the program
have completed, or are in the process of completing their education and training in the scientific
and applied professional foundations of the profession.
This proficiency requires a licensure in Psychology, and therefore the requirements for completing
education and training in the scientific and applied professional foundations of the profession of
Psychology are a prerequisite for applying for and obtaining this Proficiency. Applicants must
Petition Form
Page 56
complete an application and submit a sample psychological report with testing data evaluated by three
reviewers before receiving a certificate deeming them proficient.
6. Describe the qualifications necessary for faculty who teach in these programs.
The training qualifications of faculty are maintained in accord with general ethical guidelines for
practice in terms of the trainers remaining proficient to do their jobs. Regular review of such
sites for accreditation insure that individuals are working within their scope of practice and
maintaining adequate knowledge and skills to be trainers. It is expected that supervisors and instructors
that provide supervision and didactic teaching will have adequate experience in the area of
psychological assessment, and specifically personality assessment as well as related areas such as
personality development, psychopathology, therapeutic interventions, diversity and ethics. Most
assessment supervisors providing clinical supervision are licensed thus they must comply with state
based requirements for qualifications.
There is limited information available about assessment instructors at the graduate level. Eighty four
out of 183 APA-accredited programs were surveyed in 1997 (Eyde & Childs, 2000); in these 413
faculty members taught psychological assessment courses. When all faculty members who listed
assessment as a primary or secondary interest area were considered, it was found that about one fifth
listed assessment as a central aspect of their professional identity. Of the assessment faculty members,
80% were licensed in psychology. Seventy seven out of 233 APA-accredited programs were surveyed
in 2011 (Ready & Veague, 2014); the majority of programs (Clinical-Science 65%, Scientist-
Practitioner 70%, Practitioner-Scholar 76%) had four or more faculty with assessment expertise,
distributed across all ranks.
Those psychologists who teach, train, or supervise assessment are certainly encouraged to gain
proficiency recognition in personality assessment. This both helps ensure their skills level as well as
set a positive example to their students and trainees who will become potential applicants upon
licensure. As noted per data above, many of those who teach assessment courses in graduate programs
may or may not have the specific skills and career paths that necessitate that they themselves are
licensed or have the same credential as those seeking the proficiency. For example, an individual may
be teaching personality assessment but they do not conduct assessments in the field themselves nor
have they provided clinically based personality assessment services since their supervised experience.
Or an individual may be a supervisor who is licensed and has some assessment expertise, but is not
necessarily up to date on the multiple measures available. SPA continues to explore ways to further
engage instructors and supervisors in the proficiency process. The Proficiency Coordinator and
Committee have put together a letter to be distributed to APA accredited programs, both graduate and
internships describing the proficiency and its importance, especially as it applies to graduate training.
One of the goals of such outreach is to set the proficiency in personality assessment as an expectation
or “next step” upon completing one’s formal training and licensure.
Petition Form
Page 57
Thus far, proficiency based workshop leaders have been recognized as proficient and thoroughly
familiar with the proficiency process and relevance to the field of personality assessment. SPA will
work to ensure that future proficiency workshop presenters are as well.
7. Describe how the program sponsor ensures that all promotional materials have accurate and
complete information, including how potential participants can obtain detailed information
about program requirements, goals, objectives, etc.
Currently there are no approved specific “training programs” for this proficiency. Accurate and
complete information about the requirements for the proficiency are available via the SPA website.
Information sessions are provided annually at the SPA convention and SPA plans to increase such
visibility in the future. Materials and information are available to individual candidates wishing to
apply as well as those involved in any assessment training aspect with graduate level training.
8. What qualifications are sought for student admission?
As noted, there are no approved “training programs” specific to this proficiency that require admission
at a particular institution. Instead, graduate programs and pre-doctoral internships that provide
experiences necessary to achieve proficiency in personality assessment have specific entry
requirements including academic ability, clinical potential, and prerequisite coursework that ensure
high quality applicants. The same requirements that guide admissions to doctoral programs in
counseling and clinical psychology leading to licensure as a practitioner are the standards used to guide
qualifications for admission to a program of study addressing the proficiency.
9. Describe how program sponsors provide data on attainment of competence in the proficiency
program by participants as defined by standards set by those responsible for program oversight
of the proficiency. This will include both short and long-term data on program outcomes.
Because there are no approved “training programs” specific to this proficiency that require admission
at a particular institution, the only outcomes available are pass rates of individuals who attempt to
become recognized as proficient. As this proficiency was formally established seven years ago, and is
still being refined the data available are limited at this time. However, SPA has established an online
database that will allow us to keep track of number of applicants, those who pass and those who do
not, as well as those who renew their certificate at the 5-year mark. With the help of the SPA
administrative office, the proficiency coordinator will be able to provide such short term and long-term
data.
10. Describe how program sponsors ensure that the curriculum addresses: (a) ethical decision
making and practice, (b) issues of cultural and individual diversity, and (c) the most current
information on evidence-based practice as that construct is defined by APA policy.
Petition Form
Page 58
Applicants must be licensed (or certified to practice) as psychologists and in good standing. This
requirement ensures that applicants have had adequate and ongoing training and experience in ethical
decision-making and practice related to general clinical practice. Some states also require ethics
training as part of the license renewal process. SPA provides an annual ethics continuing education
workshop at its annual convention addressing specific ethical issue within the area of personality
assessment practice. As noted earlier, training for this proficiency occurs in multiple settings and
levels (graduate programs, practicum sites, and internship and postdoctoral placements) thus, diversity
and evidence-based practices are maintained in accord with general ethical guidelines for practice in
terms of the trainers remaining proficient to do their jobs. The APA conducts regular accreditation
reviews for programs and internships to make sure certain standards are maintained and certain areas
of practice are addressed sufficiently. This helps ensure that individuals are working within their scope
of practice and maintaining adequate knowledge and skills. SPA regularly disseminates information
on the most up to date evidence-based practice and training via its newsletter, website, annual
conference, and scholarly journals.
References


ethnic, linguistic, and culturally diverse populations. Washington, DC: Author
American Psychological Association. (2003). Guidelines on multicultural education, training, research,

practice, and organizational change for psychologists. American Psychologist, 58, 377-402.
American Psychological Association. (2004). Guidelines for psychological practice with older adults.

Guidelines for child custody evaluations in divorce proceedings. American Psychologist, 49,
677-680.

Guidelines for psychological evaluations in child protection matters. American Psychologist,
54, 586-593.
APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice. (2006). Evidence-based practice in

psychology. American Psychologist, 61, 271-285.
American Psychological Association Committee on Accreditation. (2017). Standards of

Petition Form
Page 59
Accreditation for Health Service Psychology. Washington D.C.: Author.
Standards of Accreditation for Health Service Psychology
Bram, A. & Peebles, M. (2014). Psychological Testing That Matters: Creating a Road Map for
Effective Treatment. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Clemence, A. J., & Handler, L. (2001). Psychological assessment on internship: A survey of training
Childs, R.A., & Eyde, L.D. (2002). Assessment training in clinical psychology doctoral programs:
What should we teach? What do we teach? Journal of Personality Assessment, 78, 130–144.
Clarke, I, III. (2000). Extreme response style in multicultural research: An empirical investigation.
Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 15, 137—152.
Clemence, A.; Handler, L. (2001). Psychological assessment on internship: A survey of training

Constantine, M. (1998). Developing competence in multicultural assessment: Implications for

counseling psychology training and practice. The Counseling Psychologist, 6, 922—929.
Dana, R. H. (1998). Understanding cultural identity in intervention and assessment. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Dana, R. H., Aguilar-Ktibutr, A., Diaz-Vivar, N., & Vetter, H. (2002). A teaching method for
Hyer, L., Molinari, V., Mills, W., & Yeager, C. (2008). Personological assessment and treatment of
older adults. In T. Millon and C. Bloom (Eds.). The Millon inventories: A practitioner’s guide
to personalized clinical assessment (pp. 296-326). New York: Guilford Press.
Krishnamurthy, R., VandeCreek, L., Kaslow, N. J., Tazeau, Y. N., Miville, M. L., Kerns, R., Stegman,
R., Suzuki, L., & Benton, S. A. (2004). Achieving competency in psychological assessment:
Directions for education and training. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 725-739.
Mortimer, R. L., & Smith, W. H. (1983). The use of the psychological test report in setting the focus of
psychotherapy. Journal of Personality Assessment, 47, 34-38.
Petition Form
Page 60
National Council of Schools and Programs of Professional Psychology & American Psychological
Association Research Office (2006). 2005 NCSPP self-study: Final results. Washington, D.C.:
National Council of Schools and Programs of Professional Psychology. (2007). Competency

developmental achievement levels (DALs) of the National Council of Schools and Programs in
Professional Psychology (NCSPP). Retrieved on March 17, 2007, from
http://ncspp.info/pubs.htm.
Piotrowski, C., & Belter, R. W. (1999). Internship training in psychological assessment: Has managed
care had an impact? Assessment, 6, 381-385.
Piotrowski, C., & Zalewski, C. (1993). Training in psychodiagnostic testing in APA-approved PsyD
and PhD clinical psychology programs. Journal of Personality Assessment, 61, 394-405.
Pope–Davis, D. B., & Coleman, H. L. K. (1997). Multicultural counseling competencies: Assessment,

education and training, and supervision. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Ready, R. E., & Veague, H. B. (2014). Training in psychological assessment: Current practices of
clinical psychology programs. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 45, 278-282.
Ridley, C., Hill, C., & Li, L. (1998). Revisiting and refining the multicultural assessment procedure.
Counseling Psychologist, 6, 939-947.
Samuda, R. J. (1998). Psychological testing of American minorities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sandoval, J., Frisby, C. L., Geisinger, K. F., Scheuneman, J. D., & Grenier, J. R. (Eds.). (1998). Test
interpretation and diversity: Achieving equity in assessment. Washington, DC: American
Sattler, J. M. (2001). Assessment of children: Cognitive functions (4th Ed.). San Diego, CA: Author.
Smith, S. R., & Handler, L. (Eds.) (2006). The clinical assessment of children and adolescents: A
practitioner’s handbook. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology [SIOP]. (1999). Guidelines for education and
training at the doctoral level in industrial-organizational psychology. Retrieved from
http://www.siop.org/PhDGuidelines98.aspx
Society for Personality Assessment Board of Trustees. (2006). Standards for education and training in
psychological assessment: Position of the Society for Personality Assessment. Journal of
Petition Form
Page 61
Stedman, J. M., Hatch, J. P., & Schoenfeld, L. S. (2000). Pre-internship preparation in psychological
testing and psychotherapy: What internship directors say they expect. Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 31, 321-326.
Criterion VII. Maintenance of Competence. The organization (s) seeking recognition for the
proficiency is responsible for identifying or providing its practitioners with regularly scheduled
opportunities for continuing professional development in the proficiency practice and assessing
knowledge and skills.
Commentary: This criterion requires that petitioners articulate what continuing

education may be necessary to maintain competency in the proficiency, particularly
given the rapidly increasing and ever-changing research and information related to the
proficiency. The petition should specify which mechanisms are used to achieve these
goals.
1. Describe the opportunities for additional continuing professional development and continuing
education in the proficiency practice. Provide detailed examples.
There are currently multiple opportunities for continuing professional development toward the
proficiency in Personality Assessment and more are being developed continuously by SPA. The
Society for Personality Assessment is approved by APA to provide Continuing Education, and has
developed specific workshops for its annual conference (2016, 2017) as well as the APA annual
convention (2016) that provide hands-on opportunities to enhance one’s proficiency related skills
addressing the various components noted previously that are included in the proficiency recognition
process. In addition, information and symposia sessions providing valuable information about the
purpose, importance of, and obtaining the proficiency are also available via the SPA convention (2015,
2016, 2017), as well as additional conferences across the country that target psychologists who may be
potential applicants (e.g., NCSPP, 2017) and future conferences including but not limited to The MMPI
Symposium 2017 and Collaborative Therapeutic Assessment Conference 2017. In the future, SPA
plans to provide CE credits via online webinars to increase access to such opportunities.
The upcoming SPA Annual Convention (Match 2018) offers two half-day Continuing Education
workshops will directly address the proficiency in personality assessment, with one focused on report
writing (Proficiency in Personality Assessment: Producing an Integrated Report by Wright & Pade)
and the other on diversity and cultural considerations (Developing Proficiency in Diversity-Sensitive
Personality Assessment by Krishnamurthy & Brabender). Below is a sample of workshops offered at
the SPA conventions between 2014 and 2017 illustrating the range of professional development
available within the context of personality assessment. Finally, in the past several years APA has
offered webinars Co-sponsored by the Society for Personality Assessment that have been viewed by
many clinicians and graduate students. These included Psychological Assessment in Primary Care: A
Petition Form
Page 62
Primer for Graduate Students by John Porcerelli, PhD, Psychological Report Writing: Resources,
Research, and Strategies by Gary Groth-Marnat, PhD, How Therapeutic Assessment Works: Theory
and Techniques by Stephen E. Finn, PhD, Ethical Issues in Psychological Assessment by Linda K.
Knauss, Ph.D., ABPP, and most recently Improving Therapeutic Outcomes with Personality
Assessment by Larry Beutler, Ph.D. SPA plans to continue this collaboration in the future as well as
reach out an collaborate with additional societies and organizations in related fields and sub-fields in
personality assessment to further enhance awareness and understanding of personality and
psychological assessment and specifically, the importance of proficiency.
SPA Convention 2014
Full Day Workshops
The Rorschach Performance Assessment System: Overview and Case Illustration Gregory J. Meyer,
Joni L. Mihura, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH S. Philip Erdberg, Independent Practice,
Greenbrae, CA
Working with Shame in Psychological Assessment Stephen E. Finn, Center for Therapeutic
Assessment, Austin, TX
Advanced Clinical Application of the MMPI-2 Maximizing Interpretive Efficiency David S. Nichols,
Independent Practice, Portland, OR
Trait-based Assessment of Psychopathology Christopher J. Hopwood, Michigan State University, East

Lansing,
Half Day Workshops
Why Write a Therapeutic Story? How Stories Communicate Assessment Findings with Children,
Adolescents, and Adults Diane H. Engelman, Center for Collaborative Psychology, Psychiatry and
Medicine, Kentfield, CA Deborah J. Tharinger, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX Marita
Frackowiak, Center for Therapeutic Assessment, Austin, TX J. B. Allyn, Center for Collaborative
Psychology, Psychiatry and Medicine, Kentfield, CA
Multicultural Evidence-based Assessment of Child, Adult and Family Psychopathology Thomas M.

Achenbach, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT Leslie A. Rescorla, Bryn Mawr College, Bryn
Mawr, PA
Forensic Psychological Assessment and Immigration Court F. Barton Evans, Clinical and Forensic
Psychologist, Asheville, NC, Giselle A. Hass, Clinical and Forensic Psychologist, Washington, DC
R-PAS Assessment in Child Custody Cases Robert E. Erard, Psychological Institutes of Michigan,
Bloomfield, MI
Petition Form
Page 63
Forensic Application of Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) Ali Khadivi, Bronx-Lebanon Hospital
Center, Bronx, NY, John E. Kurtz, Villanova University, Villanova, PA
The Millon Inventories: Therapeutic Applications and Updates toward the MCMI-IV Seth Grossman,
FIU College of Medicine, Cooper, FL
Applying R-PAS to Children Donald J. Viglione, CSPP, Alliant International University, San Diego,
CA
How to Write a Better Forensic Report Anita L. Boss, Independent Practice, Alexandria, VA, Julie A.
Gallagher, Independent Practice, Brentwood, TN
SPA Convention 2015
Full-Day Workshops
Forensic Use of the Personality Assessment Inventory Christopher J. Hopwood, Ph.D. Michigan State
University, East Lansing, MI Mark A. Ruiz, Ph.D. James A. Haley Veterans Hospital, Tampa, FL
Use of the MMPI-2 RF in Evaluation of Trauma Related Conditions Paul A. Arbisi, Ph.D., ABAP,
ABPP Minneapolis VA Health Care Center/University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN
Psychological Testing that Matters: Creating a Road Map for Effective Treatment Anthony D. Bram,
Ph.D. Cambridge Health Alliance/Harvard Medical School, MA Mary Jo Peebles, Ph.D., ABPP,
ABPH Private Practice, Bethesda, MA
Using Psychological Testing to Change the Family Story Marita Frackowiak, Ph.D. Center for
Therapeutic Assessment, Austin, TX Francesca Fantini, Ph.D. Catholic University, Milan, Italy J.D.
Smith, Ph.D. Baylor University, Waco, TX
Introducing the MCMI-IV: Assessment and Therapeutic Applications Seth Grossman, Psy.D. Private
Practice/FIU College of Medicine, Miami, FL
Half Day Workshops
Challenges and Opportunities of Teaching Assessment in the Current Training Context Jessica Gurley,
Ph.D. Steven J. Lally, Ph.D., ABPP American School of Professional Psychology at Argosy University,
Washington, DC
The Rorschach Performance Assessment System: Basic Interpretation with Cases Joni L. Mihura,
Ph.D. Gregory J. Meyer, Ph.D. University of Toledo, Toledo, OH
Petition Form
Page 64
Personality Assessment Consultation Opportunities with the Federal Aviation Administration: An

Orientation to FAA Practices and Standards Chris Front, Psy.D., ABAP Federal Aviation
Administration, Washington DC
Using the Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS) with Children and Adolescents S.
Philip Erdberg, Ph.D. University of California, San Francisco, CA
Advances in the Rorschach Comprehensive System Assessment of Adolescents Irving B. Weiner,

Ph.D., ABPP, ABAP University of South Florida, Tampa, FL Shira Tibon Czopp, Ph.D., ABAP Tel
Aviv, Israel
Teaching Personality Assessment (But Not Personality Testing) Steven Smith, Ph.D. Palo Alto
University, Palo Alto, CA
Assessing Psychosis with Clinical Interview and Psychological Testing James H. Kleiger, Psy.D.
Private Practice, Bethesda, MD Ali Khadivi, Ph.D. Albert Einstein College of Medicine/Bronx-
Lebanon Hospital Center, Bronx, NY
Domestic Violence Update: Assessment of Issues in Family and Criminal Courts Nancy Kaser-Boyd,
Ph.D., ABAP Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, Los Angeles, CA
SPA Convention 2016
Full-Day Workshops
The Rorschach Performance Assessment System: Overview and Case Illustration Gregory J. Meyer,
PhD, University of Toledo, OH Joni L. Mihura, PhD, University of Toledo, OH
Forensic Psychological Assessment in Practice: Case Studies Corine de Ruiter, PhD, Maastricht
University Nancy Kaser-Boyd, PhD, Geffen School of Medicine, UCLA
Applications and Interpretation of the MMPI-2-RF (Restructured Form) in Forensic Settings Martin
Sellbom, PhD, Australian National University
Advanced MMPI-2 Interpretation: A Symptom-Focused Approach David Nichols, PhD
Psychological Testing and Matters: Creating a Road Map for Effective Treatment Anthony D. Bram,
PhD, Cambridge Health Alliance/Harvard Medical School; Boston Psychoanalytic Society and
Institute
Half Day Workshops
Proficiency in Personality Assessment: Producing an Integrated Report Hadas Pade, PsyD, CSPP
Petition Form
Page 65
Alliant International University, A. Jordan Wright, PhD, Empire State College, SUNY
R-PAS Contributions to Contextualizing Violence with a Case Illustration and Recommendations for
Use in Court Donald J. Viglione, PhD, ABPP, CSPP Alliant International University Robert E. Erard,
PhD, Psychological Institutes of Michigan, P.C.
Multicultural Tasks of Emotional Development (MultiTED) Test Edward E. Gotts, PhD, HSPP,
Independent Researcher
SPA Convention 2017
Full Day Workshops
Introducing the MMPI-A-RF Robert P. Archer, PhD, Bay Forensic Psychology, Norfolk, VA
An Ultra-Brief Model of Therapeutic Assessment (TA) with Adult Clients Stephen E. Finn, PhD,
Center for Therapeutic Assessment, Austin, TX Jan H. Kamphuis, PhD, University of Amsterdam, The
Netherlands Hilde De Saeger, Viersorong Institute for the Study of Personality Disorder, The
Netherlands
Integrating Multimethod Assessment results in a Meaningful Way for the Client Pamela Schaber,
PhD, Center for Therapeutic Assessment, Austin, TX Filippo Aschieri, PhD, European Center for
Therapeutic Assessment, Milano, Italy
Children in the Legal System: Using Research to More Accurately Assess and to Hear Their Voices
Ginger C. Calloway, PhD, Private Practice, Raleigh, NC Margaret Lee, PhD, Private Practice, Mill
Valley, CA
Using Clinical Judgment in Therapeutic Assessment of Adults Who May or May Not Have an Autism
Spectrum Disorder Dale Rudin, PhD, Center for Therapeutic Assessment, Austin, TX
The Role of the MMPI-2 RF in Assessment of Trauma Related Conditions Paul A. Arbisi, PhD, ABAP,
ABPP, University of Minnesota
Forensic Applications of the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) Mark A. Ruiz, PhD, ABPP,
James A. Haley Veterans Hospital and Clinics, Tampa, FL
Half Day Workshops
Integrating the R-PAS and the PAI Chris Hopwood, PhD, Michigan State University Joni Mihura,
PhD, University of Toledo Greg Meyer, PhD University of Toledo
Petition Form
Page 66
Proficiency in Personality Assessment: Producing an Integrated Report Hadas Pade, PsyD,

Alliant International University A. Jordan Wright, PhD, Empire State College, SUNY
Proficiency in Personality Assessment: Producing a Client-Centered Report Steve Smith, PhD,

University of California Jamie Kent, PhD, Palo Alto University
The Rorschach Comprehensive system: Coding and Administration Barry Ritzler, PhD, Rorschach
Training Program, Long Island University David Shmerler, PhD
Therapeutic Feedback with the MMPI-2 - A Demonstration Richard Levak, PhD, Independent
Practice, Del Mar, CA
Rorschach Assessment of Personality Disorder Philip Erdberg, PhD, UC-SF School of Medicine,
Corte Madera, CA
2. Describe the formal requirements for additional continuing professional development and
continuing education in the proficiency and recognition of practitioners. What credits are
required?
At initial application for proficiency, applicants must submit their CV, documenting their training in
personality assessment as well as continuing education credits that allow them to continue conducting
assessment services. At minimum, applicants must have successfully completed a pre-doctoral
internship and met requirements for state licensure. In addition, every 5 years, those recognized as
proficient will submit a renewal application, including updated CV and training completed related to
the proficiency to demonstrate they are up to date regarding assessment with evidence based measures
and current developments within the field. Applicants may demonstrate such updates with formal
continuing education course work completed, attending relevant conference sessions, and listing
professional articles read. SPA will continue to provide such opportunities as well as provide links to
additional resources that may fulfill this requirement.
3. Describe how the assessment of an individual's professional development and continuing

education as it relates to initial competency or the maintenance of competency is accomplished
in the proficiency.
For the initial proficiency application, materials submitted include documentation of formal education
at the doctoral level, pre- and post-doctoral internship, and specific discussion of ongoing training in
personality assessment. Most applicants also submit a redacted assessment report with data as a work
sample illustrating their skills. Psychologists who are recognized as proficient must renew their
proficiency status every 5 years to verify the maintenance of their skill set. Maintaining the level of
proficiency recognized via initial application is similar to the expected maintenance of competence for
licensure. The renewal process is simpler and quicker than the original application and primarily
Petition Form
Page 67
entails completing an affirmation with a brief questionnaire and a modest processing fee (see
Maintenance and Renewal of Proficiency Status document, Appendix III).
To remain proficient psychologists are expected to stay current and up to date with instruments
utilized, scoring and interpretation procedures, updated norms especially with respect to certain
populations, demographics and settings. Psychologists are also expected to continue practice within
the boundaries of their competence and to follow all ethical guidelines provided in the field of
psychological assessment. Finally, psychologists are expected to maintain their competence and
proficiency status by participating in various professional development activities, as described below.
Psychologists are expected to have participated in at least 20 hours of formal professional development
activities with 6 of these hours pertaining to ethical issues within personality or psychological
assessment and 6 pertaining to diversity issues within psychological or personality assessment. Formal
professional development activities related to assessment may include any of the following:
Completion of or leading Continuing Education workshop or symposia (in-person, online, or via home
study); Publication or formal editorial reviews of peer-reviewed articles; Attending professional
conferences; Viewing webinars; Teaching a relevant course; Providing supervision; Receiving or
providing peer consultation. SPA offers many such professional development opportunities via the
annual convention, webinars in collaboration with APA, the JPA, as well as co-sponsoring events such
as The Therapeutic Assessment Conference and The MMPI Symposium. In addition, the SPA
Proficiency Committee is developing a resource guide as a companion to the Proficiency Report
Review Board, listing relevant book, chapters, articles, webinars, and additional resources that directly
address the different areas of proficiency identified. Psychologists’ renewal applications will be
reviewed by the Proficiency Coordinator and if needed additional members of the Proficiency
Committee, and the SPA Board of Trustees.
Evaluation and Assessment
Criterion VIII. Effectiveness. A proficiency demonstrates the effectiveness of the distinct

procedure(s), technique(s), or applied skill set(s) that comprise the proficiency with evidence
consistent with the APA 2005 Policy on Evidence-based Practice.
Commentary: A body of evidence is to be presented that demonstrates the effectiveness of the

proficiency with appropriate problems and populations and documents the best available
research.
1. Summarize evidence of the effectiveness of the proficiency, utilizing the published literature,
manuscripts published in refereed journals (or equivalent), outcome studies, practice
guidelines, consumer satisfaction surveys, etc., that demonstrate the efficacy of the proficiency.
The manuscripts cited should be relevant to the proficiency, drawn from a variety of sources
and inform the practice of the proficiency.
Petition Form
Page 68
The evidence base supporting Personality Assessment is extensive, consisting of thousands of studies
with a history that extends over 100 years. As indicated previously, Personality Assessment can
provide reliable, valid, and useful information concerning specific populations and psychological,
biological, and social problems across a wide range of settings by drawing on a range of assessment
procedures and techniques. The six representative practice settings that were noted as part of Criterion
III included Inpatient and Outpatient Psychiatric, Medical, Legal and Forensic, Educational, Older
Adults and Rehabilitation, and Occupational and Employment. Accordingly, in the material that
follows below we provide six sets of selected references regarding the validity of Personality
Assessment in these specific settings. Because the literature is so large, many of the citations consist of
meta-analyses rather than individual studies. However, additional studies that further inform the
practice of the proficiency are also included.
In addition, we note that many other sets of references could be compiled for specific populations (e.g.,
children, couples, personality disorders), specific types of Personality Assessment methods (e.g., self-
report scales, performance tasks), or applied Personality Assessment questions (e.g., assessing
treatment outcome, differential diagnosis). We also recognize that evidence on validity can be
considered just one manifestation of evidence concerning effectiveness or efficacy (see Bornstein,
2017; Meehl, 1995; Meyer, Finn, Eyde, Kay, Moreland, et al., 2001). Finally, we note that although the
general evidence supports the validity of Personality Assessment measures in these and other practice
settings, validity is conditional and depends on the specific clinical inference that is being considered
for a particular scale being used in a certain context to assess an individual possessing a unique
constellation of characteristics.
Inpatient and Outpatient Psychiatric Settings
As the articles cited below confirm, there have been a wide range of studies addressing Personality
Assessment techniques and specific tests published in peer-reviewed journals, many of which are APA
journals. Personality Assessment assists in the accurate diagnosis of mental and personality disorders,
thus assisting other practitioners and consumers in multidisciplinary mental health care settings. This
reaches far beyond symptom checklists, which often neglect the personality and underlying dynamics
that can present both obstacles and avenues to more effective treatment. These are but a sample of the
wide range of articles on this topic, which encompasses the individual, diverse populations, and the
variety of mental health settings ranging from state hospitals to private practice to outpatient services
for veterans.
Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M., Ayearst, L., Quilty, L. C., Chmielewski, M., & Bagby, R. M.
(2015). Associations between DSM-5 Section III personality traits and the Minnesota
Multiphasic Personality Inventory 2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) scales in a
psychiatric patient sample. Psychological Assessment, 27, 811-815. doi:
10.1037/pas0000096
Anestis, J. C., Finn, J. A., Gottfried, E. D., Arbisi, P. A., & Joiner, T. E. (2015). Reading the road
Petition Form
Page 69
signs: The utility of the MMPI-2 Restructured Form Validity Scales in prediction of
premature termination. Assessment, 22, 279-288. doi: 073191114541672
Anestis, J. C., Gottfried, E. D., & Joiner, T. E. (2015). The utility of MMPI-2-RF substantive
scales in prediction of negative treatment outcomes in a community mental health
center. Assessment, 22, 23-35. doi: 10.1177/1073191114536771
Blais, M. A., Baity, M. R. & Hopwood, C. J. (2011). Clinical Applications of the Personality
Assessment Inventory. Routledge
Bolinskey, P. K., Trumbetta, S. L., Hanson, D. R., & Gottesman, I. I. (2010). Predicting adult
psychopathology from adolescent MMPIs: Some victories. Personality and Individual
Differences, 49, 324-330. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2010.01.026
Cohn, L. D., & Westenberg, P. M. (2004). Intelligence and Maturity: Meta-Analytic Evidence for the
Incremental and Discriminant Validity of Loevinger's Measure of Ego Development. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 760-722.
Cooper-Hakim, A., & Viswesvaran, C. (2002). A meta-analytic review of the MacAndrew Alcoholism
Scale. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62, 818-829.
Forbes, D., Elhai, J. D., Miller, M. W., & Creamer, M. (2010). Internalizing and externalizing
classes in posttraumatic stress disorder: A latent class analysis. Journal of Traumatic
Stress, 23, 340-349. doi: 10.1002/jts.20526
Grønnerød, C. (2004). Rorschach Assessment of Changes Following Psychotherapy: A Meta-Analytic

Review. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83, 256-276.
Koffel, E., Polusny, M. A., Arbisi, P. A., & Erbes, C. R. (2012). A preliminary investigation of
the new and revised symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder in DSM-5. Depression and
Anxiety, 29, 731-73. doi: 10.1002/da.21965
Lanyon, R. I., & Thomas, M. I. (2013). Assessment of global psychiatric categories: The
PSI/PSI-2 and the MMPI-2-RF. Psychological Assessment, 25, 227-232.
doi:10.1037/a0030313
Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., & Schutte, N. S. (2005). The Relationship between the Five-
Factor Model of Personality and Symptoms of Clinical Disorders: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of
Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 27, 101-114.
McMillan, D., Gilbody, S., Beresford, E., & Neilly, L. (2007). Can we predict suicide and non-fatal
self-harm with the Beck Hopelessness Scale? A meta-analysis. Psychological Medicine, 37,
769-778.
Petition Form
Page 70
Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’

responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist,
50, 741-749.
Meyers, J. E., Miller, R. M., & Tuita, A. R. R. (2014). Using pattern analysis matching to
differentiate TBI and PTSD in a military sample. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 21, 60-68.
doi: 10.1080/09084282.2012.737881
Mick, E., Biederman, J., Pandina, G., & Faraone, S. V. (2003). A preliminary meta-analysis of the
Child Behavior Checklist in pediatric bipolar disorder. Biological Psychiatry, 53, 1021-1027.
Noordhof, A., Sellbom, M., Eigenhuis, A., & Kamphuis, J. H. (2015). Distinguishing between
demoralization and specific personality traits in clinical assessment with the NEO-PI-R.
Psychological Assessment, 27, 645-655. doi: 10.1037/pas0000067
Quilty, L. C., Sellbom, M., Tackett, J. L., & Bagby, R. M. (2009). Personality trait predictors of
bipolar disorder: A replication and extension in a psychiatric sample. Psychiatry Research, 169,
159-163. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2008.07.004
Reese, J. B., Viglione, D. J., & Giromini, L. (2014). A comparison between Comprehensive
System and an early version of the Rorschach Performance Assessment System administration
with outpatient children and adolescents. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96, 515-522. doi:
10.1080/00223891.2014.889700
Rossi, G. & Derksen, J. (2015). International Adaptations of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory:
Construct Validity and Clinical Applications. Journal of Personality Assessment 97(6):572-90.
doi: 10.1080/00223891.2015.1079531.
Seligman, L. D., Ollendick, T. H., Langley, A. K., & Baldacci, H. B. (2004). The utility of measures of
child and adolescent anxiety: A meta-analytic review of the Revised Children's Anxiety Scale,
the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Children, and the Child Behavior Checklist. Journal of
Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, 33, 557-565.
Sellbom, M., Bagby, R. M., Kushner, S., Quilty, L. C., & Ayearst, L. E. (2012). Diagnostic
construct validity of the MMPI-2 Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) scale scores.
Assessment, 19, 176-186. doi: 10.1177/1073191111428763
Shklalim, E., Almagor, M., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2016). Examining conceptualizations of

psychopathology with the MMPI-2/MMPI-2-RF Restructured Clinical Scales:
Preliminary findings from a cross-cultural study. Journal of Personality Assessment. doi:
10.1080/00223891.2016.1189429
Petition Form
Page 71
Sinclair, S. J., Smith, M., Chung, W. J., Liebman, R., B. Stein, M. B., Antonius, D., Siefert, C. J.,
Haggerty, G. & A. Blais, M. A. (2014). Extending the Validity of the Personality Assessment
Inventory's (PAI) Level of Care Index (LOCI) in Multiple Psychiatric Settings. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 97(2) 145-152. DOI:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2014.941441
Smith, J.D., Eichler, W.C., Norman, K.L., & Smith, S.R. (2015) The Effectiveness of
Collaborative/Therapeutic Assessment for Psychotherapy Consultation: A Pragmatic Replicated Single-Case
Study, Journal of Personality Assessment, 97:3, 261-270, DOI: 10.1080/00223891.2014.955917 Tarescavage,
A. M., Finn, J. A., Marek, R. J., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & van Dulmen, M. H. M
(2015). Premature termination from psychotherapy and internalizing psychopathology: The role
of demoralization. Journal of Affective Disorders, 174, 549-555.doi:
10.1016/j.jad.2014.12.018
Van der Heijden, P. T., Egger, J. I. M., Rossi, G., & Derksen, J. J. L. (2012). Integrating
psychopathology and personality disorders conceptualized by the MMPI-2-RF and the
MCMI-III: A structural validity study. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94, 345-347.
doi: 10.1080/00223891.2012.656861
Viglione, D. J., Meyer, G. J., Jordan, R. J., Converse, G. L., Evans, J., MacDermott, D., &
Moore, R. C. (2015). Developing an alternative Rorschach administration method to optimize
the number of responses and enhance clinical inferences. Clinical Psychology and
Psychotherapy, 22, 546-558. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cpp.1913
Watson, C., Quilty, L. C., & Bagby, R. M. (2011). Differentiating bipolar disorder from major
depressive disorder using the MMPI-2-RF: A receiver operating characteristics (ROC)
analysis. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 33, 368-374. doi:
10.1007/s10862-010-9212-7
Wolf, E. J., Miller, M. W., Orazem, R. J., Weierich, M. R., Castillo, D. T., Milford, J., Kaloupek,
D. G., & Keane, T. M. (2008). The MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical Scales in the assessment of
posttraumatic stress disorder and comorbid disorders. Psychological Assessment, 20, 327-340.
doi: 10.1037/a0012948
Wygant, D. B., & Fleming, K. P. (2008). Clinical utility of the MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical
(RC) Scales in therapeutic assessment: A case study. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 90, 110-118. doi: 10.1080/00223890701845112
Zimmerman, M., Chelminski, I., & Pasternak, M. (2004). A review of studies of the Hamilton
Depression Rating Scale in healthy controls: Implications for the definition of remission in
treatment studies of depression. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 192, 595-601.
Petition Form
Page 72
Medical Settings
Although biological factors (e.g., type of illness, illness severity) help determine patients’ adjustment
during and after medical treatment, evidence suggests that psychosocial variables including
personality, coping style, stress management, and social support also play a significant role (Orom et
al., 2009; Penedo et al., 2013). As the importance of psychosocial processes in medical treatment has
become established, researchers have begun to examine the impact of personality on patients’ response
to various interventions. Assessment of personality variables that moderate treatment impact is an
active area of inquiry as psychology becomes increasingly integrated into primary care.
General Health Psychology:
Baum, A., Reverson, T. A., & Singer, J. E. (2001). Handbook of health psychology. Mahwah, N. J.:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Washington, D. C.: APA Press.
Belar, C. D., & Deardorff, W. W. (2009). Clinical health psychology in medical settings: A
practitioner’s guidebook.
Block, A. R., & Sarwer, D. B. (2013). Presurgical Psychological Screening: Understanding Patients,
Improving Outcomes. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Boyer, B. A., & Paharia, M. I. (2008). Comprehensive handbook of clinical health psychology.
Hoboken, N. J.: John Wiley & Sons.
Feldman, M. D., & Christiansen, J. F. (2008). Behavioral medicine: A guide for clinical practice. New
York, N. Y.: McGraw-Hill.
Liem, Y. S., Bosch, J. L., Arends, L. R., Heijenbrok-Kal, M. H., & Hunink, M. G. M. (2007). Quality
of life assessed with the Medical Outcomes Study Short Form 36-Item Health Survey of
patients on renal replacement therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Value in Health,
10, 390-397.
Maruish, M.E. (2000). Handbook of Psychological Assessment in Primary Care Settings. New York,
NY: Routledge.
McCullough, N., & Parkes, J. (2008). Use of the Child Health Questionnaire in children with cerebral
palsy: A systematic review and evaluation of the psychometric properties. Journal of Pediatric
Psychology, 33, 80-90.
Thombs, B. D., Magyar-Russell, G., Bass, E. B., Stewart, K. J., Tsilidis, K. K., Bush, D. E., Fauerbach,
J. A., McCann, U. D., & Ziegelstein, R. C. (2007). Performance characteristics of depression
screening instruments in survivors of acute myocardial infarction: Review of the evidence.
Petition Form
Page 73
Psychosomatics: Journal of Consultation Liaison Psychiatry, 48, 185-194.
Wittkampf, K. A., Naeije, L., Schene, A. H., Huyser, J., & van Weert, H. C. (2007). Diagnostic
accuracy of the mood module of the Patient Health Questionnaire: A systematic review.
General Hospital Psychiatry, 29, 388-395.
Bariatric Surgery:
Along with a thorough medical chart review and a clinical interview, The American Society for
Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery (ASMBS) recommends some form of psychological testing.
Guidelines for conducting psychological assessments in bariatric surgery settings (Sogg, Lauretti, &
West-Smith, 2016) specifically include personality traits as well as issues such as stress, anxiety,
depression, and overall social-emotional functioning, often uncovered via personality testing. Overall,
such psychosocial factors have been found to have significant potential to affect long-term outcomes of
bariatric surgery. Many of these factors can be identified via personality assessment. The
recommendation by ASMBS suggests that a psychological/personality test/measure should map onto
relevant domains of psychopathology and personality related to constructs of interest in bariatric
settings (e.g., depression, anxiety, and impulsivity), yield good reliability and validity coefficients, and
have normative data published. Additionally, nearly 1/3 of bariatric surgery candidates tend to respond
in a socially desirable manner on personality inventories, indicating that bariatric surgery patients are
not always forthcoming about their psychosocial functioning (Ambwani et al., 2013; Marek, Ben-
Porath, & Heinberg, 2016; Marek, Heinberg, et al., 2016). Marek and Colleagues (2016) reviewed a
number of personality assessment inventories and their psychometric properties in bariatric surgery
settings. Including personality assessment in bariatric surgery evaluations can aid or challenge
differential diagnoses, reveal clinical information on risk factors that the patient may be sensitive to
disclosing during an interview, and provide information on the extent to which a candidate is over- or
underreporting symptoms. According to Sogg et. al. (2016), there is growing research suggesting that
certain personality characteristics are related to obesity risk. In addition, identifying certain
personality characteristics may improve predictions of psychosocial, medical, and behavioral outcomes
as well as suggest certain strategies for optimizing surgical results.
Ambwani, S., Boeka, A. G., Brown, J. D., Byrne, T. K., Budak, A. R., Sarwer, D. B., & O'Neil, P. M.
(2013). Socially desirable responding by bariatric surgery candidates during psychological
assessment. Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases, 9, 300-305.
Marek, R. J., Ben‐Porath, Y. S., & Heinberg, L. J. (2016). Understanding the role of psychopathology
in bariatric surgery outcomes. Obesity Reviews, 17, 126-141.
Marek, R. J., Heinberg, L. J., Lavery, M., Merrell Rish, J., & Ashton, K. (2016). A review of
psychological assessment instruments for use in bariatric surgery evaluations. Psychological
Assessment, 28, 1142-1157. doi:10.1037/pas0000286
Petition Form
Page 74
Mitchell, J. E., & De Zwaan, M. (Eds.). (2012). Psychosocial assessment and treatment of bariatric
surgery patients. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Sogg, S., Lauretti, J., & West-Smith, L. (2016). Recommendations for the presurgical psychosocial
evaluation of bariatric surgery patients. Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases, 12, 731-749.
doi: 10.1016/j.soard.2016.02.00
Chronic Pain:
Gatchel, R. J., & Weisberg, J. N. (2000). Personality characteristics of patients with pain. Washington,
DC: American Psychological Association.
Karoly, P., & Jensen, M. P. (2013). Multimethod Assessment of Chronic Pain: Psychology Practitioner
Guidebooks. Elsevier.
Sternbach, R. A. (1974). Pain patients: Traits and treatment. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Oncology:
Burton, M. V., Parker, R. W., Farrell, A., Bailey, D., Conneely, J., Booth, S., & Elcombe, S. (1995). A
randomized controlled trial of preoperative psychological preparation for mastectomy. Psycho‐
Oncology, 4, 1-19.
Den Oudsten, B. L., Van Heck, G. L., Van der Steeg, A. F., Roukema, J. A., & De Vries, J. (2009).
Predictors of depressive symptoms 12 months after surgical treatment of early‐stage breast
cancer. Psycho‐Oncology, 18, 1230-1237.
Lipscomb, J., Gotay, C. C., & Snyder, C. (Eds.). (2004). Outcomes assessment in cancer: measures,
methods and applications. Cambridge University Press.
Montgomery, G. H., & Bovbjerg, D. H. (2004). Presurgery distress and specific response expectancies
predict postsurgery outcomes in surgery patients confronting breast cancer. Health
Psychology, 23, 381-387.
Montgomery, G. H., Schnur, J. B., Erblich, J., Diefenbach, M. A., & Bovbjerg, D. H. (2010).
Presurgery psychological factors predict pain, nausea, and fatigue one week after breast cancer
surgery. Journal of pain and symptom management, 39, 1043-1052.
Orom, H., Penner, L. A., West, B. T., Downs, T. M., Rayford, W., & Underwood, W. (2009).
Personality predicts prostate cancer decision-making difficulty and satisfaction. Psycho-
Oncology. 18, 290-299.
Petition Form
Page 75
Penedo F.J., et al. (2013). Association of stress management skills and perceived stress with physical
and emotional well-being among advanced prostate cancer survivors following androgen
deprivation treatment. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings. 20, 25-32.
Richardson, A., Medina, J., Brown, V., & Sitzia, J. (2007). Patients’ needs assessment in cancer care: a
review of assessment tools. Supportive Care in Cancer, 15, 1125-1144.
Schou, I., Ekeberg, Ø., Ruland, C. M., Sandvik, L., & Kåresen, R. (2004). Pessimism as a predictor of
emotional morbidity one year following breast cancer surgery. Psycho‐Oncology, 13, 309-320.
Organ Transplant:
Collins, C. A., & Labott, S. M. (2007). Psychological assessment of candidates for solid organ
transplantation. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38, 150-157.
Dew, M. A., Jacobs, C. L., Jowsey, S. G., Hanto, R., Miller, C., & Delmonico, F. L. (2007). Guidelines
for the psychosocial evaluation of living unrelated kidney donors in the United
States. American Journal of Transplantation, 7, 1047-1054.
Olbrisch, M. E., Benedict, S. M., Ashe, K., & Levenson, J. L. (2002). Psychological assessment and
care of organ transplant patients. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 70, 771-783.
Rodrigue, J. R., Pavlakis, M., Danovitch, G. M., Johnson, S. R., Karp, S. J., Khwaja, K., &
Mandelbrot, D. A. (2007). Evaluating living kidney donors: relationship types, psychosocial
criteria, and consent processes at US transplant programs. American Journal of
transplantation, 7, 2326-2332.
Spine Surgery/Pain-Control Implants:
Block, A. R., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Marek, R. J. (2013). Psychological risk factors for poor outcome of
spine surgery and spinal cord stimulator implant: A review of the literature and their
assessment with the MMPI-2-RF. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 27, 81-107.
den Boer, J. J., Oostendorp, R. A., Beems, T., Munneke, M., Oerlemans, M., & Evers, A. W. (2006). A
systematic review of bio-psychosocial risk factors for an unfavourable outcome after lumbar
disc surgery. European Spine Journal, 15, 527–536. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00586-005-
0910-x
Stephens, K. A., & Ward, A. (2014). Patient Selection for Spinal Cord Stimulators: Mental Health
Perspective. Current Pain and Headache Reports, 18, 1-6.
Petition Form
Page 76
Legal/Forensic Settings
The APA has recognized Forensic Psychology as a specialty area, and Section 10 of the Specialty
Guidelines for Forensic Psychology (SGFP) contains relevant parameters for assessment in general.
Personality Assessment as a proficiency would ensure that practitioners of Forensic Psychology have
additional training and guidance as they provide this essential service to the judicial system. The
listing of chapters, handbooks, and peer-reviewed articles below is but a summary, and many of them
are contained in APA publications. Personality Assessment is often critical in clarifying a diagnosis
for the court and identifying personality characteristics that assist the court in making decisions about a
wide variety of psycho-legal questions. As noted previously in this document, Personality Assessment
is used in many forensic contexts, such as child custody, pre- and post-trial criminal matters of all
kinds, sexually violent predator commitment, immigration matters, personal injury and disability
claims, etc. It is incumbent on any practitioner of Forensic Psychology to provide the most accurate
and relevant information possible to the courts and to the attorneys who are the consumers of their
work. The proficiency in Personality Assessment would provide additional assurance that those who
use these methods are employing best practices of assessment (SGFP, Section 10.02).
American Psychological Association. (2013) Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists.

Archer, E. M., Hagan, L. D., Mason, J., Handel, R. W., & Archer, R. P. (2012). MMPI-2-RF
characteristics of custody evaluation litigants. Assessment, 19, 14-20. doi:
10.1177/1073191110397469
Archer, R. P., & Wheeler, E.M. A. (Eds.) (2013). Forensic uses of clinical assessment
instruments (2nd Ed.). New York: Routledge.
Anderson, J. L., Sellbom, M., Pymont, C., Smid, W., De Saeger, H. & Kamphuis, J. H. (2015).
Measurement of DSM-5 Section II personality disorder constructs using the MMPI-2-RF
in clinical and forensic samples. Psychological Assessment, 27, 786-800. doi:
10.1037/pas0000103
Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2012). Addressing challenges to MMPI-2-RF-based testimony: Questions and

answers. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 27, 691-705. doi: 10.1093/arclin/acs083
Benjestorf, S. T., Viglione, D. J., Lamb, J. D., & Giromini, L. (2013). Suppression of aggressive
Rorschach responses among violent offenders and nonoffenders. Journal of Interpersonal
Violence, 28, 2981-3003. doi:10.1177/0886260513488688
Clegg, C., Fremouw, W., Horacek, T., Cole, A., & Schwartz, R. (2010). Factors associated with
Petition Form
Page 77
treatment acceptance and compliance among incarcerated male sex offenders. International
Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 6, 880-897.
doi:10.1177/0306624X10376160.
Edens, J. F., & Campbell, J. S. (2007). Identifying youths at risk for institutional misconduct: A meta-
analytic investigation of the Psychopathy Checklist Measures. Psychological Services, 4, 13-
27.
Erard, R. E. (2012). Expert testimony using the Rorschach Performance Assessment System in
psychological injury cases. Psychological Injury and Law, 5, 122-134. doi:10.1007/s12207-
012-9126-7
Erard, R. E., & Viglione, D. J. (2014). The Rorschach Performance Assessment System (R-PAS)
in child custody evaluations. Journal of Child Custody, 11, 159-180.
doi:10.1080/15379418.2014.943449
Glassmire, D. M, Tarescavage, A. M., Burchett, D., Martinez, J., & Gomez, A. (2015). Clinical
utility of the MMPI-2-RF SUI items and scale in a forensic inpatient setting: Association
with interview, self-reports and future suicidal behavior. Psychological Assessment.
doi.org/10.1037/pas0000220
Kauffman, C. M., Stolberg, R., & Madero, J. (2015). An examination of the MMPI-2-RF
(Restructured Form) with the MMPI-2 and MCMI-III in child custody litigants. Journal
of Child Custody, 12, 129-151. doi: 10.1080/15379418.2015.1057354
McAnulty, R. D., McAnulty, D. P., Sipp, J. E., Demakis, G. J., & Heggestad, E. D. (2014).
Predictive validity of the MMPI-2 in a residential treatment program. Journal of
Personality Assessment. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2014.880061
McCann, J. T. (2002). Guidelines for Forensic Application of the MCMI-III. Journal of Forensic
Psychology Practice 2(3) 55-69
Nørbech, P. C. B., Fodstad, L., Kuisma, I., Lunde, K. B., & Hartmann, E. (2016). Incarcerated
violent offenders' ability to avoid revealing their potential for violence on the Rorschach and
the MMPI-2. Journal of Personality Assessment, 98, 419-429. DOI:
10.1080/00223891.2015.1129613
Newberry, M. & Shuker, R. (2012). Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) Profiles of Offenders
and Their Relationship to Institutional Misconduct and Risk of Reconviction. Journal of
Personality Assessment 94(6), 586-592
Ogloff, J. R. P., & Douglas, K. S. (2013). Forensic psychological assessments. In J. R. Graham

Petition Form
Page 78
& J. A. Naglieri (Eds.), Assessment psychology. Volume 10 in I. B. Weiner (Ed.-in-Chief),

Handbook of psychology (2nd ed., pp. 373-393). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Phillips, T. R., Sellbom, M., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Patrick, C. J. (2013). Further development
and construct validation of MMPI-2-RF indices of global psychopathy, fearless dominance, and
impulsive-antisociality in a sample of incarcerated women. Law and
Human Behavior, 38, 34-46. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000040
Pinsoneault, T. B., & Ezzo, F. R. (2012). A comparison of MMPI-2-RF profiles between child
maltreatment and non-maltreatment custody cases. Journal of Forensic Psychology
Practice, 12, 227-237. doi.org/10.1080/15228932.2012.674469
Resendes, J., & Lecci, L. (2012). Comparing the MMPI-2 scale scores of parents involved in
parental competency and child custody assessments. Psychological Assessment, 24, 1054-
1059. doi: 10.1037/a0028585
Sellbom, M. (2012). The MMPI-2-RF is ready for the Daubert challenge: Evidence,
implications, and recommendations for use in court testimony. Journal of Psychological
Practice, 17, 151-179.
Sellbom, M., Lee, T. T. C., Ben-Porath, Y. S., Arbisi, P. A., & Gervais, R. O. (2012).
Differentiating PTSD symptomatology with the MMPI-2-RF (Restructured Form) in a
forensic disability sample. Psychiatry Research, 197, 172-179. doi:
10.1016/j.psychres.2012.02.003
Sellbom, M. (2014). A factor mixture model approach to elaborating on offender mental health
classification with the MMPI-2-RF. Journal of Personality Assessment, 96, 293-305. doi:
10.1080/00223891.2013.843538
Sellbom, M. (2011). Elaborating on the construct validity of the Levenson Self-Report

Psychopathy Scale in incarcerated and non-incarcerated samples. Law and Human
Behavior, 35, 440-451. doi: 10.1007/s10979-010-9249-x
Semel, R. A. (2016). The Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) in Child Custody Evaluations:
Some Contextual and Psychometric Considerations. Journal of Psychology and Clinical
Psychiatry 5(3)
Stolberg R. & Kauffman, C. (2015). The Utility of the MCMI-III in Child Custody Evaluations: The
Impact of Clinical Norms. Journal of Child Custody 12 (3-4), 325-336.
Tarescavage, A. M., Cappo, B., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2016). Assessment of sex offenders with
the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-
Petition Form
Page 79
RF). Sexual Abuse: A Journal of Research and Treatment. DOI:

10.1177/1079063216667921
Tarescavage, A. M., Glassmire, D. M., & Burchett, D. (2016). Introduction of a conceptual

model for integrating the MMPI-2-RF into HCR-20V3 violence risk assessments and
associations between the MMPI-2-RF and institutional violence. Law and Human
Behavior. doi: 10.1037/lhb0000207
Tarescavage, A. M., Luna-Jones, L., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2014). Minnesota Multiphasic

Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF) predictors of violating probation
after felonious crimes. Psychological Assessment, 26, 1375-1380. doi: 10.1037/pas0000022
Walters, G. D. (2003). Predicting criminal justice outcomes with the Psychopathy Checklist and
Lifestyle Criminality Screening Form: A meta-analytic comparison. Behavioral Sciences & the
Law, 21, 89-102.
Walters, G. D. (2006). Risk-Appraisal Versus Self-Report in the Prediction of Criminal Justice

Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 33, 279-304.
Walters, G. D. (2003). Predicting institutional adjustment and recidivism with the psychopathy
checklist factor scores: A meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 27, 541-558.
Educational Settings
Ávila, C., & Torrubia, R. (2004). Personality, expectations, and response strategies in multiple-choice
question examinations in university students: A test of Gray's hypotheses. European Journal of
Personality, 18, 45-59.
Beedie, C. J., Terry, P. C., & Lane, A. M. (2000). The profile of mood states and athletic performance:
Two meta-analyses. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 12, 49-68.
Flanagan, R., & Teglasi, H. (Eds.) (2007). Performance Measures of Personality in School Psychology:
Practice and Research [Special issue]. Psychology in the Schools, 44, 19-43.
Staggs, G. D., Larson, L. M., & Borgen, F. H. (2007). Convergence of personality and interests: Meta-
analysis of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire and the Strong Interest Inventory.
Journal of Career Assessment, 15, 423-445.
Older Adults and Rehabilitation Settings
Haywood, K. L., Garratt, A. M., & Fitzpatrick-R. (2005). Quality of life in older people: A structured
review of generic self-assessed health instruments. Quality of Life Research, 14, 1651-1668.
Petition Form
Page 80
Heo, M., Murphy, C. F., & Meyers, B. S. (2007). Relationship between the Hamilton Depression
Rating Scale and the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale in depressed elderly: A
meta-analysis. American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 15, 899-905.
Addiction and Substance Abuse Treatment Settings:
Forbey, J. D., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2007). A comparison of the MMPI-2 Restructured Clinical
(RC) and Clinical Scales in a substance abuse treatment sample. Psychological Services, 4,
46-58. doi: 10.1037/1541-1559.4.1.46
Hopkins, T. A., Brawner, C. A., Meyer, M., Zawalinski, L., Carnes, P. J., & Green, B. A. (2016).
MMPI-2 correlates of sadomasochism in a sexual addiction sample: Contrasting men and
women. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 23, 114-140. doi:
10.1080/10720162.2015.1095137
Monnot, M. J., Quirk, S. W., Hoerger, M., & Brewer, L. (2009). Racial bias in personality
assessment: Using the MMPI-2 to predict psychiatric diagnoses of African American and
Caucasian chemical dependency patients. Psychological Assessment, 21, 137-151. doi:
10.1037/a0015316
Occupational/Employment Settings
Brown, K. P., Iannelli, R. J. & Marganoff, D. P. (2016). Use of the Personality Assessment Inventory
in Fitness-for-Duty Evaluations of Physicians. Journal of Personality Assessment 1-7. doi:
10.1080/00223891.2016.1255950
Carson, K. P., & Gilliard, D. J. (1993). Construct validity of the Miner Sentence Completion Scale.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 66, 171-175.
Connolly, J. J., Kavanagh, E. J., & Viswesvaran, C. (2007). The Convergent Validity
between Self and Observer Ratings of Personality: A meta-analytic review. International
Journal of Selection and Assessment, 15, 110-117.
Hurtz, G. M., & Donovan, J. J. (2000). Personality and job performance: The Big Five revisited.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 869-879.
Judge, T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality and job satisfaction:
A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 530-541.
Li, A., & Bagger, J. (2006). Using the BIDR to Distinguish the Effects of Impression Management and
Self-Deception on the Criterion Validity of Personality Measures: A Meta-Analysis.
Petition Form
Page 81
International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 14, 131-141.
Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Schmidt, F. L. (1993). Comprehensive meta-analysis of integrity test
validities: Findings and implications for personnel selection and theories of job performance.
Journal of Applied Psychology, 78, 679-703.
Ones, D. S., Viswesvaran, C., & Reiss, A. D. (1996). Role of social desirability in personality testing
for personnel selection: A red herring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 81, 660-679.
Piotrowski, C. & Armstrong, T. (2006). Current recruitment and selection practices: A national survey
of Fortune 1000 firms. North American Journal of Psychology, 8, 489-496
Salgado, J. F. (2003). Predicting job performance using FFM and non-FFM personality measures.
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 76, 323-346.
Spangler, W. D. (1992). Validity of questionnaire and TAT measures of need for achievement: Two
meta-analyses. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 140-154.
Tett, R. P., Jackson, D. N., & Rothstein, M. (1991). Personality measures as predictors of job
performance: A meta-analytic review. Personnel Psychology, 44, 703-742.
Varela, J. G., Boccaccini, M. T., Scogin, F., Stump, J., & Caputo, A. (2004). Personality Testing in
Law Enforcement Employment Settings: A Meta-Analytic Review. Criminal Justice and
Behavior, 31, 649-675.
Police and Public Safety Settings:
The use of personality assessment in the area of law enforcement and public safety has increased
substantially over the past several decades being utilized for pre and post conditional job offers (and
additional purposes such as fitness for duty) across majority of police departments in the United States.
Weiss (2010) suggested that since police work entails a wide range of activities, it is likely that the
application of personality based instruments to different kinds of police and public safety evaluations
will only continue to grow in the future. Weiss (2010) also noted that using personality measures in
the contemporary practice of police psychology assessment is essential. Areas assessed often include
integrity, impulse control, stress tolerance, interpersonal skills, and dependability among many others.
Certain widely used personality inventories such as the MMPI-2 RF and the PAI, have been adapted as
well as specifically re-designed to help make employment screening decisions in the public safety field
Multiple studies, including the ones listed below, provide further insight on how certain scales
(traditional or newly developed) are relevant to police applicants’ performance at the academy and on
the job as well as potential for problem behaviors. Multiple studies utilizing such measures have
collected law enforcement specific norms to enhance the interpretation of results with respect to this
particular population. Result shave been quite positive with strong correlations between psychological
Petition Form
Page 82
screenings based recommendations and outcomes.
California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) Standards, Evaluation, and
Research Bureau (2017) Peace Officer Psychological Screening Manual
Detrick, P., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Sellbom, M. (2016). Associations between MMPI-2-RF
(Restructured Form) and Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI) scale scores in a law
enforcement preemployment screening sample. Journal of Police and Criminal
Psychology, 31, 81-95. doi: 10.1007/s11896-015-9172-7
Lowmaster, S. E. & Morey, L. C. (2012). Predicting Law Enforcement Officer Job Performance with
the Personality Assessment Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 94(3), 254-261
Tarescavage, A. M., Corey, D. M., Gupton, H. M., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2015). Criterion validity
and clinical utility of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured
Form (MMPI-2-RF) in assessments of police officer candidates. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 97, 382-394. doi: 10.1080/00223891.2014.995800
Tarescavage, A. M., Fischler, G. L., Cappo, B., Hill, D. O., Corey, D. M., & Ben-Porath, Y. S.
(2015). Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2-Restructured Form (MMPI-2-RF)
predictors of police officer problem behavior and collateral self-report test scores.
Psychological Assessment, 27, 125-137. doi: 10.1037/pas0000041
Weiss, P. (2010). Personality Assessment in Police Psychology: A 21st Century Perspective.

Springfield: Charles C Thomas Publisher.
Criterion IX. Quality Improvement. A proficiency promotes ongoing investigations and

procedures to develop further the quality and utility of its applications.
Commentary: The public interest requires the best services possible for consumers. A
proficiency, therefore, continues to seek ways to improve the quality and usefulness of its
practitioners' services beyond its original determination of effectiveness. Such investigations
may take many forms. Petitions describe how the research and practice literatures are regularly
reviewed for developments that are relevant to the proficiency's skills and services, and how
this information is publicly disseminated.
1. Provide a description of the types of investigations that are designed to evaluate and increase
the usefulness of the applications used in the practice of the proficiency. Estimate the number
of researchers conducting these types of studies, the scope of their efforts, and how your
organization and/or other organizations associated with the proficiency will act to foster these
developments. It also is appropriate to provide evidence of current efforts in these areas.
Petition Form
Page 83
Two broad classes of investigations help to evaluate and increase the usefulness of the skills and
services in Personality Assessment: 1) validation studies concerning the application of instruments
commonly used in personality assessment in particular applications and with particular populations and
2) studies evaluating the utility or incremental value of personality assessment in particular settings.
With regard to the first type of study, the major assessment journals (e.g., Journal of Personality
Assessment, Assessment, and Psychological Assessment) as well as various journals devoted to
specialized applications of personality assessment (e.g., Journal of Child Custody, Journal of Forensic
Psychology Practice) publish hundreds of such studies annually, and the number of investigators is
legion. For example, the Journal of Personality Assessment, published by the Society for Personality
Assessment (SPA), alone has published over 400 such studies just on validating applications of various
scales and forms of the MMPI in the past 10 years, including some 20 recent articles investigating the
merits of the new Restructured Clinical (RC) scales and the new Restructured Format (RF). JPA also
regularly publishes case studies illustrating best practices and new applications of personality
assessment techniques (e.g., Therapeutic Assessment).
As for the second type of study, two special issues of the Journal of Personality Assessment are
illustrative: a) Personality Assessment in Psychotherapy (2004) and b) Personality Assessment in
Medical Settings (2007). Numerous works investigate or summarize research concerning the specific
utility of personality assessment in therapeutic contexts, such as Blatt (2008), Blatt & Shahar (2004),
Farmer, Nelson-Gray, and Rosmery (2005), Finn (2007), Maruish (2004), Millon (1999), and
Tharinger, Finn, Gentry, Hamilton, Fowler, Matson, Krumholz, and Walkowiak (2009). A recent
issue of Professional Psychology: Science and Practice focuses on evidence-based assessment.
The Journal of Personality Assessment also offers periodic special sections, issues, and series
addressing in depth various issues within the context of Personality Assessment via multiple articles
(see selected examples noted previously). The journal also offers ongoing perspectives on Personality
Assessment in the Diagnostic Manuals as well as Clinical Case Application sections across volumes.
A few select examples of special editions and sections from recent years are: Personality Assessment
and the Law (2016); Cultural Considerations in Collaborative and Therapeutic Assessment (2016);
Teaching, Training, and Supervision in Personality and Psychological Assessment (2016); Personality
Assessment and the DSM: A Match Made in Heaven? (2015); Difficult Assessment Cases:
Psychodynamic Perspectives (2015); Mixture Modeling in Personality Assessment (2014); Openness
to Experience (2014); Personality Assessment in the DSM-5 (2011); and Integrating Personality,
Psychopathology, and Psychotherapy Using Interpersonal Assessment (2010).
In order to foster and support future research on the utility of personality assessment, the Society for
Personality Assessment Foundation (SPAF) has raised substantial funds for the Utility of Assessment
Project. A panel consisting of SPA members with a history of successful scholarship in this area has
been formed to seek, review, fund, and monitor proposals for major research projects that meet
expected standards of excellence and relevance.
Petition Form
Page 84
2. Describe how the proficiency seeks ways to improve the quality and usefulness of its
practitioners' services beyond its original determinations of effectiveness.
The Society for Personality Assessment (SPA) seeks to improve the quality and usefulness of
psychological assessment services through education and various other means of communicating new
findings and techniques in the field of psychological assessment. SPA has a yearly meeting for the
purposes of dissemination of research, discussion and elaboration of theoretical innovations, as well as
providing a context for professional communication among psychological assessment specialists. SPA
produces a biannual newsletter (the SPA Exchange) for sharing ideas, problems, and new findings.
Finally, SPA publishes the Journal of Personality Assessment, a leading peer-reviewed journal in the
field of psychological assessment.
3. Describe how the research and practice literature are regularly reviewed for developments
which are relevant to the proficiency's skills and services, and how this information is publicly
disseminated.
The editorial board of the Society for Personality Assessment regularly examines the broader
psychological literature for its implications for personality assessment. Specifically, the editors consult
the literature on psychological assessment that is published regularly in numerous peer-reviewed
journals, including Applied Measurement in Education, Applied Psychological Measurement,
Educational Assessment, Educational and Psychological Measurement, European Journal of
Psychological Assessment, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, Journal of Personality
Assessment, Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, Measurement and Evaluation in
Counseling and Development, and Psychological Assessment. The editors survey annual reviews of
major topics in psychological assessment, which are published yearly in the Annual Review of
Psychology and the Annual Review of Clinical Psychology. Also consulted is the Buros Mental
Measurements Yearbook provides independent scholarly evaluations of all commercially available
psychological and educational assessment instruments while Tests in Print provides an index of tests
along with reviews and literature for specific tests. The editorial board will use this information to
solicit articles and to encourage authors to expand the scope of the literature they address.
At SPA’s annual conference, an effort is made to bring in individuals who represent areas outside of
personality assessment. For example, psychologists who write on the topic of personality,
neuropsychological assessment, and risk management are invited to present. Also, participating in our
annual meeting are individuals from other disciplines, such as attorneys, who engage in professional
activities relating to personality assessment.
References
Blatt, S. (2008). Polarities of experience: Relatedness and self-definition in personality development,

psychopathology, and the therapeutic process. Washington, DC: APA Books.
Petition Form
Page 85
Blatt, S. & Shahar (2004). Stability of the patient-by-treatment interaction in the Menninger
Psychotherapy Research Project. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 68, 23-38.
Farmer, R. F., Nelson-Gray, & Rosmery, O. (2005). Personality-guided behavior therapy.

Washington, DC: APA Books.
Maruish, M. E. (Ed.). (2004). The use of psychological testing for treatment planning and outcomes
assessment: Vol. 1: General considerations (3rd Ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Millon, T. (1999). Personality-guided therapy. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Special issue on personality assessment and psychotherapy. (2004). Journal of Personality Assessment,
83(3).
Special issue on personality assessment in medical settings. (2007), Journal of Personality Assessment,
89 (3).
Tharinger, D. J., Finn, S. E., Gentry, L., Fowler, J., Matson, M., Krumholz, L, & Walkowiak, J.
(2009). Therapeutic assessment with children: A pilot study of treatment acceptability and outcome.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 91(3), 238–244
Criterion X. Guidelines for Proficiency Service Delivery. The proficiency has developed and
disseminated guidelines for practice in the proficiency that expand on the profession's general
practice guidelines and ethical principles2.
Commentary: Such guidelines are readily available to proficiency practitioners and to

members of the public and describe the characteristic ways in which proficiency practitioners
make decisions about proficiency services and about how such services are delivered to the
public.
Because Personality Assessment is a core competency in the practice of professional psychology, it is

imperative that appropriate standards of care be maintained and that these be communicated both to
members of the profession and to the public at large. The proficiency takes seriously the need to
promulgate guidelines for ethical and competent practice and to disseminate these widely. Recent
experience has shown that potential misunderstandings about the appropriateness of Personality
2In this context, professional proficiency guidelines refer to modes of conceptualization, identification and assessment of
issues, and intervention planning and execution common to those trained and experienced in the practice of the proficiency.
Such professional guidelines may be found in documents or websites including, but not limited to, those bearing such a title
or as described in a variety of published textbooks, chapters, and/or articles focused on such contents.
Petition Form
Page 86
Assessment and the elements of competent and ethical practice demonstrate the need for ongoing
communication.
Because the field of Personality Assessment is always evolving (new instruments are developed,
standard instruments are revised and updated, norms are developed for new populations, new
techniques are developed for sharing assessment findings with clients etc.), it is necessary for the
proficiency to communicate with practitioners on an ongoing basis about developments in the field.
The Ethics Code (American Psychological Association, 2002, 2010) as well as the Standards for
Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA et al., 2014) both require that psychologists base their
practice on up-to-date information. The proficiency strives to assure that such information is readily
accessible to those practitioners who need it.
We recognize that to be proficient, a personality assessment psychologist must practice ethically. Even
though core ethical principles are universal across practice situations, ethical knowledge is continually
evolving. In order to ensure that proficiency practitioners have an up-to-date awareness of the
demands of ethical practice, we are in the process of making available to our practitioners an ethical
toolkit (Appendix IV) that contributes to the literature on ethics and personality assessment. A link to
this toolkit will appear on our proficiency webpage. The proficiency committee is exploring the
possibility of adding a requirement for both those applying for the proficiency recognition and those
seeking renewal to attest to having received one substantial exposure to training in personality
assessment in the last 5 years. Our annual convention always features at least one CE credit-bearing
workshop or symposium on the ethics of personality assessment. However, those not attending the
convention might have difficulty accessing relevant resources. The Society for Personality
Assessment is currently seeking approval to be a Home Study CE credit provider. Once this status is
achieved, we will develop on-line resources to enable practitioners to obtain training in the ethics of
personality assessment. At such time, it would be feasible for the Society to require such ongoing
training.
1. Describe how the proficiency's practitioners assume effective and ongoing communication to
members of the discipline and the public as to the proficiency's practices, practice
enhancements, and/or new applications.
Communication with members of the discipline takes a number of forms. Scientific advances in
Personality Assessment are communicated through several professional journals, notably the Journal
of Personality Assessment (official publication of the Society for Personality Assessment),
Psychological Assessment (published by the American Psychological Association), and Assessment
(published in conjunction with Section IX, Assessment Psychology, of Division 12 (the Division of
Clinical Psychology) of the American Psychological Association), along with a variety of more
specialized journals applicable to particular settings (e.g., educational, organizational, forensic, Older
Adults). These publications keep members of the profession informed on the latest developments in
assessment techniques including new instruments, updated norms, the most recent data on reliability
and validity, and the application of assessment techniques to specific populations or problem areas.
Petition Form
Page 87
The Society for Personality Assessment also publishes and distributes to its members a semi-annual
newsletter, The Exchange, which provides information about the activities of the Society as well as
substantive articles on the teaching, ethics, and practice of Personality Assessment in various settings.
Additionally, the Society also maintains a public web page, http://www.personality.org. This site is
used to communicate with members of the Society as well as other professionals, and contains
information about upcoming educational events, recent developments that affect the proficiency, and
official statements of the Society regarding Personality Assessment. The site is also available for
announcements from members that are of interest to practitioners.
In addition to written documents, the Annual Convention Meeting of the Society for Personality
Assessment provides an opportunity for practitioners of the proficiency to learn of current
developments in the science of Personality Assessment that affect service delivery. This meeting also
provides continuing education workshops aimed at sharpening the skills of practitioners. In particular,
a workshop on ethical practice of Personality Assessment is offered on an annual basis. SPA also co-
sponsors, with other organizations (e.g., the Center for Therapeutic Assessment, National Academy of
Neuropsychology, and the Michigan Psychological Association) Continuing Education workshops
throughout the year on new developments in assessment practice. Other organizations, notably Section
IX (assessment) of Division 12 (clinical) of the American Psychological Association and the American
Board of Assessment Psychology, provide continuing education workshops and symposia in
conjunction with the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association. For example, in the
2010 annual convention of the American Psychological Association, Division 12, Section IX,
sponsored a symposium on integration of test data. Other organizations provide continuing education
in their specific areas of interest (e.g., Rorschach Training Programs, MMPI-2 & RF Workshops, etc.).
Finally, various professional listservs are utilized by members of the Personality Assessment practice
community to discuss problems and dilemmas encountered in the practice of assessment.
In the past several years APA has offered webinars co-sponsored by the Society for Personality
Assessment that have been viewed by many clinicians and graduate students. These included
Psychological Assessment in Primary Care: A Primer for Graduate Students by John Porcerelli, PhD,
Psychological Report Writing: Resources, Research, and Strategies by Gary Groth-Marnat, PhD, and
How Therapeutic Assessment Works: Theory and Techniques by Stephen E. Finn, PhD, as well as two
more recent webinars noted earlier in this document. SPA plans to continue this collaboration in the
future and further enhancing awareness and understanding of personality and psychological
assessment.
Communication with the public is equally important and is accomplished in several ways. The Society
for Personality Assessment has developed a brochure describing Personality Assessment, appropriate
uses and benefits, to be distributed to the lay public as well as professionals in other disciplines. In
addition, the web page of the Society is continually updated and available to the lay public and
contains information about Personality Assessment.
The Society for Personality Assessment also maintains a Public Affairs Office for the purpose of
Petition Form
Page 88
educating and informing the public about Personality Assessment as well as clarifying misconceptions
about the practice when these arise. The Public Affairs Office seeks to inform legislatures, judiciaries,
third party health care payers, and other decision-makers of the appropriate use of Personality
Assessment in various settings. For example, the office has written to legislators in those states
contemplating statutes that would affect the practice of assessment to explain what assessment consists
of as well as the appropriate standards for training and practice in the proficiency. Where appropriate,
members of the society also communicate this information through various media outlets, including
newspapers, magazines, radio, and television.
Finally, the proficiency seeks to educate groups that are often consumers of Personality Assessment
through participation in continuing education events. These include physicians, psychiatrists, attorneys,
and judges.
2. How does your proficiency encourage the development of guidelines of practice?
In addition to the ethical guidelines that govern the practice of professional psychology in general,
there are specific standards and guidelines for the competent and ethical practice of Personality
Assessment. Section 9 (Assessment) of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct
(American Psychological Association, 2002, 2010) provides guidelines for the practice of assessment
in various settings. The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (AERA et al., 2014)
provide additional guidance for practitioners. Furthermore, the Society for Personality Assessment has
promulgated a set of standards for education and training in assessment (Society for Personality
Assessment, 2006), which articulate minimum standards for competence in the practice of Personality
Assessment. The Society regularly reviews these standards and revises them as appropriate.
The Society for Personality Assessment, through its Journal, Annual Scientific Meeting, and
Continuing Education Workshops, seeks to develop guidelines for the practice of various aspects of
assessment in different settings and to disseminate these to members of the profession. Where
appropriate, the Society also publishes official position statements on aspects of the practice of
Personality Assessment (Society for Personality Assessment, 2005, 2006). In addition to publication in
the Journal of Personality Assessment, these position statements are made available through the
Society’s web page. As part of this effort, the Society also sponsors research on new developments in
assessment practice as well as funds dissertations. The results of these projects are presented at
national meetings and, where appropriate, published in scientific journals.
An example of this broad effort is a project conducted in relation to assessment supervision. Dialogue
between SPA and APA’s Education Directorate led to a shared recognition that guidelines for
assessment supervision are lacking. The Society sponsored a competitive grant process leading to the
evaluation of a number of proposals of projects that would shed light on current supervisory practices
in assessment. Currently, one study has been published in the Journal for Personality Assessment
(Iwanicki & Peterson, 2016) and a second manuscript will be submitted very soon. The kind of survey
and qualitative data yielded from such a project serves as one foundational element in the
establishment of guidelines, which will foster competent, ethical personality assessment. The Society
Petition Form
Page 89
is continually monitoring areas of practice related to personality assessment to ascertain where further
guideline development would be useful and what research might support the establishment of
guidelines.
Finally, In the process of reviewing the work samples of psychological assessors, the committee has an
opportunity to see where assessors might be having difficulty delivering effective products. Were the
committee to identify such areas, we could propose to the board the drafting of guidelines to assist
psychologists in rendering more useful services. For example, were we to find that psychologists
aspiring to be deemed proficient had difficulty in integrating data from various sources, we could
propose that guidelines be developed to address this problem
References
American Psychological Association. (2010). American Psychological Association ethical principles

of psychologists and code of conduct. Available from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html

Iwanicki, S & Peterson, C. (2016). An Exploratory Study Examining Current Assessment Supervisory
Practices in Professional Psychology. Journal of Personality Assessment, 99, 165-174.
Society for Personality Assessment. (2006). Standards for education and training in psychological
assessment: Position of the Society for Personality Assessment - An official statement of the
Board of Trustees of the Society for Personality Assessment. Journal of Personality
Criterion XI. Provider Identification and Evaluation. The administrative organization(s)

responsible for the proficiency has sound methods for evaluating competence in the proficiency
and recognizing practitioners who have achieved competency.
Commentary: Identifying psychologists who are competent to practice the proficiency

provides a significant service to the public. Assessing the knowledge and skill levels of
these professionals helps increase the ability to improve the quality of services
provided. Initially practitioners competent to practice in the proficiency may simply be
identified by their successful completion of an organized sequence of education and
training. As the proficiency matures it is expected that the proficiency will develop
more formal structures for the recognition of competency in practitioners.
1. Describe how and by whom the proficiency identifies those who are qualified to practice in the
proficiency.
Petition Form
Page 90
Participation in the proficiency process occurs at multiple levels including applicants, the SPA
Proficiency Coordinator, proficiency reviewers (identified as particularly notable in the field of
personality assessment), members of the SPA proficiency committee, and members of the SPA Board
of Trustees.
All licensed psychologists who provide personality assessment services are encouraged to apply for
proficiency recognition. Applicants must meet minimal requirements including a doctoral degree in
clinical, counseling, forensic, health, or industrial-organizational psychology (or a related health-
service psychology degree), completion of internship, and postdoctoral training. Applicants must be
providing personality assessment services under an active license or certification in their jurisdiction.
Applicants may fall into one of several categories depending on years of experience in the field of
personality assessment and related credentials. Applicants who have already demonstrated a certain
standard including ABAP Diplomates or SPA Fellows have a simplified application process whereas
psychologists without such credentials are asked to submit additional materials. Specific details about
these application categories are described in the following section and are available via the SPA
website (and the previously submitted Policies and Procedures Manual). SPA continues to enhance the
advertising of the proficiency to its members and beyond. Along with readily available information on
its website, SPA has developed a brochure for psychologists explaining the application and recognition
process and the importance of the proficiency. This brochure has been distributed in multiple
conferences so far including the APA Convention, Therapeutic Assessment Convention, The
International Rorschach Convention, and The Annual MMPI Symposium. The Society will continue
to reach out to additional organizations and conferences that are related to the field of personality
assessment to further advertise the proficiency and encourage applications.
The Proficiency Coordinator is a position appointed by the SPA Board of Trustees and requires
oversight of the application and recognition process along with advertising of the proficiency.
Proficiency reviewers are licensed psychologists who have been previously recognized as proficient in
personality assessment AND have demonstrated a certain of level of recognized or credentialed
expertise in the area, including either as SPA Fellows or ABAP Diplomates. Such credentials help
ensure that reviewers have exceeded the level of proficiency, to the level of expertise, and thus are
qualified to review the samples submitted by applicants. Many, although not all, reviewers, are
leading figures in the field of personality assessment and have been long term SPA members who have
not only participated in a multitude of trainings but have facilitated and led many of them. Three
reviewers are assigned for each application and the details of the process are described in the next
section as well as the Policies and Procedures Manual.
Members of the SPA Proficiency Committee are highly committed SPA members who volunteer to
support the proficiency effort and work alongside the Proficiency Coordinator in developing and
overseeing the application and recognition process. Some members are also SPA Board of Trustees
members and others are leading figures in the field of personality assessment and long-standing SPA
members who regularly present at the annual convention as well as other professional national
conferences on personality assessment related issues. Finally, the SPA Board of Trustees includes SPA
Petition Form
Page 91
members who are dedicated and highly committed to the field of personality assessment and ensuring
high standards in the field. Some of the positions are appointed while others elected. Most are
voluntary non-paid positions. CVs of reviewers, proficiency coordinator, committee members and
Board members are available upon request.
2. Describe how and by whom the proficiency assesses the competencies of individuals who wish
to be identified as practitioners in this proficiency.
SPA has taken the following steps to identify practitioners in this proficiency.
a) All ABAP certified individuals who have undergone board certification and shown expertise and
excellence in the field of assessment (at a higher level than the proficiency requires) are automatically
"grandfathered" in as long as they are currently providing personality assessment services under an
active license.
b) All Fellows of SPA considered for being similarly "grandfathered", contingent on Board of Trustees
approval. Each Fellow submits a questionnaire that documents assessment experience. A selection of
proficiency reviewers approved by the Board reviews all Fellows applications and endorses those who
meet requirements for final Board review and approval.
c) Regardless of their SPA membership status or lack thereof, applicants who have been providing
personality assessment services as a licensed or certified psychologist for more than 5 years, submit an
application, CV and sample report with testing data. Three reviewers are assigned by the Proficiency
Coordinator to review their application including all materials submitted. Details of this process are
described in the Proficiency Policies and Procedures Manual. Based on their determination they either
endorse a candidate, or not, for recognition. Those applicants endorsed are then submitted to the
Board of Trustees for final review and vote for approval of proficiency recognition. Ten of 14 Board
members must vote to approve a candidate for proficiency to be awarded.
d) Regardless of their SPA membership status or lack thereof, applicants who have been providing
personality assessment services as a licensed or certified psychologist for less than 5 years, submit an
application, CV and sample report with testing data as noted in the item above but also include a
statement from a senior assessment psychologist who can attest to their assessment skills. Such a
statement is available via the Policies and Procedures Manual. The review and recognition process is
the same as noted above.
SPA has developed clear and accessible guidelines for proficiency expectations, application
requirements and the recognition process. Such materials are readily available on the SPA website
http://www.personality.org/about/proficiency-application/. These materials include handouts as well
as brief webinars. The Proficiency Coordinator is available via email to address any questions by
potential applicants as well as those who have gone through the process. SPA has also developed a
Petition Form
Page 92
couple of proficiency based workshops and in the process of developing more to address the various
components of the proficiency. Proficiency based Integrative report workshops have been offered thus
far at the SPA 2016 Annual convention (half day) and the 2016 APA Annual Convention (full day).
This workshop has also been submitted for the 2017 APA convention. Two half day workshops
(Integration and client centered report writing) are offered at the upcoming SPA 2017 Convention.
SPA plans to further develop webinars and other training materials to enhance proficiency for potential
applicants as well as though who may have not met proficiency. A proposal of additional proficiency-
based workshops is included in the Policies and Procedures Manual.
3. Describe how and by whom the proficiency educates the public and the profession concerning
those who are identified as practitioners of this proficiency. How does the public identify
practitioners of the proficiency?
Those recognized as proficient are listed (with their permission) on the SPA website and available to
the public. This list is currently being updated to include more information about providers and
enhance access of information for public consumers and other providers. Initially SPA announced the
names of persons who had recently been recognized via the Exchange newsletter. Such practice may
be resumed in the future. Updates about the proficiency along with its basis and purpose together with
invitations for qualified psychologists to apply are provided regularly via the Exchange newsletter and
e-newsletter sent to SPA members via email. In addition, the proficiency flyer that was initially
developed and distributed at various conferences and trainings that typically have potentially qualified
applicants to further inform the professional community has been updated into a more informative and
formal brochure (see Appendix V). SPA will continue to share this brochure and include invitations
to apply for recognition in professional journals, conference presentations, and newsletters of other
societies and APA Divisions (e.g., Divisions 5, 12, 13, 14, 20, 38, 39, 40, 41, & 42). A similar
brochure aimed to inform the public as well as non-psychologist providers is currently in development
which will also include links to the SPA website and list of those providers listed as proficient.
4. Estimate how many practitioners are qualified to practice in this proficiency (e.g., spend 25%
or more of their time in services characteristic of this proficiency). Provide whatever
demographic information is available.
More than 100,000 psychologists are licensed in the United States (see APA, 2014). Based on limited
information available about current practitioners perhaps 10% practice personality assessment at the
level that would qualify them to apply for the proficiency.
There are currently approximately 65 psychologists recognized as proficient. Specific estimates for
how many qualify are difficult to determine. Among relevant facts, however, the Society for
Personality Assessment includes approximately 1,200 members (excluding student members), and
survey data indicate that: a) assessment is the second most frequent service provided by clinical
psychologists in various settings, after psychotherapy (Phelps, Eisman, & Kohout, 1998); b)
psychologists working in independent practice or in health care or government settings spend 15-23%
Petition Form
Page 93
of their time doing assessment (Phelps et al., 1998); and c) of the 10 psychological tests most widely
used by clinical psychologists, six are Personality Assessment measures, with the Minnesota
Multiphasic Personality Inventory ranking 2nd in frequency of use, the Rorschach Inkblot Method
ranking 4th, and the Thematic Apperception Test ranking 6th (Hogan, 2005).
5. Estimate how many practitioners are qualified to practice in this proficiency (e.g., spend 25%
or more of their time in services characteristic of this proficiency), and whose primary practice
is not within the discipline of psychology (i.e. Pharmacists). Provide whatever demographic
information is available.
Practitioners who are not psychologists are not qualified to practice in this proficiency, so the answer
to the question asked is none. As psychological assessment is exclusively under the purview of
psychologists, this proficiency is exclusively for psychologists who already have a license as a
Psychologist in their state and meet the other noted requirements. This is not a proficiency that would
be offered to anyone outside the discipline.
References
American Psychological Association. (June 2014). How many psychologists are licensed in the
United States? News from APA’s Center for Workforce Studies. Monitor on
Psychology, 45 (6)
Phelps, R., Eisman, E. J., & Kohout, J. (1998). Psychological practice and managed care: Results of
the CAPP practitioner survey. Professional Psychology, 29, 31-36.
Hogan, T. P. (2005). 50 widely used psychological tests. In G. P. Koocher, J. C. Norcross, & S. S. Hill
III (Eds.), Psychologists’ desk reference (2nd ed., pp. 101-107). New York: Oxford University
Press.
http://www.personality.org/about/proficiency-application/
END OF PETITION FORM

JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT, 87(3), 355–357
Copyright © 2006, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
SOCIETY FOR PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT

SOCIETY FOR PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT
Standards for Education and Training in Psychological

Assessment: Position of the Society
for Personality Assessment
An Official Statement of the Board of Trustees
of the Society for Personality Assessment
The Society for Personality Assessment is a national and international professional organiza-
tion devoted to research and practice in the field of psychological assessment. As such, it repre-
sents practitioners of assessment regardless of discipline or degree.
It is the position of the Society that psychological assessment I. Need for Standards for Education
is a specialty that requires intensive and ongoing education and Training in Psychological Assessment
and training to be practiced competently and ethically and in
order to protect the public. At a minimum, practitioners Psychological assessment is a complex specialty within psy-
should adhere to the appropriate standards for educational chological practice that requires specific training. Psychother-
and psychological testing (American Educational Research apy training alone does not prepare the practitioner to provide
Association, et al., 1999; Turner, et al., 2001). With the pres- psychological assessment. Practitioners of competent assess-
sure of managed care for diversified services, and the bur- ment must be conversant with methods of test construction and
geoning of shorter degree programs for mental health practi- the theory of measurement. They must understand the
tioners, the likelihood that more inadequately trained strengths and limitations of particular psychological tests and
individuals will begin to practice assessment has increased. instruments as well as the proper ways of administering them,
Indeed, there have been recent efforts in several states to interpreting them, and integrating them into a coherent and
downgrade the level of professional expertise required to clinically relevant report.
practice assessment by including assessment as a generic ser- It is important to appreciate the difference between two as-
vice under most or all mental health licenses. While many pects of clinical evaluation that are commonly confused: ap-
such programs include education and training in assessment, praisal and psychological assessment. By appraisal we refer
this is not required for licensure in disciplines other than psy- to either informal assessments of patient problems or the use of
chology in most states. rating scales that produce single scores with very specific in-
This document will articulate the rationale that psycho- terpretations. Psychological assessment, on the other hand, is
logical assessment, which heretofore has been a specialty a complex task that involves the integration of information
within psychology, is not a generic mental health service from multiple sources, including psychological tests, to an-
and set forth standards for education and training in this swer complex clinical questions. This distinction is important
area. to clarify what has been confusion about precisely what con-
stitutes “appraisal” and what constitutes “assessment.” Al-
though all clinicians appraise their clients informally and
many use rating scales and other unidimensional instruments,
psychological assessment involves the use of psychological
tests and techniques to derive a complex, detailed, in-depth
Editor’s Note: This is published as an official statement by the
Board of Trustees for the Society for Personality Assessment. A understanding of an individual from multiple data sources to
copy may be obtained from the SPA web page at www.personality. facilitate diagnosis, treatment, and/or outcome. Integrating
org. the complex information from these instruments and tech-
356 SOCIETY FOR PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT
niques requires specialized expertise and training in order to profound impact on the lives of individuals well be-
analyze and formulate the findings competently. yond the sphere of mental health treatment.
Inappropriate or untrained use of psychological assess- 4. Society as a whole is harmed both by inappropriate
ment instruments exposes patients to harm. Unreliable or in- decisions made about individual clients as well as by
valid conclusions drawn from psychological assessment can the loss of confidence in professional judgment re-
be more dangerous than ineffective psychotherapy for four sulting from psychological assessment errors.
reasons:
II. Education and Training Standards
1. Psychological assessment typically involves a rela- for Competent Practice
tively brief encounter with the client. As a conse-
quence, the possibility for serious misinterpretations Comprehensive education and training are essential for com-
is magnified. Therapists typically have many hours to petence in psychological assessment. Assessment requires
get to know an individual, thus improving on the pos- both specific knowledge and specific training that are not
sibility of eventually making an accurate diagnosis. merely an extension of general psychological or psycho-
In addition, for the same reason, there is a greater therapeutic principles. The following are minimal require-
likelihood that a client can recognize inadequate ments for competence in assessment:
treatment and make a change. By contrast, assess- Education: Two or more courses of graduate education in
ments typically occur over the course of one to three psychological assessment with additional coursework in
sessions, so the opportunity to correct an inaccurate psychopathology, diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric dis-
diagnosis or inference on the basis of subsequent in- orders as a pre- or corequisite. More education and training is
formation is far less. Furthermore, by the time a client necessary in order to conduct neuropsychological assess-
notices that the assessor has erred, the assessment is ments. This coursework should include both didactic instruc-
likely to be concluded. tion and practical experience in the following:
2. Psychological test reports usually become a perma-
nent part of an individual’s medical record and are • Psychometric theory, including issues of reliability, va-
likely to follow him or her throughout his or her life, lidity, reference group norms, limits of generalizability,
carrying with them the imprimatur of scientific fact. and test construction.
While ineffective or poorly conducted psychotherapy • Theories of intelligence and human cognition, includ-
can be harmful, it is less likely to leave the kind of re- ing the role of race and ethnicity in intellectual evalua-
cord that will influence subsequent medical decisions tion and the administration and interpretation of cogni-
about the client. The record of treatment will be more tive assessment instruments.
easily viewed as the opinion of a single individual and • Theory, administration, and interpretation of perfor-
therefore held with less certainty. In addition, psycho- mance-based measures of personality such as the Ror-
therapy notes are more protected under privacy regula- schach and major projective tests.
tions than are the results of psychological assessment. • Theory, administration, and interpretation of major
3. Psychological assessments lead to important decisions self-report inventories, such as the MMPI-2 or the PAI,
about clients’ lives. While such assessments are typi- including the applicability of specific population norms
cally used to inform treatment decisions, they can be to individual clients.
used in other ways as well. In addition to informing de- • Appropriate selection of instruments to answer specific
cisions about what kind of psychological, neurologi- referral questions and the construction of a test battery.
cal, or psychiatric treatment—including the need for • Integration of data from multiple data sources, including
hospitalization—to pursue, psychological assessment interview, psychometric tests, and collateral sources.
is used in other contexts that can significantly influ- • Communication of assessment results to different re-
ence high-stakes outcomes in the life of an individual ferring individuals and agencies and feedback to clients
or family. Such decisions include: assessing danger- themselves.
ousness, awarding or denying disability benefits or ac- • Relationship between assessment and treatment.
cess to special education services, and offering or de-
nying employment or security clearance. Training: Supervised practicum, internship, and post-
Psychological assessment also plays an important role terminal degree training in psychological assessment is also
in informing courts and other bodies in various matters essential for the development of competence. This training
concerning decisions as to whether or not an individ- should include regular administration of assessment batteries
ual is to be awarded or denied custody of his or her under the supervision of a licensed professional with expertise
children, compensated for alleged emotional trauma as in assessment throughout the education and training period.
part of civil damages, incarcerated, or put to death. In- Attainment of minimum education and training require-
adequately trained psychological assessors can have a ments in psychological assessment is necessary for entry-
SOCIETY FOR PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT 357
level practice. These minimum standards should not be con- from the adverse impact of incompetent psychological as-
fused with the necessity for the mental health practitioner to sessment. As mentioned above, practitioners should adhere
develop competent and ethical practice, which can only be to appropriate ethical standards. Additionally, Section 9 (As-
obtained through seeking additional educational and training sessment) of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and
opportunities through workshops, consultation, and Code of Conduct (American Psychological Association,
coursework. As is true for any area of mental health practice, 2002) provides well-elaborated guidelines for the practice of
it is the responsibility of practitioners to hone their skills, de- assessment. For any state to give its imprimatur to the prac-
velop new techniques, and remain current with develop- tice of assessment on the part of a group of mental health pro-
ments in the field fessionals who do not possess the education and training out-
lined above risks exposing the public to significant
III. Conclusion unnecessary risk.
Practitioners of any mental health discipline can, in theory,

REFERENCES
fulfill the educational and training requirements necessary to
become proficient in assessment. With this said, historically American Educational Research Association, American Psychological As-
it is doctoral level psychologists who have received such edu- sociation, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). The
cation in the normal course of their training and who have standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC:
conducted the bulk of research that serves as the underpin- Author.
American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychol-
ning for competent practice of psychological testing and of
ogists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 47, 1597–1611.
assessment training models. It is our position that anyone Turner, S. M., DeMers, S. T., Fox, H. R., & Reed, G. M. (2001). APA’s
wishing to practice assessment needs to be held to these stan- guidelines for test user qualifications: An executive summary. American
dards of training and education in order to protect the public Psychologist, 56, 1099–1113.
Section IX: Assessment Psychology
American Psychological Association's Division 12, Society of Clinical Psychology
12/14/16
To: Chair, Commission for Recognition of Specialties and Proficiencies

In Professional Psychology (CRSPPP), American Psychological Association
750 First Street, NE
Washington, D.C. 20002-4242
Re: Petition for Continuation of Recognition of Personality Assessment as a Proficiency
Dear CRSPPP Chair:
I am writing on behalf of Division 12 Section IX (Assessment Psychology) to extend my full

endorsement of the Society for Personality Assessment's petition to continue to include
personality assessment as a professional psychology proficiency. SPA is the premier national
organization of professional psychologists involved in personality assessment and upholds the
highest standards of training, practice, and research in this area. Section IX shares these high
standards, emphasizes that assessment work should be of the highest quality, and recognizes that
competent assessment involves developing a unique and extensive set of knowledge and skills.
Section IX's mission statement reflects on the fact that clinical assessment is the unique
contribution made by psychologists in the field of mental health and is vitally important to such
areas as diagnostic, forensic, neuropsychological, and psychoeducational applications. In
placing importance on high quality assessment as an essential component of our professional
identity, we recognize that acquiring competency in this area often requires considerable
development beyond the foundational training provided in graduate school and internship. We
have therefore truly valued the efforts of SPA in the proficiency process, and we have
collaborated with SPA to materialize our common goals of advancing the science and practice of
assessment psychology at the level that in my opinion meets the definition of a proficiency.
I ask you to give SPA's continuation application your fullest consideration. If you require any
further information from me, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
A. Jordan Wright, Ph.D., ABAP

President, Division 12 Section IX
Maintenance and Renewal of Proficiency Status
The Society for Personality Assessment
General guidelines:
 Psychologists who are recognized as proficient must renew their proficiency status every 5
years to verify the maintenance of their skill set.
 Maintaining the level of proficiency recognized via initial application is similar to the expected
maintenance of competence for licensure.
 All psychology regulatory bodies have a responsibility to the public to ensure the ongoing
competence and high standards of practice for psychologists.
 All licensed psychologists are expected to periodically demonstrate that they have maintained
the competencies needed for their areas of practice so that they continue to practice safely and
with the high standards required of psychologists (MOCAL paper).
 The renewal process is simpler and quicker than the original application and primarily entails
completing an affirmation with a brief questionnaire and a modest processing fee.
Maintenance of competence expectations in Personality Assessment:
 Psychologists are expected to stay current and up to date with instruments utilized, scoring and
interpretation procedures, updated norms especially with respect to certain populations,
demographics, and settings.
 Psychologists are also expected to continue practice within the boundaries of their competence
and to follow all ethical guidelines provided in the field of psychological assessment.
 Finally, psychologists are expected to maintain their competence and proficiency status by
participating in various professional development activities, as described below.
Overview of process:
 Automatic email reminders will be sent via database as expiration dates approach
 Applicants complete the affirmation and pay a processing fee ($20)
 Renewal applications are reviewed by the SPA Proficiency Coordinator
o If there are no concerns, renewal will be approved and certificate issued by SPA Central
Office.
o If there are concerns, renewal application will be brought to the attention of the
Proficiency Committee/SPA Board of Trustees for a decision.
 If a psychologist opts not to renew, an optional survey and request for explanation will be sent.
This is for SPA’s information only, in an effort to improve the proficiency process.
 Those who choose not to renew their proficiency, are rejected, or no longer qualify for
proficiency, will be removed from the SPA website list of proficient psychologists.
Cost:
 A late renewal will result in a $25 fee in addition to $20 processing fee.
Renewal application:
1. Has there been any change to your licensure status since your original application?
Yes, please explain ________________________ No
2. Do you continue to provide personality assessment services (conducting assessment, assessment

consultation, teaching, or supervising assessment)?
Yes No, please explain ________________________
3. Since your original application, have you been the subject of any ethical complaints?
Yes, please explain ________________________ No
4. In the past 5 years, have you participated in at least 20 hours of formal professional development
activities* in the area of personality or psychological assessment?
4a. Have at least 6 of those hours addressed diversity issues?
4b. Have at least 6 of those hours addressed ethics issues?
5. Have you kept up to date with administration, scoring, and interpretation procedures for assessment
measures you utilize in your practice?
By clicking on the 'submit' button, renewal applicants will be certifying that the information
provided is true and correct.
*Formal professional development activities related to assessment may include any of the following:
 Completion of or leading Continuing Education workshop or symposia (in-person, online, or
via home study)
 Publication or formal editorial reviews of peer-reviewed articles
 Attending conferences
 Viewing webinars
 Teaching a relevant course
 Providing supervision
 Receiving or providing peer consultation
Toolkit on Ethics in Personality Assessment
The Society for Personality Assessment
Virginia Brabender and Linda Knauss
Note: This resource list does not include the general ethical resources that exist for
psychological assessment or psychological practice in general. Featured are those
resources that speak to personality assessment, in whole or in part.
Webinar
Knauss, L. K. (2016). Ethical issues in psychological assessment.

http://apaonlineacademy.bizvision.com/product/apa-online-academy-
vods/ethicalissuesinpsychologicalassessment(13998)
Newsletter Articles
Knauss, L.K. (2017). What every psychologist needs to know about research ethics.
SPA Exchange, 29(1), 4,12,13.
Knauss, L.K. (2016). If I am not your client, what am I? SPA Exchange, 28(2), 4, 12, 13.
Knauss, L.K. (2016). Confidentiality after death. SPA Exchange, 28(1), 5, 15, 16.
Knauss, L.K. (2015). Ethical considerations in assessment feedback. SPA Exchange,

27(2), 4,16, 17.
Knauss, L. K. (2015). What is a collateral? SPA Exchange, 27 (1), 5,13,14.
Knauss, L. K. (2014). Ethical considerations in assessment supervision. SPA Exchange,

26, (2), 4, 11, 12.
Knauss, L. K. (2014). Can I use this test? SPA Exchange, 26, (1), 7, 14.
Knauss, L. K. (2013). Ethics, remediation, and competency in assessment.

SPAExchange, 25,(2), 4, 12, 13.
Knauss, L. K. (2013). The pros and cons of computerized assessment. SPA Exchange,
25, (1), 4, 12, 13.
Knauss, L. K. (2012). What do we know about child sexual abuse assessment? SPA
Exchange, 24, (2), 3, 13, 14.
Knauss, L. K. (2012). Ethical considerations in assessment report writing. SPA Exchange, 24

(1), 4, 13, 14.
Knauss, L. K. (2011). Ethics, assessment, and the internet. SPA Exchange, 23(1), 4,12,
13.
Knauss, L. K. (2010). How long do I need to keep this? SPA Exchange, 22(1), 6, 12, 13.
Knauss, L. K. (2009). Informed consent, part II: Ideas for your informed consent
agreement. SPA Exchange, 21(2), 4, 14.
Knauss, L. K. (2009). Are you informed about informed consent? SPA Exchange, 21(1),
4, 14, 15.
Knauss, L. K. (2008). What you need to know about the new APA record-keeping
guidelines. SPA Exchange, 20(2), 4, 12.
Knauss, L. K. (2008). The ethics of self-care. SPA Exchange, 20(1), 4, 12.
Knauss, L. K. (2007). Our ethical responsibility to provide culturally competent

personality assessment. SPA Exchange, 19(2), 4, 12-13.
Knauss, L. K. (2006). Who is the client? SPA Exchange, 18(2), 14-15.
Knauss, L. K. (2006). Avoiding the six harbingers of doom in conducting child custody
evaluations. SPA Exchange, 18(1), 11-12.
Knauss, L. K. (2005). Why don’t we follow the rules? SPA Exchange, 17(2), 14-15.
Knauss, L. K. (2005). Have you been watched? SPA Exchange, 17(1), 8.
Knauss, L. K. (2004). Competence: How much is enough? SPA Exchange, 16(2), 2-5.
Journal articles and book chapters
Alvelo, P. J., Maguire, N., & Knauss, L. K. (2016). Sex, Gender, and Psychological
Assessment: Integrating Principle and Feminist Ethics. In V. Brabender & J.
Mihura (Eds.). Handbook of gender and sexuality in psychological
assessment. Philadelphia, PA: Taylor and Francis (Routledge).
Bersoff, D.N., DeMatteo, D., & Foster, E.E. (2012). Assessment and testing. In S.
Knapp, M. Gottlieb, L. VandeCreek, & M. Handlesman (Eds.), APA handbook
of ethics in psychology, Volume 2 (pp. 45-74). Washington, DC: American
Brabender, V. (2018, in press). Ethics in diversity-sensitive assessment. In S. R.

Smith & R. Krishnamurthy (Eds.). Diversity-sensitive personality
assessment. New York, NY: Routledge
Brabender, V., & Bricklin, P. (2001). Ethical issues in psychological assessment in
different settings. Journal of personality assessment, 77(2), 192-194.
Claassen, C. A., & Lovitt, R. (2001). Solving Ethical Problems in Medical Settings
During Psychological Assessment: A Decisional Model. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 77(2), 215-230.
DeMers, S. T. (1986). Legal and ethical issues in child and adolescent personality
assessment. The Assessment of Child and Adolescent Personality, 35-55.
Knapp, S., & VandeCreek, L. (2001). Ethical issues in personality assessment in

forensic psychology. Journal of Personality Assessment, 77(2), 242-254.
Knauss, L. K. (2001). Ethical issues in psychological assessment in school

settings. Journal of Personality Assessment, 77(2), 231-241.
Krishnamurthy, R., & Yalof, J. A. (2010). The assessment competency. In M.B. Kenkel
& R. L. Peterson (Eds.). Competency-based education for professional
psychology (pp. 87-104). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Koocher, G. P., & Rey‐ Casserly, C. M. (2003). Ethical issues in psychological

assessment. In J. Graham & J. A. Naglieri (Eds.). Handbook of psychology:
Assessment Psychology (Vol. 10, pp. 165-209). New York, NY: John Wiley.
Messick, S. (1964). Personality measurement and the ethics of assessment. ETS

Research Report Series, 1964(2).
Mukherjee, S., & Kumar, U. (2016). Ethical Issues in personality assessment. In U.

Kumar (Ed.) The Wiley Handbook of Personality Assessment, (pp. 415-426).
West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
Russ, S. W. (2001). Tackling ethical dilemmas in personality assessment.Journal of

personality assessment, 77(2), 255-258.
Yalof, J., & Brabender, V. (2001). Ethical dilemmas in personality assessment

courses: Using the classroom for in vivo training. Journal of personality
assessment, 77(2), 203-213.
The Society for
Personality Assessment
(SPA)
PROFICIENCY
IN
PERSONALITY
ASSESSMENT
INFORMATION FOR
SPA offers PSYCHOLOGISTS
psychologists the
opportunity to get
formally recognized
as proficient in Personality Assessment is a
recognized proficiency by
personality the American Psychological
assessment. Association’s (APA)
6109H Arlington Blvd
Commission for the
Falls Church, VA 22044 Recognition of Specialties
703-534-4SPA and Proficiencies in
Apply Online at: or 703-534-4772
http://www.personality.org/abo manager@spaonline.org Professional Psychology
ut/proficiency-application/ proficiency@spaoline.org (CRSPPP).
Proficiency in Personality Assessment
What is a Proficiency? Why is Proficiency ➢ Reviewers make a

Important? recommendation to the SPA
➢ The APA’s Commission for
➢ Provides a basic set Board whether the applicant
the Recognition of
of expectations for all is deemed proficient
Specialties and Proficiencies
in Professional Psychology licensed psychologists ➢ Approval by SPA Board of
(CRSPPP) describes a providing personality Trustees for formal
proficiency as a distinct assessment services recognition
procedure, technique, or ➢ Receive a certificate and
➢ Supports the concept of
applied skill set in have credentials available
using assessment to
professional psychology on the SPA website
understand the “whole
within which one develops
person” ➢ No consequences if not
competence.
deemed proficient and
➢ Establishes a standard of
can reapply at any time
The Proficiency in practice intended to provide
Personality Assessment accurate and helpful Why get Recognized?
assessments
➢ Available via the Society for ➢ A formal way to verify your
Personality Assessment The Application and skills for colleagues, third
(SPA) Recognition Process party providers, and clients
➢ Entails the use of ➢ Submit a Curriculum Vita, a ➢ Enhance the field of
empirically-supported summary of training in assessment by maintaining
measures of personality and personality assessment, and adequate standards of
psychological functioning in a de-identified assessment practice
various settings to foster report
understanding and inform
➢ Materials are reviewed by
interventions and behavioral
prediction
three psychologists with To find out more
established expertise in information,
➢ Requires meaningful assessment including cost,
integration of information ➢ Receive detailed feedback on go to:
from multiple sources into a report utilizing a formal
written report that provides www.personality.org
review form
a basis for useful feedback

Personality Assessment

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Personality Assessment

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PETITION FOR THE RECOGNITION OF A

PROFICIENCY IN PROFESSIONAL PSYCHOLOGY

AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION

PETITION PACKAGE (RENEWAL)

Title of proficiency: Personality Assessment

Definition: A proficiency is a circumscribed activity in the general practice of professional psychology

Criterion I. Administrative Organizations. The proposed proficiency is represented by one or

Name: Society for Personality Assessment (SPA)

Name: Robert Archer PhD APA membership status: Fellow

Year organization founded 1938

Organization incorporated Yes

Describe the purpose and objectives of the administrative organization.

a. Development of methods of Personality Assessment.

APA Status: Fellow

APA Status: Fellow

REPRESENTATIVE-AT-LARGE 518-626-5339 (office) APA Status: None

APA Status: None

REPRESENTATIVE-AT-LARGE APA Status: None

313-993-1440 (office) APA Status: Member

SPA EXCHANGE EDITOR

APA Status: Life Member

PROFICIENCY 408-460-9662 (cell) APA Status: Member

WEB SITE EDITOR jd.smith@northwestern.edu APA Status: None

LIAISON TO APA BOARD OF

SPA committees: Executive Committee, Nominations Committee, Ad Hoc Finance Advisory

SPA Publications: The Journal for Personality Assessment (JPA)

The SPA Exchange Newsletter

SPA Dues Structure: Member/Fellow/Associate - $120.00

Collaborations with additional organizations: The American Board of Assessment Psychology

Robert Archer, PhD SPA President 12/28/2017

Need and Distinctiveness

Personality Assessment provides a comprehensive picture of individual differences in personality

a) Facilitating the alleviation of psychological distress and impairment: the development of a

b) Identification of psychological strengths and resources to determine what stressors the

e) Health-related assessment of factors such as coping and adjustment to physical illness.

f) Assessment of the impact of alleged injuries on plaintiff's personality functioning in personal

h) Identification of the personality resources and vulnerabilities of older adults and, as

i) Assessment of personality characteristics that assist prediction of violent behavior or reoffending

j) Identification of special needs of students in educational settings and formulation of appropriate

2. Describe any regulatory, professional privileging, and/or educational statute or regulation of

c) Guidelines for Computer-based Tests and Interpretations (Committee on Professional

b) Assessment of Individuals with Disabilities Sourcebook - Assessment of Individuals with

c) Guidelines on Multicultural Education, Training, Research, Practice, and

According to Krishnamurthy et al. (2004), training in Personality Assessment requires both

As a result of the de-emphasis on training in the foundational skills of Personality Assessment in

contemporary concepts and models of personality and psychopathology (Ben-Porath, 2012).

c) Wechsler Intelligence Tests - Personality assessors commonly use intelligence tests to

Professional Identity Factors

A proficiency in Personality Assessment will encourage practitioners in this area to identify

American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National

American Psychological Association. (1991). Guidelines for providers of psychological services to

American Psychological Association. (2003). Guidelines on multicultural education, training,

American Psychological Association. (2010). American Psychological Association ethical principles

American Psychological Association. (2011). Guidelines for psychological evaluations in child

American Psychological Association. (2013) Specialty Guidelines for Forensic Psychologists.

Ben-Porath, Y. (2012). Interpreting the MMPI-2RF. University of Minnesota Press.

Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2013). Understanding and using the MMPI-2-RF. In G. P. Koocher, J. C.,

Bornstein, R. F. (2017). Evidence based psychological assessment. Journal of Personality

psychologists. Law and Human Behavior, 15, 655-665.

Economic Employment Opportunity Commission, U.S. Department of Labor (2005). Enforcement

Frank, R. G. & Elliott, T. R. (2000). Handbook of rehabilitation psychology. Washington, DC:

Groth-Marnat, G. & Wright, A. J. (2016). Handbook of psychological assessment, (6 th Edition).

Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.