测试安全实践的IOPC调查和持牌心理学家的观点。

IF 3 3区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Robert A Beattey, Heidi Allison Bender, Delia M Silva, Kyle Brauer Boone, Melissa Friedman, Paul M Kaufmann, Jonathan C Woodhouse, Jerry J Sweet
{"title":"测试安全实践的IOPC调查和持牌心理学家的观点。","authors":"Robert A Beattey, Heidi Allison Bender, Delia M Silva, Kyle Brauer Boone, Melissa Friedman, Paul M Kaufmann, Jonathan C Woodhouse, Jerry J Sweet","doi":"10.1080/13854046.2025.2528903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objective</b>: To evaluate the positions, policies, and practices regarding test security among psychologists and neuropsychologists who engage in clinical and forensic assessment practice. <b>Methods</b>: The Inter-Organizational Practice Committee (IOPC) undertook a survey of licensed practitioners who regularly conduct neuropsychological and psychological testing. An online survey captured respondent data between October and December 2023. <b>Results</b>: Once duplicates and individuals with non-confirmable psychology licensure were removed, 628 licensed psychologist respondents comprised the sample, which consisted primarily of individuals who identify as neuropsychologists. Respondents overwhelmingly favored keeping test materials secure and not divulging information to attorneys (≥98.%). There was near consensus (94.5%) that a protective order issued by a judge is not sufficient to ensure test security. <b>Conclusion</b>: The current survey assessing the practices and perspectives of neuropsychologists and psychologists who engage in testing represents the largest known canvas of the discipline examining test security. Findings indicate that individuals who engage in such testing expressed strong agreement regarding the necessity of protecting against release of information that would threaten future validity of test usage. Notably, even protective orders issued by a judge, which are often cited by third parties in favor of releasing information, are not viewed by practitioners as adequately protective. Rather, neuropsychologists and practitioners administering psychological testing endorse a high degree of agreement regarding the critical importance in maintaining the clinical and scientific rigor upon which psychology and neuropsychology rely.</p>","PeriodicalId":55250,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"IOPC survey of test security practices and perspectives of licensed psychologists.\",\"authors\":\"Robert A Beattey, Heidi Allison Bender, Delia M Silva, Kyle Brauer Boone, Melissa Friedman, Paul M Kaufmann, Jonathan C Woodhouse, Jerry J Sweet\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13854046.2025.2528903\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objective</b>: To evaluate the positions, policies, and practices regarding test security among psychologists and neuropsychologists who engage in clinical and forensic assessment practice. <b>Methods</b>: The Inter-Organizational Practice Committee (IOPC) undertook a survey of licensed practitioners who regularly conduct neuropsychological and psychological testing. An online survey captured respondent data between October and December 2023. <b>Results</b>: Once duplicates and individuals with non-confirmable psychology licensure were removed, 628 licensed psychologist respondents comprised the sample, which consisted primarily of individuals who identify as neuropsychologists. Respondents overwhelmingly favored keeping test materials secure and not divulging information to attorneys (≥98.%). There was near consensus (94.5%) that a protective order issued by a judge is not sufficient to ensure test security. <b>Conclusion</b>: The current survey assessing the practices and perspectives of neuropsychologists and psychologists who engage in testing represents the largest known canvas of the discipline examining test security. Findings indicate that individuals who engage in such testing expressed strong agreement regarding the necessity of protecting against release of information that would threaten future validity of test usage. Notably, even protective orders issued by a judge, which are often cited by third parties in favor of releasing information, are not viewed by practitioners as adequately protective. Rather, neuropsychologists and practitioners administering psychological testing endorse a high degree of agreement regarding the critical importance in maintaining the clinical and scientific rigor upon which psychology and neuropsychology rely.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55250,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-13\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Neuropsychologist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2025.2528903\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Neuropsychologist","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13854046.2025.2528903","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价从事临床和法医评估实践的心理学家和神经心理学家在考试安全方面的立场、政策和做法。方法:组织间实践委员会(IOPC)对定期进行神经心理学和心理测试的执业医师进行了调查。一项在线调查收集了2023年10月至12月期间的受访者数据。结果:一旦重复和个人与不可确认的心理学执照被删除,628名持牌心理学家受访者组成的样本,其中主要包括个人谁认定为神经心理学家。绝大多数受访者支持保护测试材料的安全,不向律师泄露信息(≥98%)。几乎一致认为(94.5%)法官发布的保护令不足以确保测试安全。结论:目前的调查评估了从事测试的神经心理学家和心理学家的实践和观点,代表了检验测试安全性的学科中最大的已知画布。调查结果表明,参与此类测试的个人对防止泄露可能威胁测试使用未来有效性的信息的必要性表示强烈同意。值得注意的是,即使是由法官发布的保护令,通常被第三方引用以支持发布信息,也不被从业人员视为充分的保护。相反,神经心理学家和管理心理测试的从业者对保持心理学和神经心理学所依赖的临床和科学严谨性的关键重要性达成了高度一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
IOPC survey of test security practices and perspectives of licensed psychologists.

Objective: To evaluate the positions, policies, and practices regarding test security among psychologists and neuropsychologists who engage in clinical and forensic assessment practice. Methods: The Inter-Organizational Practice Committee (IOPC) undertook a survey of licensed practitioners who regularly conduct neuropsychological and psychological testing. An online survey captured respondent data between October and December 2023. Results: Once duplicates and individuals with non-confirmable psychology licensure were removed, 628 licensed psychologist respondents comprised the sample, which consisted primarily of individuals who identify as neuropsychologists. Respondents overwhelmingly favored keeping test materials secure and not divulging information to attorneys (≥98.%). There was near consensus (94.5%) that a protective order issued by a judge is not sufficient to ensure test security. Conclusion: The current survey assessing the practices and perspectives of neuropsychologists and psychologists who engage in testing represents the largest known canvas of the discipline examining test security. Findings indicate that individuals who engage in such testing expressed strong agreement regarding the necessity of protecting against release of information that would threaten future validity of test usage. Notably, even protective orders issued by a judge, which are often cited by third parties in favor of releasing information, are not viewed by practitioners as adequately protective. Rather, neuropsychologists and practitioners administering psychological testing endorse a high degree of agreement regarding the critical importance in maintaining the clinical and scientific rigor upon which psychology and neuropsychology rely.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Neuropsychologist
Clinical Neuropsychologist 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
12.80%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Clinical Neuropsychologist (TCN) serves as the premier forum for (1) state-of-the-art clinically-relevant scientific research, (2) in-depth professional discussions of matters germane to evidence-based practice, and (3) clinical case studies in neuropsychology. Of particular interest are papers that can make definitive statements about a given topic (thereby having implications for the standards of clinical practice) and those with the potential to expand today’s clinical frontiers. Research on all age groups, and on both clinical and normal populations, is considered.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信