Report Writing and Testimony

In this chapter, the authors offer suggestions on how to write a report that answers the organizational client’s referral questions in a logical and effective manner. The chapter informs readers of the multiple audiences, well beyond the retaining party, that can be expected to scrutinize a written report, and offers guidance on how to write the report in a manner that anticipates the uses those various audiences may eventually make of the report and on how to avoid common errors. In recognition of the fact that the written report establishes the foundation for any future legal testimony, the authors describe the requirements for the admissibility of expert testimony in federal courts and differences between fact and expert witnesses. Finally, the chapter contains guidance on providing written reports and testimony in instances where the psychologist is retained by the examinee or the examinee’s attorney, as well as referrals for tie-breaking opinions.

Data Collection

This chapter describes the procedures commonly followed in suitability and fitness evaluations, with a particular focus on the collection of data from three sources routinely required for these assessments. The authors discuss best practices for providing examinees with the necessary elements of disclosure about the evaluation, including its probable uses and potential negative outcomes, and for obtaining the examinee’s informed consent. The chapter includes detailed guidance for selecting assessment instruments, brief descriptions of the psychological tests most commonly used in suitability and fitness evaluations, and discussion of the emerging use of executive function measures in suitability evaluations.

Preparation for the Evaluation

In this chapter, the authors review three categories of information psychologists need to obtain before conducting suitability and fitness evaluation: (1) the employer’s foundation for the referral (i.e., whether the employer has demonstrated the legal threshold for mandating the evaluation), (2) the relevant job demands and working conditions of the examinee’s position, and (3) the criterion standard for determining whether the examinee is psychologically suitable or fit for duty. The chapter includes guidance for gathering this necessary information and how to use it to optimize the quality and utility of the evaluation. Also addressed are two other issues that have implications for the evaluation and must be determined in advance: the examinee’s access to the report and records, and the presence of third parties during the evaluation.

Functional Competencies

In this chapter, the authors discuss the functional competencies required to conduct psychological evaluations of police candidates and officers, including “occupational competence,” which includes knowledge about the essential functions of police officers, their working conditions and chain of command, and the psychological demands and stressors of police work. The authors provide guidance on how to self-assess for competency, as well as for bias, that, in relation to a particular referral, may preclude a competent assessment. Included are an explanation of how contemporary challenges in policing may shape the criterion standard for assessing psychological suitability and fitness and a brief summary of six interdisciplinary professional practice standards and guidelines documents—from the United States and Canada—that are especially pertinent to evaluations of police suitability and fitness.

Empirical Foundations

The authors review the published, peer-reviewed studies relevant to two questions: What psychological constructs underlie police officer suitability and fitness? and What assessment instruments provide empirically validated measures of these constructs? In addressing the second question, the authors focus on examples of research related to the most commonly used instruments in these suitability and fitness evaluations (i.e., current versions of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, California Psychological Inventory, Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire, and Personality Assessment Inventory). The discussion is limited to a review of studies published in peer-reviewed journals and pertaining only to versions of the test currently supported by the test’s publisher.

The Legal Framework

This chapter contains an overview of the legal framework, doctrines, and statutes that have a controlling influence on how police suitability and fitness evaluations are conducted in the United States. In a discussion that is rich in easily understood case law and engaging and practical detail, the authors orient the reader to the major federal laws and regulations governing these evaluations and to how the evaluations’ quality and defensibility can be optimized by compliance with the legal requirements. Emphasizing that psychological practice in the employment context is highly regulated by both federal mandates and local rules, the authors provide several examples of assessment procedures that are well accepted when providing healthcare but are illegal when deployed in the employment arena.

Data Interpretation

This chapter begins with a discussion of the benefits of using a data integration model to guide clinical decision-making in suitability and fitness evaluations. The authors note that avoiding reliance on a single data source is a well-established principle in forensic practice. In their experience, in some cases the data fit together neatly like pieces of a jigsaw puzzle, and the resulting suitability and fitness determinations are “no-brainers.” But more often, there is some information that points to problems that are contradicted (or not reported) by other sources. These more typical cases reflect the reality that people can be complicated, and behavior is contextual. The authors then present several examples of integrative models, including one for guiding the integration and interpretation of data in a preemployment evaluation to reach a determination of suitability, and another to facilitate the determination of fitness for duty.