The end of the world as we know it (and I feel fine): comment on Erard.
We review Erard's (this issue) article. We laud him for the measured tone and carefully reasoned position that is taken. Although his main point that The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and the new American Psychological Association (APA) Ethics Code (2002) need not be seen as disasters for the practice of assessment, we pose several problems with his analysis. In particular, we argue that although his point that test security is not airtight at present is well taken, nonetheless, it is important to set the bar as high as possible to limit breaches in security. Although Erard is correct that more complex instruments may withstand attempts to manipulate the results, many smaller or more focused instruments may be irrevocably damaged. Furthermore, the release of raw test data can have a deleterious effect in the clinical arena, especially in instances in which it could be subject to misinterpretation and misuse. Finally, we criticize the APA for subjugating the interests of the profession to political expediency.
Smith
Bruce L
BL
Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, USA. blsmith@socrates.berkeley.edu
Evans
F Barton
FB
D032781:Codes of Ethics / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D030881:Disclosure / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D020408:Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act; D006801:Humans; D011581:Psychological Tests; D012958:Societies, Scientific; D014481:United States