The psychological report: A review of current controversies

Abstract

A summary of the most frequent controversies in report writing is covered. These include length, readability, acknowledging use of poorly validated measures, use of computer-based narratives, inclusion of test scores, degree of integration, inclusion of client strengths, and development of a feedback report. Available research is summarized along with suggestions for future research.

A C.L.E.A.R. Approach to Report Writing: A Framework for Improving the Efficacy of Psychoeducational Reports

“…Some of the primary issues include poor readability, generic interpretation, test-by-test reporting, focus on client weaknesses, report length, and poor links between the referral questions and the results and recommendations (see Beutler & Groth-Marnat, 2003;Brenner, 2003;Groth-Marnat, 2003a, 2003bGroth-Marnat & Horvath, 2006;Harvey, 1997Harvey, , 2006. Some of the primary issues include poor readability, generic interpretation, test-by-test reporting, focus on client weaknesses, report length, and poor links between the referral questions and the results and recommendations (see Beutler & Groth-Marnat, 2003;Brenner, 2003;Groth-Marnat, 2003a, 2003bGroth-Marnat & Horvath, 2006;Harvey, 1997Harvey, , 2006.…”

“…The issue of report readability has been noted as a limiting factor by a number of researchers (e.g., Brenner, 2003;Groth-Marnat, 2009;Groth-Marnat & Horvath, 2006;Harvey, 1997Harvey, , 2006. The issue of report readability has been noted as a limiting factor by a number of researchers (e.g., Brenner, 2003;Groth-Marnat, 2009;Groth-Marnat & Horvath, 2006;Harvey, 1997Harvey, , 2006.…”

“…For example, many reports present results test by test, report irrelevant information, and use excessive jargon in interpretation. Given that clients have significant access to their reports, reading a deficitfocused report can be discouraging for the client and may instill feelings of frustration with the mental health system and isolation from the practitioner (Groth-Marnat & Horvath, 2006;Snyder et al, 2006). However, as this writing style is more efficient from the psychologist's perspective, many practitioners continue to write reports in this format despite the fact that doing so often reduces the likelihood of the report being read in its entirety (Ackerman, 2006).…”

“…It is based on a set of five core principles that have been derived from a review of extant empirical and conceptual literature on report-writing (e.g., Appelbaum, 1970;Brenner, 2003;Groth-Marnat, 2009;Groth-Marnat & Horvath, 2006). Approach is intended to provide an organized and accessible framework for achieving more effective and consumer-focused psychological reports.…”

Neurobehavioral assessment in forensic practice

“…Computerized narratives are all too frequently adopted by evaluators as is, which is contrary to the best practices for psychologists using this type of information. These computerized narratives have been criticized as lacking validity, being devoid of social history context, inaccurate and misleading, and often false (Butcher, Perry, & Atlis, 2000; Butcher, Perry, & Hahn, 2004; Groth-Marnat & Horvath, 2006). The scales of these instruments, however, reflect personality traits not symptoms relevant to neurodevelopmental disorders; thus, the protocols carefully advise that an elevated scale is insufficient to diagnose a person; for example, an elevated “schizophrenia” scale does not mean the person is schizophrenic and an elevated “psychopathic deviant” scale does not mean the person is psychopathic.…”