Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to submit your manuscript to SPPS

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Assessment
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by McMinn, M. R.
Right arrow Articles by Soref, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McMinn, M. R.
Right arrow Articles by Soref, E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Ethical Perspectives and Practice Behaviors Involving Computer-Based Test Interpretation

Mark R. McMinn

Brent M. Ellens

Erez Soref

Wheaton College

The debates of the 1980s regarding responsible use of computer-based test interpretation (CBTI) software have mostly disappeared, as CBTI use has become common practice. We surveyed 364 members of the Society for Personality Assessment to determine how they use CBTI software in their work and their perspectives on the ethics of using CBTI in various ways. Psychologists commonly use CBTI software for test scoring and to provide a complementary source of input for case formulations. Most do not use CBTI software as the primary way to formulate a case, nor as an alternative to a written report. Controversy and uncertainty were expressed about importing sections of CBTI narratives into psychological reports. We distinguish between support and replacement functions of CBTI use, arguing that adequate research evidence should be present before using CBTI as a replacement for established assessment procedures.

Key Words: Computer-based test interpretation • personality assessment • professional ethics • psychological testing • report writing

Assessment, Vol. 6, No. 1, 71-77 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/107319119900600108
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Journal of Career AssessmentHome page
J. P. Sampson Jr., M. P. Purgar, and J. D. Shy
Computer-Based Test Interpretation in Career Assessment: Ethical and Professional Issues
Journal of Career Assessment, February 1, 2003; 11(1): 22 - 39.
[Abstract] [PDF]