ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to critically examine the instruments used in the screening process, with particular attention given to supporting research validation. Psychological screening is a well-established process used in the selection of employees across public safety industries, particularly in police settings. Screening in and screening out are both possible, with screening out being the most commonly used method. Little attention, however, has been given to evaluating the comparative validities of the instruments used. Design/methodology/approach – This review investigates literature supporting the use of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), the California Personality Inventory (CPI), the Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI), the Australian Institute of Forensic Psychology's test battery (AIFP), and some other less researched tests. Research supporting the validity of each test is discussed. Findings – It was found that no test possesses unequivocal research support, although the CPI and AIFP tests show promise. Most formal research into the validity of the instruments lacks appropriate experimental structure and is therefore less powerful as “evidence” of the utility of the instrument(s). Practical implications – This research raises the notion that many current screening practices are likely to be adding minimal value to the selection process by way of using instruments that are not “cut out” for the job. This has implications for policy and practice at the recruitment stage of police employment. Originality/value – This research provides a critical overview of the instruments and their validity studies rather than examining the general process of psychological screening. As such, it is useful to those working in selection who are facing the choice of psychological instrument. Possibilities for future research are presented, and development opportunities for a best practice instrument are discussed.
Thisisthepublishedversion:
Lough,JonathanandVonTreuer,Kathryn2013,Acriticalreviewofpsychologicalinstruments
usedinpoliceofficerselection,Policing,vol.36,no.4,pp.737‐751.
AvailablefromDeakinResearchOnline:
http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30059560
Reproducedwiththekindpermissionofthecopyrightowner.
Copyright:2013,EmeraldGroupPublishing
Acriticalreviewofpsychological
instrumentsusedinpolice
officerselection
JonathanLoughandKathrynVonTreuer
Psychology,DeakinUniversity,Burwood,Victoria,Australia
Abstract
PurposeThepurposeofthispaperistocriticallyexaminetheinstrumentsusedinthescreening
process,withparticularattentiongiventosupportingresearchvalidation.Psychologicalscreeningis
awellestablishedprocessusedintheselectionofemployeesacrosspublicsafetyindustries,
particularlyinpolicesettings.Screeninginandscreeningoutarebothpossible,withscreeningout
beingthemostcommonlyusedmethod.Littleattention,however,hasbeengiventoevaluatingthe
comparativevaliditiesoftheinstrumentsused.
Design/methodology/approachThisreviewinvestigatesliteraturesupportingtheuseofthe
MinnesotaMultiphasicPersonalityInventory(MMPI),theCaliforniaPersonalityInventory(CPI),the
InwaldPersonalityInventory(IPI),theAustralianInstituteofForensicPsychology’stestbattery
(AIFP),andsomeotherlessresearchedtests.Researchsupportingthevalidityofeachtestis
discussed.
FindingsItwasfoundthatnotestpossessesunequivocalresearchsupport,althoughtheCPIand
AIFPtestsshowpromise.Mostformalresearchintothevalidityoftheinstrumentslacksappropriate
experimentalstructureandisthereforelesspowerfulas“evidence”oftheutilityofthe
instrument(s).
PracticalimplicationsThisresearchraisesthenotionthatmanycurrentscreeningpracticesare
likelytobeaddingminimalvaluetotheselectionprocessbywayofusinginstrumentsthatarenot
“cutout”forthejob.Thishasimplicationsforpolicyandpracticeattherecruitmentstageofpolice
employment.
Originality/valueThisresearchprovidesacriticaloverviewoftheinstrumentsandtheirvalidity
studiesratherthanexaminingthegeneralprocessofpsychologicalscreening.Assuch,itisusefulto
thoseworkinginselectionwhoarefacingthechoiceofpsychologicalinstrument.Possibilitiesfor
futureresearcharepresented,anddevelopmentopportunitiesforabestpracticeinstrumentare
discussed.
KeywordsManagement,Selection,Psychology,Screening,Validity
PapertypeLiteraturereview
Generalpractice:psychologicalscreeninginparamilitarysettings
Policeandsimilarorganizationsaroundtheworldfacethechallengeofselectingapplicantswhowill
becomesuccessfulonthejobperformers.Societyexpectspoliceofficers(andotherpublicsafety
personnel,suchasfirefightersandcorrectionalofficers)tobehaveaccordingtocertainstandards.
Thenatureofpolicingmakesthejobdangerous,whilealsoprovidingofficerswithuniqueauthority.
Itisgenerallyacknowledgedthatpsychologicalscreening,orprofiling,asapersonnelselection
processfortheseorganizationsisaviablemeansofassessingcandidatesforemployment.Job
personfitisparticularlyimportantinapublicsafetyposition.Useofprofilingforselectioninthe
policeindustryiswellestablished,particularlyintheUSA(Guller,1993,1994a;Ho,2001;White,
2008).Thebenefitsofprofilingincludereducedstaffturnoveranddecreasedlikelihoodofpoorjob
performance,whichleadtoconsiderablefinancialbenefit(e.g.Choy,1998).However,the
instrumentsusedforprofiling,andtheprocessesandresearchrelatedtousingthem,needtobe
validinorderforthemtoservetheirpurpose.Itistheaimofthisreviewtoexaminetheinstruments
usedinthescreeningprocesswiththeaimofidentifyingwhichinstrument,ifany,providesthe
greatestbenefitfortheselectionprocess.
Itshouldbenotedthatthevastmajorityofresearchinthisfieldhasbeenconductedwithpolice
officersandpolicecandidates;assuch,thisreviewwillfocusonresearchfrompolicerelatedstudies.
Researchinvolvingotherjurisdictionsdoesexistforexample,Loughetal.(2007)examinedthe
differencesbetweenscreenedandunscreenedcorrectionalofficers’jobperformances.However,as
themainbodyofworkrelatestopolicework,thisreviewwillbeconfinedtothediscussionofthat
sphere.Thisissupportedbytheargumentthatpolicerelatedfindingsmaybepartlygeneralizableto
otherjurisdictions(e.g.Barretetal.,1999;Brough,2005).
Howpsychologicalscreeningworks
Thebenefitsofpsychologicalscreeningthatgoesbeyondthestraightforwardinterviewprocessare
wellestablished(Blau,1994).Objectivepsychologicalassessmentreducesriskfromphenomena
suchasinterviewerbias,interinterviewdisagreement,andhaloeffects.Thecapacityof
standardizedinstrumentstoallowbenchmarkingtoanappropriatenormativepopulationfurther
increasestheirusefulness.
Theoperationalaspectsofpsychologicalassessmentarewelldocumented(e.g.Murphyand
Davidshofer,1994).Essentially,theprocessinvolvestheadministrationofoneormorevalid
psychologicaltestsinordertoassessaperson’ssuitabilitytoataskorsituation.Thetests’findings
areevaluatedbyapsychologist,wholooksforevidenceormarkersintherespondent’sprofilethat
suggestsuitabilityorunsuitabilityforaparticularrole.Psychologicalscreeninginanappliedsetting
isthepracticalapplicationofsuchassessmentsthetestee(anapplicanttothepolicedepartment)
undertakestheassessmentaspartoftheirapplication.Theresultingdataandreportarethenused
bypolicepsychologiststoassistindeterminingthesuitabilityoftheapplicantforpoliceduties.
Testingusuallyinvolvestheadministrationofaformalinstrument(suchastheMinnesota
MultiphasicPersonalityInventory(MMPI))and,inmostcases,aninterview(oftenwitha
psychologist;Blau,1994).Thisreviewfocussesonthefirstpartofthisprocesstheformal
instrument.Thefunctionalgoalofthescreeningprocessisanimportantelementinpsychological
screening.Comparingthedifferentmethodsof“screeningin”(selectionbasedondesirabletraits)vs
“screeningout”(eliminationbasedonundesirabletraits)isanimportantissue.Itisacknowledged
(e.g.HoggandWilson,1995;Meieretal.,1988)thatscreeninginisamoredifficultprocess.
However,itisgenerallysuggestedthatbothapproachesshouldbeusedintandemforoptimal
resultsinthepoliceenvironment(e.g.Hensonetal.,2010;Metchik,1999).Measuresfocussedon
detectingpathology,suchastheMMPI,aremoreusefulasscreenoutmechanisms,whilesome
personalityinstrumentsandscalesparticularlythosemeasuringdesirableorpositivetraitsare
potentiallysuitedtoscreeningin(e.g.Guller,2003).
Thetimingofpsychologicalassessmentsinapotentialemployee’sapplicationprocessisan
importantvariablethatcandifferaccordingtonationallaws.Forexample,intheUSA,the
introductionoftheAmericanswithDisabilitiesActin1992effectivelyeliminatedpurepre
employmentscreeningusingtestsofpsychopathology(suchastheMMPI).Thishasresultedinthese
testsbecomingadministrableonlyonceaconditionalofferofemploymenthasbeenmade.Thishas
hinderedresearchintotheeffectivenessofmanyinstrumentsthatuseAmericanpolicesamples,and
hasreducedthereturnoninvestment(ROI)benefitsconferredbytesting(WeissandInwald,2010).
Bycontrast,nosuchlegalrequirementexistsinAustralia,wherepsychologicalscreeningisgenerally
consideredastandardcomponentofthepreemploymentselectionprocess.
Theusefulnessofaninstrumentinthescreeningprocessultimatelyfocussesononecentral
question:howwelldoestheinstrumentpredictperformanceparticularlypoorperformance?The
answertothisquestionliesintheresearchsurroundingtheinstrument.Thisreviewwillnowfocus
onthemostfrequentlyusedinstruments,andwillcriticallyexaminetheresearchunderpinningtheir
useinappliedsettings.Thereaderwillnotethatsingleinstruments,suchastheMMPI,are
comparedwithtestbatteriessuchastheMatrixPredictiveUniformLawEnforcementSelection
Evaluation(MPULSE)andAustralianInstituteofForensicPsychology(AIFP)system.Whilethismay
seemunfaironthesurfaceabattery,orsuiteoftests,shouldlogicallycovermoregroundthana
singleinstrumentthecomparisonisvalidonthebasisofcurrentpractices.Thatis,manypolice
departmentsusesingleinstrumentssuchastheMMPIasthesolepsychologicalscreeningtool
(Aamodt,2010);itisthereforefairtocomparesingleinstrumentswithtestbatteries.
TheMMPI
Instrumentoverview
TheMMPIhasbeenusedinmorepolicerelatedselectionresearchthananyotherinstrument
(Aamodt,2004).TheoriginalMMPIwasdesignedin1940asameasureofpsychological
maladjustmentforassessingpatientsseekingpsychiatrichelp(Butcher,2005).Thetestwasrevised
in1989andreissuedastheMMPI2.Bothversionsconsistof567itemstowhichtherespondentis
requiredtoindicateeither“true”or“false.”Theinstrument’stenclinicalscalesmeasurevarious
typesofpathology.Any“Tscore”(standardizedscore)above70(orabove65intheMMPI2)
indicatesthelikelihoodofpsychologicalmaladjustment.Threeothernonclinicalscalesindicatehow
honestthesubjectwasinansweringthequestions.Thesescalesseektoindicateiftherespondent
wasattemptingtoappearbetteradjustedthanheorsheactuallywas(fakinggood);was
manufacturingorexaggeratingsymptoms(fakingbad,ormalingering);orwasrespondingcandidly.
Morerecently,anumberofRestructuredClinical(RC)scalesweredevelopedtocorrectforsome
overlapintheoriginalclinicalscales(Graham,2006).ThiswasfollowedbytheMMPI2Restructured
Form(RF).Consistingof338items,thisisdescribedasmorestatisticallyrigorousandisconsidered
tobebasedonwellestablishedtheoreticalmodelsofpersonalityandpathology(BenPorathand
Tellegen,2008).Atthisstage,theRCscalesandtheMMPI2RFhavehadminimalresearchattention
inthefieldofpoliceapplicantscreening(Sellbometal.,2007).
EarlyreviewsofMMPIresearch
BurbeckandFurnham(1985)reviewedfivestudiesontheMMPIandpoliceselectionconducted
between1964and1980.Theyconcludedthat“ithasnotbeenpossible[y]toshowwhether
psychologicaltesting[theMMPI]candiscriminatebetweenpoliceofficersandmembersofthe
public,orbetweengoodandbadpoliceofficers[y]psychologicaltestingmaybeusefulforselecting
outpeoplesufferingfromsomementalabnormality.”Similarly,inreviewing18studiesonthe
MMPI,Simmersetal.(2003,p.287)notedthattheMMPIwasoriginallydesignedtopredict
psychopathologyandsubsequently“doesnotappeartobeausefulgaugeforidentifyingcertain
behaviorsinthelesspathologicalrange.”Theyarguedthatmanyskillsthatareessentialforsuccess
asapoliceofficermaygoundetected.
Ametaanalysisthatincludedover300studiesofMMPIresearchdatabyAamodt(2004)observed
thatcorrelationsbetweenMMPIscalesandmeasuresofacademyandpatrolperformancewerelow,
andthatthemajoritywerenotstatisticallysignificant.CorrelationsbetweenMMPIscalesand
disciplineproblemsandcommendationsalsoshowednocorrelation.Aamodtconcludedthat
“becausetheFscaleiscomprisedofitemsfromtheotherclinicalscalesandbecauseitis
significantlyrelatedtobothacademyperformance(R+0.11)andsupervisorratingsofperformance
(R=0.09),itisprobablythemostusefulindividualMMPIscale”(p.94).Thisconclusionsaysagreat
dealabouttheutilityoftheotherscales.Whilethesecorrelationsmaybestatisticallysignificant,
theyareverysmalltheFscaleaccountsforlessthan1percentofthevarianceofsupervisor
ratingsofperformance.Thus,thescalesareunlikelytobeofanyclinicalorpracticalassistance.
MoredetailedexaminationofMMPIresearch
WhileAamodt’s(2004)metaanalysisprovidedarelativelyrecenttechnicaloverviewofMMPIdata,
amorequalitativereviewofMMPIresearch,itself,iswarranted.WeissandWeiss(2010a)discussed
thegeneralstateofMMPIresearch,andconcludedthattheMMPIhasmuchtooffertothe
disciplineofpolicepsychology.However,theystatedthattheMMPIis“notrecommendedasa
standaloneforscreening,butitcanbeusedinconjunctionwithotheroneormoreother
instruments”(p.69).Thisstatementappearscongruentwiththebulkofpublishedliterature.This
reviewwillnowdiscussarepresentativesampleofMMPIrelatedresearch.Acompletely
comprehensivediscussionofallrelevantstudies,giventhesizeoftheliteraturebase,isbeyondthe
scopeofthispaper.
Inconclusivestudies.ManystudiesexaminingtheefficacyoftheMMPIasaselectiontoolhave
yieldednegativeorinconclusivefindings.Azenetal.(1973)studied100newlyhiredsheriffsinLos
Angeles,andconcludedthatMMPIscoreswereunsuccessfulinpredictingdropouts.Researchby
Schoenfeldetal.(1980)andMerianetal.(1980)comparedgroupsofproblempoliceperformers
withacontrolgroup.NosignificantdifferencesbetweentheMMPIprofilesofthetwogroupswere
detectedineitherstudy.DralleandBaybrook(1985)usedasimilarapproachandreportedsimilar
resultsnosignificantMMPIscalecorrelationswerepresentamonganyperformancecriteriafor
thesampleof356policeapplicants.
Inwald(1988)used16predictorvariables,includingavarietyofpsychologicaltests,aswellasclinical
judgmentsstudiedinvaryingcombinations.Thesewereappliedto219“publicsafetyofficers”who
hadremainedonthejobforfiveyears.Amongthatgroup,28werefiredforcause.Inthiscase,
clinicalinterpretationoftheMMPIwastheleastaccuratepredictorofperformanceissues.A
computergeneratedpredictionofterminationorretentionbasedonearlierMMPIresearch
(Shusmanetal.,1984)misidentifiedthegreatestpercentageofapparentlysuccessfulofficersby
predictingtheywouldbeterminated.Thismethodincorrectlyrejected36percentofthegroupof
219(78individuals)aTypeOneerror.
OtherstudieshavefocussedonmorespecificaspectsoftheperformanceofMMPIscales.Hargrave
etal.(1988)foundnopredictiveutilityonaderivedaggressionindex,asdevelopedfromthree
MMPIscales.SimilarfindingsfromacommensuratemethodologywerereportedbyCastoraetal.
(2003).Costelloetal.(1996)examineddisciplinarysuspensiondaysamongservingpoliceofficers,
andfounda0.223correlationwiththeF+Pd+Mascale.Theyconcludedthattherelationship
“appearsunimpressive”(p.302)andthatfurtherconstructvalidationisnecessarytodeterminethe
potentialusefulnessoftheindex.
DanielsandKing(2002)notedthatMMPIscaleswereunabletomakeanydistinctionbetween
successfulandunsuccessfulperformers,asdeterminedbysupervisorratings.Bartoletal.(1992)
reportedthattheMMPIwasnotastrongpredictorofselfreportedstress.Byusingperformance
ratingsandMMPItocompareapplicantsintwomajorUScities,Winters(1990)concludedthatthere
wasnocorrelationbetweentestsscoresandjobperformance.Thesameconclusionwasreachedby
Wrightetal.(1990),whostudiedpoliceperformanceattheendofa14weektrainingcourse.
Surretteetal.(2004)cametoasimilarconclusion.TheyexaminedMMPIspecialscalescoresand
supervisorratingsof129experiencedpoliceofficers,anddeclaredthat“scoresontheGood
Cop/BadCop,HusemannIndex,GoldbergIndex,andGonderIndexwerenotsignificantlyrelatedto
supervisorratings”(p.71).
Studieswithpositivefindings.Alargenumberofstudieshavereportedpositivedataregardingthe
MMPI’sabilitytoaddpredictivepowertopoliceselection.However,manyofthesestudieshad
designissuesthatunderminedanyresearchevidenceoftheMMPI’sutility.Thissectionpresentsa
representativeselectionofthesestudies.
Severalauthors(e.g.Bartol,1982;Bernsteinetal.,1982)reportedsignificantfindingsthatwere
basedonstatisticalcalculationsofrawscores.Thisstudymethodcanbemisleadingbecause,inthe
actualpracticeofMMPIinterpretation,rawscoresareneverused.Interpretationofthetestresults
isalwaysundertakenfromthescaledscores,asthebodyofvalidityresearchsupportingtheMMPIis
allbasedonscalednotrawscores(Butcher,2005).Further,inthesestudies,whenthereported
rawscoreswereconvertedtoTscores,thestatisticallysignificantdifferencesdisappeared,andthe
meanTscoreswereallinthenormalrange.Thismadeitimpossibletoobtainanyclinical
differences.Bernsteinetal.(1982)reportedfollowupdataon120policewhocompletedtheMMPI
priortobeingemployed.SignificantcorrelationsbetweenMMPIrawscoresandfieldperformance
werereported.However,whentherawscoreswereconvertedtoTscores,allwereintheaverage
range.Undertheseconditions,itisunlikelythatapsychologistusingthetestforscreening
applicantswouldfindanymeaningfuldata.
Bartol(1982)administeredtheMMPIto102malepoliceapplicantsand,usingrawscores,reported
astatisticallysignificant“elevation”onfiveMMPIscalesforthoseofficersrated“belowaverage”
throughsupervisorperformanceratings.Whentherawscoresforeachofthethreegroupsofpolice
weretranslatedtoTscores,allwereintheaveragerange,whicheliminatedtheabilityto
differentiatebetweenthegroups.Thissuggeststhatalloftheapplicantslooked“normal”according
totheusualcriteriaoftestinterpretation.
SimilarissueswerepresentinBartol’s(1991)investigationof600policeofficers.Bartolfoundthat
officerswhowere“elevated”onthePd(PsychopathicDeviate),Ma(Hypomania),orL(Lie)scales
werelaterdescribedasimmaturebysupervisors.
Combiningthesethreescoresresultedinanimmaturityindex;however,therewasnodescriptionof
whatconstitutedanelevatedscore.Thedifferenceinimmaturityscoresbetweenthosewhowere
terminatedorforcedtoresignandthosewhoretainedemploymentwasdescribedashighly
significant.However,whenthereportedrawscoreswereconvertedtoTscores,thedifferences
betweenthetwogroupsdisappeared,andallsubjectsscoredwithintheaveragerange.Therefore,
theindexappearstohavelittleornoclinicalutility.
Severalstudies(e.g.Beutleretal.,1985;HiattandHargrave,1988ab)reportedstatistically
significantintergroupdifferencesbetweenoneormorescoresonMMPIscales,withthesuggestion
thatsuchfindingsshowtheMMPIcandiscriminatebetweengoodandpoorperformers.Upon
inspection,itwasnotedthattwoissuesrecurredinthesestudies.First,thedifferencesinscale
scoresweresosmallthattheywouldbeunhelpfulintheactualtaskofscreeningpoliceapplicants.
Second,despitethedifferences,thescoresforgoodandpoorperformerswereentirelywithinthe
normalrange.SaxeandReiser(1976)acknowledgedthislatterdifficultyinpracticalapplication.
Theyreportedsignificantdifferencesbetweenseveralgroups,butaddedthat“thesedifferencesare
allwithinthe“normal”rangeandaretoosmall[y]tohavemeaningfulutilityinclinical
differentiationofsuccessfulandunsuccessfulpoliceapplicants”(p.424).
Somestudies(e.g.HookeandKrauss,1971;Blauetal.,1993;BrewsterandStoloff,1999)reported
positivefindingsfortheMMPIandpoliceselectionbyusingsamplesofalreadyemployedofficers.
Theproblemwiththisapproachwasthatthosewhohadbeenhiredrepresentedavery
homogeneousgroupbydefinition,thestudysubjectsshouldhavebeen“thebestofthebest.”
Furthermore,thelongerthesesubjectshadbeenemployedaspoliceofficers,thelesslikelyitwas
thattheyrepresentednewapplicants.Researchthatusesthismethodhasutilityonlyifthefindings
arereplicatedwithastudyofpoliceapplicants.
Sellbometal.(2007)acknowledgedtheselflimitingnatureofusinganalreadyemployedpolice
sample,andsubsequentlycorrectedtheiranalysistocompensateforthisrangerestriction.The
resultinganalysisindicatedmoderatepredictiveabilityofcertainMMPIscales(RCscales),andlower
thannormalTscoreelevations.AsimilarmethodwasadoptedbyCaillouetetal.(2010)intheir
examinationofthePSY5scalesandfacets.Adichotomousoutcomevariable(ceasedemploymentvs
stillemployed)wasusedasthepredictedmeasure.Modestpredictivepowerwasfound,albeitwith
caveats(rangerestrictionsandscoresmodifiedbyimpressionmanagementlevels),andtheauthors
acknowledgedthattheirmodel’sfindingsdid“notrepresentaclearlysignificantadvancefor
predictinglawenforcementofficerperformance”(p.236).
MMPIresearchhasalsousedPoliceAcademyperformanceasanoutcomemeasure.
ProblemswiththisapproachhavebeennotedbyKleimanandGordon(1986),whoobservedthat
thisresearchreliesontrainingperformanceasavalidationmeasure.Theauthorsdiscussedalarge
numberofrelevantlegalcases,andnotedthatvirtuallyallcasesjudgedthattherewas“insufficient
evidencetosubstantiatethevalidityoftheselectiondevice”(p.93).Burkhart(1980)agreed,noting
that“trainingacademydatacannotbeconsideredanidealchoiceforcriteriabecausesuchdatado
notinvolvetheofficers’responsestotherealjobdemands”(p.123).Anumberofstudiesbased
uponMMPIandtrainingperformancefacedtheissuedescribedabove(e.g.GonderandGilmore,
2004;Gough,1950;Hargraveetal.,1986;InwaldandShusman,1984).
Macintyreetal.(2001)usedasophisticatedmethodtodevelopaframeworktopredictproblem
performersamongpoliceofficers.Ascalecombinationandrecalculationmodelwasconstructed
fromexistingMMPIdata.Thesampleincludedtwomatchedgroupsofmaleofficers.Onegroup
consistedofproblematicperformers,andtheothergrouphadnoindicationsofpoorperformance.
Thestudy’spredictivemodelwasmoresuccessfulinidentifyingproblemperformersthangood
performers,despitethefactthatallcaseswereclassifiedbythatdichotomy.Themodelappearedto
find“addedvalue”residingintheMMPIdata,whichcouldbeusefulatthepersonnellevel.In
practicalterms,thiswouldrequiresubmittingeachMMPIprofiletoarelativelycomplexmodel
developedfromafewscales.Whilecumbersome,thismethodhaspromiseforresearchwithpolice
applicants.
TheCaliforniaPsychologicalInventory(CPI)andtheInwaldPersonalityInventory(IPI)
CPI:instrumentoverviewandreviewofresearch
TheCPIsharesalmosthalf(194)ofits434itemswiththeMMPI.However,thisisfocussedon
commonpersonalityfactors,ratherthanpsychopathology.Itemsaretrueorfalse,andthe
instrumentisscoredon18scales(threeofwhicharetesttakingvalidityscales).Duetoitsshared
heritagewiththeMMPI,andageneralpredispositionamongpractitionerstoprefertheMMPI,
muchCPIresearchtendstobementionedalongsideMMPIstudies.ThishasresultedinCPIandits
potentialcontributiontopoliceselectionreceivingdilutedattention.
Ingeneral,CPIrelatedresearchmimicsthebodyofresearchusingtheMMPI;someresearchers
reportsignificantrelationshipsbetweenCPIscalesandaspectsofpoliceperformance,whileother
researchersdonot.Pugh(1985)andHogan(1971)bothreportedthatseveraloftheCPIscaleswere
significantlycorrelatedwithavarietyofperformancemeasures,includingevaluationsbyfield
commanders.However,Hargrave(1985)andSarchioneetal.(1998)werenotsuccessfulinlinking
CPIscaleswithaspectsofpoliceperformance.
Aamodt’s(2004,2010)landmarkmetaanalysisofpolicepsychologyselectiondatashowedsome
supportfortheCPI’spredictivevalidity.Aamodt’sanalysisalsorevealedthatanumberofscales
werepredictiveofacademyperformance.ThesescalesincludedIntellectualEfficiencyandCapacity
forStatus.However,thetolerancescalewasparticularlypredictive.Aamodtnotedthatthe
tolerancescale“seemstoprovidethebestcombinationofpredictingsupervisorratingsof
performance,disciplinaryproblems,andacademyperformance”(Aamodt,2010,p.240).
IPI:instrumentoverviewandreviewofresearch
TheIPIisa310item(trueorfalse)inventorydesignedtoassessarangeofbehaviouraland
personalitycharacteristics.Theinventoryhasafocusonadmittedbehaviourpatterns,suchas
troublewiththelaw,anddrugandalcoholuse.SimilartotheMMPI,italsoassessesother
personalitycharacteristicsandclinicalindicatorsofpsychopathology(Inwald,2010).
ResearchsupportforthepredictivevalidityoftheIPIasapoliceselectiontoolislimited.Inwald
(2010)assertedthattheIPIis“abenchmarkfornewertestsintheselectionfield[y]theIPIhas
demonstratedthatitidentifiesantisocialbehaviorpatternsandisausefulpredictorofpoliceand
publicsafetyofficerjobperformance”(p.91).PositivefindingshavebeenreportedbyDetrickand
Chibnall(2002)whostatedthatsomeoftheIPIscalesnotably,familyconflicts,guardedness,and
drivingviolationswerepredictiveofonthejobperformanceattheoneyearevaluationpoint.
Similarly,Inwald(1988)reportedthattheIPIwasaccurateinidentifyingwhichapplicants(afterone
yearofperformance)werelikelytobeterminated.However,ahighfalsepositiverate(36percent)
aTypeOneerrorwasalsonoted.
OtherresearchershavereportedmixedfindingswiththeIPI.Cortinaetal.(1992)administeredthe
IPI(andtheMMPI)tonewlyhiredpoliceofficers.Ignoringtheproblemofrangerestriction(thatis,
theyassumedthatsuccessfulapplicantswerethebestofthebest),theIPI,althoughadequately
measuringthe“BigFive”personalitydimensions,addedlittletonoincrementalvalidity(abovethe
entryexams)forarangeofperformancemeasures,includingacademyperformanceandturnover.
Similarly,MufsonandMufson(1998)observedthatfouroftheIPI’sscaleswerepredictiveofpoor
performanceratingsandeventualtermination;however,asmallsamplesize(n=33)andtherange
restrictionagainlimitedthestudy’sgeneralizability.
Otherpublishedtests
Asmallgroupofotherpsychologicalinstrumentshavealsobeenappliedtothepoliceselection
environment.ThePersonalityAssessmentInventory(PAI)hasbeenusedinanumberofstudies,with
varyingdegreesofsuccess.WeissandWeiss(2010b)discussedthePAIindetail,andreportedthat,
whilesomescales,suchastheInterpersonalandTreatmentscalesshowed“considerablepotential”
(p.87),muchresearchremainstobedone,particularlyconcerningthecriterionvalidityofsomeof
theclinicalscales.Moreover,thePAIisfundamentallyatestofpsychopathology,andhasmany
similaritiestotheMMPI,whichismuchmorewidelyused(Super,2006).AswiththeMMPI,there
remainstheissueofusingatestofpsychopathologyinsteadofassessing“normal”ornonclinical
aspectsofpersonalitythatmayhaveasignificanteffectonjobperformance.
TheMPULSEisamorerecentlydevelopedinstrument,whichwasfirstintroducedin2008(Davis
suchastheMMPIand16PF,andassessesarangeofattitudesandbeliefsspecificallyrelatedto
policeemploymentduties.Initialresearchsuggeststhatthistestmayhavepromiseforpolice
selectionpurposes(DavisandRostow,2010);however,muchmoreresearchisrequiredbeforethis
instrumentcanbeconsideredempiricallyvalidated.
TheAIFPtestbattery
Instrumentoverview
TheAIFPprofilingsystemisacollectionofinstrumentsthathavebeencombinedandadministered
byAIFPsincetheearly1990s.ItsancestortheIFPprofilingsystemhasbeenusedwithsuccessin
theUSA,withsomesuccesssupportedbyresearch(Guller,1994b;Guller,2003).TheAIFPsystem
consistsofsixseparatepsychologicaltests:
.CandidateandOfficerPersonnelSurvey(COPS):atestdesignedbyAIFP,viaresearch,for
thespecificpurposeofselectingpublicsafetyofficerapplicants.Thiscomponentisthe
flagshipofthetestbattery.Scalesinclude,butarenotlimitedto,factorssuchaslegal
difficulties,alcoholanddruguse,aggression,andimpulsivity.
.EdwardsPersonalPreferenceSchedule(EPPS):abroadmeasureofpersonalitythat
assessescharacteristicsdirectlyrelatedtopoliceperformance.Scalesincludefactorssuchas
aggression,needtodominateothers,capacitytolearnfrommistakes,abilitytofitintoa
team,andabilitytotolerateroutinetasks.
.LocusofControl(LOC):ameasureoftheextenttowhichapersonfeelsincontrolofhisor
herlife.Thisisadefactomeasureofmaturity.
.HowSuperviseScale(HS):ameasureofjudgmentininterpersonalsituations,and
awarenessofbehavioralsensitivitywhendealingwithothers.
.ShipleyInstituteofLivingScale:astandardized,wellresearchedtestofgeneralintelligence.
.TheOpinionSurvey:ameasurethatassessesattitudestowardenforcingthelaw,ranging
frombeingrigidandunyieldingtobeingsoftandnaive.
Thefulltestconsistsof540items,withamixoftrueorfalseitems,forcedchoiceitems,andLikert
scaleitems.Itisintendedtobeusedasascreenouttool.
ReviewofAIFPresearch
SmythandByrne(1994)appliedtheAIFPprofilingsystemto51VictorianPolicerecruitsontheirfirst
dayattheVictorianTrainingAcademy,andfoundthattheAIFPpredictionsweresignificantly
accurateinpredictingtrainees’performancecategories.Theyalsofoundthat,overtime,the
predictionsweresignificantlyaccurateindeterminingrecruits’sickleaveandtheirlikelihoodof
beinginvolvedininvestigationsbytheInternalInvestigationsUnit(IIU).Thatis,priortocommencing
training,thesystemwasabletosuccessfullypredictanddistinguishbetweengoodandpoor
performers,highandlowsickleaveusers,andrecruits’highandlowlikelihoodsofbeinginvolvedin
IIUinvestigations.
Morerecently,LoughandRyan(2005,2006)examinedtheperformanceofAIFPscreenedand
unscreenedpoliceconstablesafteroneyearofservice.Thescreenedgroupdemonstrablyout
performedtheunscreenedgroupacrossmostperformancevariables.Thescreenedgrouptook11
percentlesssickleave,had58percentlessinjuryclaims,were84percentlesslikelytohavebeenin
amotorvehicleaccidentwhiledrivingapolicecar,andweremorethanthreetimeslesslikelyto
incurcomplaintsfromthegeneralpublic.
LoughandRyan(2010)furtherextendedtheirexaminationofpolicecohortsoveraperiodofthree
years.TheAIFPscreenedgroupconsistentlyoutperformedtheunscreenedgroup;theAIFPgroup
tooksignificantlylesssickdays,hadsignificantlyfewernonstress(injury)claims,andhad
significantlylessmotorvehicleaccidents.Additionally,thescreenedgrouphadalowerdropoutrate,
andwerelesslikelytomakeseriousonthejoberrorsthatresultedinformaldisciplinaryactionor
investigation.However,aswiththeearlierstudies,individualofficerperformanceratings(e.g.
supervisorreports)werenottakenintoaccount.
OtherresearchsupportingthevalidityoftheAIFPprofilingsysteminAustralianconditionshasbeen
conductedinthecorrectionscontext.Choy(1998)comparedNewSouthWales(NSW)corrections
officersscreenedforselectionbytheAIFPbatterywithanunscreenedgroup,andreported
significantlylowerratesofattritionandsickleaveusageamongtheAIFPscreenedcohortaftertwo
yearsofservice.ChoyestimatedthattheNSWcorrectionsdepartmentsickleavecosthadreduced
by39percentasaresultofthescreening.
SimilarfindingswerereportedamongQueensland(Byrne,2001)andSouthAustraliancorrections
officers(Caseyetal.,2001),withscreenedofficerstakingapproximatelyhalfthenumberofsickdays
oftheirunscreenedcounterpartsduringtheirfirsttwoyearsofemployment.ROIcalculationsupon
Caseyetal.’sdatarevealedamonetarysavingofover$850,000foraninitialoutlayof$22,500an
ROIfigureof3,815percent.
Loughetal.(2007)trackedthesickleaveoftwocohortsofcorrectionalofficers(AIFPscreenedand
unscreened)overafouryearperiod.Theyfoundthatthescreenedgrouptooksignificantlylesssick
leaveineachofthefirsttwoyears,and30percentlessintotalacrossthefouryearsofthestudy.
Theyalsonotedasignificantlylowerdropout(terminationsplusresignations)amongtheAIFP
screenedgroup.Theauthorsconcludedthat“psychologicalprofilingasamethodofselecting
correctionalofficersappearstobeaworthwhileandvalidcourseofaction”(Loughetal.,2007,p.6).
Byrneetal.(2002)summativeinvestigationofAIFPtestingwithinthecorrectionscontextreinforced
theutilityoftheprocessanditsassociatedfinancialbenefits.Forexample,theyfoundthatadeeper
analysisofChoy’s(1998)datarevealedthatthescreeningprocessyieldedareturnoninvestmentof
approximately3,000percent.Inadditiontomonetarybenefits,thereareotherbenefitsthatare
difficulttoquantifythosederivedfromhiringthemostsuitablecandidatesforthejob,which
improvesstaffmoraleandgeneralefficiency,andreducesthelikelihoodoffuturelegalaction.
FurtherexaminationofAIFPresearch
TheresearchevidencefortheAIFPtestdiffersfromagreatdealofresearchofothertests,
particularlytheMMPI,becauseofthefrequentpresenceofcontrolgroupsthatallowfordirect
comparisonbetweenselectedandnonselectedcohorts.Inmostpreviousstudies,thecontrol
groupswerehiredimmediatelypriortotheintroductionofthepsychologicalscreeningprogram
(and,therefore,thecommencementoftheexperimentalgroup),whichtendedtomitigateany
potentialmaturationbasedresearchartifacts.Thisapproachisparticularlystrongforexaminingthe
effectofthetestasawhole,andalsoallowsforlongitudinalobservation.
AlthoughresearchsupportingthegeneralvalidityoftheAIFPappearssound,thereisnopublished
evidenceofanyincrementalvalidity.Noneoftheindividualcomponents,oranyofthesubscales
withinthosecomponents,havebeenlinkedorcorrelatedwithperformanceoutcomes.Such
researchwouldbevaluablegiventhatthemajorityofscalebasedresearchfortheMMPIandCPI
tendstodivergeonthepredictivevalidityofindividualscales(althoughAamodt’s,2004findingthat
thetolerancescaleoftheCPIisavalidpredictorisnoted).
Inadditiontotheabove,oneotherfactorconfoundstheAIFPfindings.Researchtodatehasbeen
drawnfromboththeAIFP(Australian)andIFP(American)data.Whilethetwoinstrumentshavea
lotofcommoncontentincludingtheCOPStesttheyarenotthesameinstrument.Research
evidencesupportingtheIFPtestinstrumentdoesnotnecessarilyapplytothepotentialvalidationof
theAIFPtestinstrument,andviceversa.Futureresearchneedstoconcentrateitseffortsona
particulariterationofthetestbattery.
Discussionanddevelopmentopportunity
Fromthematerialpresentedinthispaper,itisapparentthatnobestpracticeinstrumentforthe
selectionofpoliceofficersexistsatthistime.Eachoftheinstrumentsexaminedhaveissuesintheir
supportingresearch.TheMMPIresearchisequivocalatbest,researchwiththeCPIandIPIislimited,
andtheAIFPresearchlacksscalelevelincrementalvalidity.Otherinstruments,suchasthePAIand
MPULSE,aresimplynotusedoftenenoughtogeneratetheresearchrequiredtounderpintheir
endorsement.
Therefore,itappearsthatthereisopportunityforthedevelopmentofabestpracticeinstrument.
Researchdevotedtothisdevelopmentneedstoconsiderthefactorsthatensuretheutilityand
validityoftheinstrument’screationandtesting.Futureresearchshouldensure:
.thedevelopmentofaninstrumentthatcanassessaswidearangeofattitudesand
behaviorsasisreasonable,ratherthanbeingfocussedsolelyonpathologies;
.asufficientsamplesize(>100);
.thatappropriateoutcomevariables,suchasonthejobperformance,areobtainedin
additiontoperformanceduringtraining(e.g.academyperformance);
.thatacontrolgroupormatchedcohortiscomparedtoanygroupselectedusinga(new)
instrument;and
.thatallcomponentsofaninstrument,downtothescalelevel,areadequatelyinvestigated
andexaminedforvalidationpurposes.
Othercriteria,suchastheexaminationofnonsuccessfulapplicants’testscores,shouldalsobe
considered(althoughthismaynotbefeasibleinAmericanjurisdictionsduetotheAmericanswith
DisabilitiesAct).Ultimately,theidealinstrumentwouldbeatestthatispurposebuiltforpolice
selection,ratherthanatestthathasbeenadaptedforuseinthepoliceenvironment.
Ifaninstrumentweretobeselectedasastartingpointforthedevelopmentofabestpractice
instrument,theAIFPtestbatteryappearstobeasoundoption.TheAIFPinstrumentfulfillsmostof
theabovecriteria,withtheexceptionofavailabilityofincrementalvalidationdata.Giventhecurrent
author’sexperiencewiththeAIFPinstrument,itisrecommendedthatathoroughforensic
examinationofthattest,withtheaimofbuildingapsychometricallysoundinstrument,wouldbea
logicallaunchingpadforthedevelopmentofabestpracticeinstrument.
References
Aamodt,M.G.(2004),ResearchinLawEnforcementSelection,BrownwalkerPress,BocaRaton,FL.
Aamodt,M.G.(2010),“Predictinglawenforcementofficerperformancewithpersonalityinventories”,inWeiss,
P.(Ed.),PersonalityAssessmentinPolicePsychology:A21stCenturyPerspective,CharlesC.Thomas,
Springfield,IL,pp.229259.
Azen,S.P.,Snibbe,H.M.andMontgomery,H.R.(1973),“Alongitudinalpredictivestudyofsuccessand
performanceoflawenforcementofficers”,JournalofAppliedPsychology,Vol.57No.2,pp.190192.
Barret,G.,Polomsky,M.andMcDaniel,M.(1999),“Selectiontestsforfirefighters:acomprehensivereview
andmetaanalysis”,JournalofBusinessandPsychology,Vol.13No.4,pp.507514.
Bartol,C.R.(1982),“Psychologicalcharacteristicsofsmalltownpoliceofficers”,JournalofPoliceScience&
Administration,Vol.10No.1,pp.5863.
Bartol,C.R.(1991),“PredictivevalidationoftheMMPIforsmalltownpoliceofficerswhofail”,Professional
Psychology,Vol.22No.2,pp.127132.
Bartol,C.R.,Bergen,G.T.,Volckens,J.S.andKnoras,K.M.(1992),“Womeninsmalltownpolicing:job
performanceandstress”,CriminalJusticeandBehavior,Vol.19No.3,pp.240259.
BenPorath,Y.S.andTellegen,A.(2008),“EmpiricalcorrelatesoftheMMPI2RestructuredClinical(RC)scales
inmentalhealth,forensic,andnonclinicalsettings:anintroduction”,JournalofPersonalityAssessment,Vol.90
No.2,pp.119121.
Bernstein,I.H.,Schoenfeld,L.S.andCostello,R.M.(1982),“Truncatedcomponentregressionmulticollinearity
andtheMMPI’suseinapoliceofficerselectionsetting”,MultivariateBehaviorResearch,Vol.17No.1,pp.99
116.
Beutler,L.E.,Storm,A.,Kirkish,P.,Scogin,F.andGaines,J.A.(1985),“Parametersinthepredictionofpolice
officerperformance”,ProfessionalPsychology,Vol.16No.2,pp.324335.
Blau,T.H.(1994),PsychologicalServicesforLawEnforcement,JohnWileyandSons,NewYork,NY.
Blau,T.H.,Super,J.T.andBrady,L.(1993),“TheMMPIgoodcop/badcopprofileinidentifyingdysfunctional
lawenforcementpersonnel”,JournalofPoliceandCriminalPsychology,Vol.9No.1,pp.24.
Brewster,J.andStoloff,M.L.(1999),“Usingthegoodcop/badcopprofilewiththeMMPI2”,JournalofPolice
andCriminalPsychology,Vol.14No.2,pp.2934.
Brough,P.(2005),“Acomparativeinvestigationofthepredictorsofworkrelatedpsychologicalwellbeing
withinpolice,fireandambulanceworkers”,NewZealandJournalofPsychology,Vol.34No.2,pp.127134.
Burbeck,E.andFurnham,A.(1985),“Policeofficerselection:acriticalreviewofliterature”,JournalofPolice
Science&Administration,Vol.13No.1,pp.5869.
Burkhart,B.(1980),“Conceptualissuesinthedevelopmentofpoliceselectionprocedures”,Professional
Psychology,Vol.11No.1,pp.121129.
Butcher,J.N.(2005),ABeginner’sGuidetotheMMPI2,2nded.,AmericanPsychologicalAssociation,
Washington,DC.
Byrne,K.(2001),ResearchintotheEffectivenessoftheAIFPCriticalCharacterAssessmentSystemfor
ScreeningNewCustodialCorrectionalOfficers,AIFPAustralia,CliftonHill.
Byrne,K.,Guller,I.andGuller,M.(2002),“Slashingsickleave/attritionratesthroughnewrecruitscreening”,
CorrectionsToday,Vol.64No.5,pp.9295.
Caillouet,B.,Boccaccini,M.T.,Varela,J.G.,Davis,R.andRostow,C.(2010),“PredictivevalidityoftheMMPI2
PSY5scalesandfacetsforlawenforcementofficeremploymentoutcomes”,CriminalJusticeandBehavior,
Vol.37No.2,pp.217238.
Casey,S.,Dollard,M.andWinefield,T.(2001),SelectionofCorrectionalServiceOfficers.Work&Stress
ResearchGroup,UniversityofSouthAustralia,Adelaide.
Castora,K.,Brewster,J.andStoloff,M.L.(2003),“PredictingaggressioninpoliceofficersusingtheMMPI2”,
JournalofPoliceandCriminalPsychology,Vol.18No.1,pp.18.
Choy,J.(1998),ReducingSickLeaveinCorrectionalOfficers:TheRoleofPsychologicalAppraisal,NewSouth
WalesDepartmentofCorrectiveServices,Sydney.
Cortina,J.M.,Doherty,M.L.,Schmitt,N.,Kaufman,G.andSmith,R.G.(1992),“The“bigfive”personality
factorsintheIPIandMMPI:predictorsofpoliceperformance”,PersonnelPsychology,Vol.45No.1,pp.119
140.
Costello,R.M.,Schneider,S.L.andSchoenfeld,L.S.(1996),“ValidationofapreemploymentMMPIindex
correlatedwithdisciplinarysuspensiondaysofpoliceofficers”,Psychology,CrimeandLaw,Vol.2No.1,pp.
299306.
Daniels,S.andKing,E.(2002),“ThepredictivevalidityofMMPI2contentscalesforsmalltownpoliceofficer
performance”,JournalofPoliceandCriminalPsychology,Vol.17No.2,pp.5460.
Davis,R.andRostow,C.(2008),MPULSEinventory:Matrixpredictiveuniformlawenforcementselection
evaluationinventory.TechnicalManual,MHSInc,Toronto.
Davis,R.andRostow,C.(2010),“TheuseoftheMPULSEinventoryinlawenforcementselection”,inWeiss,
P.A.(Ed.),PersonalityAssessmentinPolicePsychology:A21stCenturyPerspective,CharlesC.Thomas,
Springfield,IL,pp.528,132158.
Detrick,P.andChibnall,J.(2002),“PredictionofpoliceofficerperformancewiththeInwaldpersonality
inventory”,JournalofPoliceandCriminalPsychology,Vol.17No.2,pp.917.
Dralle,P.andBaybrook,R.M.(1985),“Screeningofpoliceapplicants:areplicationofa5itemMMPIresearch
indexvaliditystudy”,PsychologicalReports,Vol.57No.3,pp.10311034.
Gonder,M.andGilmore,D.C.(2004),“Validitystudy:personalityprofilesofpoliceofficerswhosuccessfully
completeacademytraining”,AppliedHRMResearch,Vol.9No.2,pp.5962.
Gough,H.G.(1950),“TheFminusKDissimulationIndexfortheMMPI”,JournalofConsultingPsychology,Vol.
33No.1,pp.247255.
Guller,I.(1993),AFollowUpStudyofAppointedPublicSafetyOfficersandRelationshipofPerformanceto
MeasuredPsychologicalVariables,InstituteforForensicPsychology,Oakland,NJ.
Guller,I.(1994a),EvolutionofaBioDataInstrumentfortheScreeningofPoliceandotherPublicSafety
Personnel,InstituteforForensicPsychology,Oakland,NJ.
Guller,I.(1994b),AFollowUpStudyofAppointedPublicSafetyOfficersandRelationshipofPerformanceto
MeasuredPsychologicalVariables,paperpresentedattheAnnualMeetingoftheNewJerseyChiefsofPolice,
AtlanticCity,NJ,June22.
Guller,M.(2003),PredictingPerformanceofLawEnforcementPersonnelusingtheCandidateandOfficer
PersonnelSurveyandotherPsychologicalMeasures,unpublisheddoctoraldissertation,SetonHallUniversity,
SouthOrange,NJ.
Graham,J.R.(2006),MMPI2:AssessingPersonalityandPsychopathology,OxfordUniversityPress,NewYork,
NY.
Hargrave,G.E.(1985),“UsingtheMMPIandCPItoscreenlawenforcementapplicants:astudyofreliability
andvalidityofclinicians’decisions”,JournalofPoliceScienceandAdministration,Vol.13No.3,pp.221224.
Hargrave,G.E.,Hiatt,D.andGaffney,T.W.(1986),“AcomparisonofMMPIandCPItestprofilesfortraffic
officersanddeputysheriffs”,JournalofPoliceScience&Administration,Vol.14No.3,pp.250258.
Hargrave,G.E.,Hiatt,D.andGaffney,T.W.(1988),“Fþ4þ9þCn:anMMPImeasureofaggressioninlaw
enforcementofficersandapplicants”,JournalofPoliceScience&Administration,Vol.16No.3,pp.268273.
Henson,B.,Reyns,B.,Klahm,C.andFrank,J.(2010),“Dogoodrecruitsmakegoodcops?Problemspredicting
andmeasuringacademyandstreetlevelsuccess”,PoliceQuarterly,Vol.13No.1,pp.526.
Hiatt,D.andHargrave,G.E.(1988a),“MMPIprofilesofproblempeaceofficers”,JournalofPersonality
Assessment,Vol.52No.4,pp.722731.
Hiatt,D.andHargrave,G.E.(1988b),“Predictingjobperformanceproblemswithpsychologicalscreening”,
JournalofPoliceScience&Administration,Vol.16No.2,pp.122125.
Ho,T.(2001),“Theinterrelationshipsofpsychologicaltesting,psychologists’recommendations,andpolice
departments’recruitmentdecisions”,PoliceQuarterly,Vol.4No.3,pp.318342.
Hogan,R.(1971),“Personalitycharacteristicsofhighlyratedpolicemen”,PersonnelPsychology,Vol.24No.1,
pp.679686.
Hogg,A.andWilson,C.(1995),IsthePsychologicalScreeningofPoliceApplicantsaRealisticGoal?TheSuccess
andFailuresofPsychologicalScreening,NationalPoliceResearchUnit,Payneham.
Hooke,J.F.andKrauss,H.H.(1971),“Personalitycharacteristicsofsuccessfulpolicesergeantcandidates”,
JournalofCriminalLaw,CriminologyandPoliceScience,Vol.62No.1,pp.104106.
Inwald,R.E.(1988),“Fiveyearfollowupstudyofdepartmentalterminationsaspredictedby16pre
employmentpsychologicalindicators”,JournalofAppliedPsychology,Vol.73No.4,pp.703710.
Inwald,R.(2010),“UseoftheInwaldPersonalityInventory,HilsonTests,andInwaldSurveysforselection,
fitnessfordutyassessment,andrelationshipcounselling”,inWeiss,P.A.(Ed.),PersonalityAssessmentinPolice
Psychology:A21stCenturyPerspective,CharlesC.Thomas,Springfield,IL,pp.528,91131.
Inwald,R.E.andShusman,E.J.(1984),“TheIPIandMMPIaspredictorsofacademyperformanceforpolice
recruits”,JournalofPoliceScience&Administration,Vol.12No.1,pp.111.
Kleiman,L.S.andGordon,M.E.(1986),“Anexaminationoftherelationshipbetweenpolicetrainingacademy
performanceandjobperformance”,JournalofPoliceScience&Administration,Vol.14No.4,pp.293299.
Lough,J.andRyan,M.(2005),“PsychologicalprofilingofAustralianpoliceofficers:anexaminationofpost
selectionperformance”,InternationalJournalofPoliceScienceandManagement,Vol.7No.1,pp.1523.
Lough,J.andRyan,M.(2006),“PsychologicalprofilingofAustralianpoliceofficers:alongitudinalexamination
ofpostselectionperformance”,InternationalJournalofPoliceScienceandManagement,Vol.8No.2,pp.143
152.
Lough,J.andRyan,M.(2010),“Researchnote:psychologicalprofilingofAustralianpoliceofficers:athreeyear
examinationofpostselectionperformance”,InternationalJournalofPoliceScienceandManagement,Vol.12
No.3,pp.480486.
Lough,J.,Wald,E.,Byrne,K.andWalker,G.(2007),“TheimpactofpsychologicalprofilingofAustralian
correctionalofficers”,CorrectionsCompendium,Vol.32No.4,pp.16.
Macintyre,S.,Ronken,C.andPrenzler,T.(2001),“TheMMPI2asatoolforpreventingpolicemisconduct:a
Victorian(Australian)policestudy”,InternationalJournalofPoliceScience&Management,Vol.4No.3,pp.
213229.
Meier,R.D.,Farmer,R.E.andMaxwell,D.(1988),“Psychologicalscreeningofpolicecandidates:current
perspectives”,JournalofPoliceScienceandAdministration,Vol.15No.3,pp.210215.
Merian,E.M.,Stefan,D.,Schoenfeld,L.S.andKobos,J.(1980),“Screeningofpoliceapplicants:a5itemMMPI
researchindex”,PsychologicalReports,Vol.47No.1,pp.155158.
Metchik,E.(1999),“Ananalysisofthe“screeningout”modelofpoliceofficerselection”,PoliceQuarterly,Vol.
2No.1,pp.7995.
Mufson,D.W.andMufson,M.(1998),“PredictingpoliceofficerperformanceusingtheIPI:anillustrationfrom
Appalachia”,ProfessionalPsychologyResearchandPractice,Vol.29No.1,pp.5962.
Murphy,K.andDavidshofer,C.(1994),PsychologicalTesting:PrinciplesandApplications,PrenticeHall,
EnglewoodCliffs,NJ.
Pugh,G.(1985),“TheCaliforniapsychologicalinventoryandpoliceselection”,JournalofPoliceScienceand
Administration,Vol.13No.2,pp.172177.
Sarchione,C.,Muchinsky,P.,Nelson,R.andCuttler,M.(1998),“Predictionofdysfunctionaljobbehaviors
amonglawenforcementofficers”,JournalofAppliedPsychology,Vol.83No.6,pp.904912.
Saxe,S.andReiser,M.(1976),“AcomparisonofthreepoliceapplicantgroupsusingtheMMPI”,Journalof
PoliceScience&Administration,Vol.4No.4,pp.419425.
Schoenfeld,L.S.,Kobos,J.andPhinney,I.R.(1980),“Screeningpoliceapplicants:astudyofreliabilitywiththe
MMPI”,PsychologicalReports,Vol.47No.1,pp.419425.
Sellbom,M.,Fischler,G.L.andBenPorath,Y.S.(2007),“IdentifyingMMPI2predictorsofpoliceofficer
integrityandmisconduct”,CriminalJusticeandBehavior,Vol.34No.8,pp.9851004.
Shusman,E.J.,Inwald,R.E.andLanda,B.(1984),“CorrectionofficerjobperformanceaspredictedbytheIPI
andMMPI”,CriminalJusticeandBehavior,Vol.11No.3,pp.309329.
Simmers,K.,Bowers,T.andRuiz,J.(2003),“Preemploymentpsychologicaltestingofpoliceofficers:theMMPI
andtheIPIaspredictorsofperformance”,InternationalJournalofPoliceScienceandManagement,Vol.5No.
4,pp.277294.
Smyth,B.andByrne,K.(1994),“TheUseofSpecializedPsychologicalAssessmentMethodsintheSelectionof
ApplicantstotheVictoriaPolice”,unpublishedmanuscript,AustralianInstituteofForensicPsychology,
Melbourne.
Super,J.T.(2006),“Asurveyofpreemploymentpsychologicalevaluationtestsandprocedures”,Journalof
PoliceandCriminalPsychology,Vol.21No.2,pp.8390.
Surrette,M.A.,Aamodt,M.G.andSerafino,G.(2004),“UsingMMPIspecialscaleconfigurationstopredict
performanceratingsofpoliceofficersinNewMexico”,AppliedHRMResearch,Vol.9No.2,pp.7172.
Weiss,P.A.andInwald,R.E.(2010),“Abriefhistoryofpersonalityassessmentinpolicepsychology”,inWeiss,
P.A.(Ed.),PersonalityAssessmentinPolicePsychology:A21stCenturyPerspective,pp.528,CharlesC.
Thomas,Springfield,IL.
Weiss,P.A.andWeiss,W.U.(2010a),“UsingtheMMPI2inpolicepsychologicalassessment”,inWeiss,P.A.
(Ed.),PersonalityAssessmentinPolicePsychology:A21stCentury
Perspective,CharlesC.Thomas,Springfield,IL,pp.528,5971.Weiss,W.U.andWeiss,P.A.(2010b),“Useof
thepersonalityassessmentinventoryandpoliceandsecuritypersonnelselection”,inWeiss,P.A.(Ed.),
PersonalityAssessmentinPolicePsychology:A21stCenturyPerspective,CharlesC.Thomas,Springfield,IL,pp.
528,7290.
White,M.(2008),“Identifyinggoodcopsearly:predictingrecruitperformanceintheacademy”,Police
Quarterly,Vol.11No.1,pp.2749.
Winters,C.A.(1990),“ProblemsofvarianceintheutilityoftheMMPIintheselectionofmetropolitanpolice”,
PoliceJournal,Vol.63No.2,pp.121128.
Wright,B.S.,Doerner,W.G.andSpeir,J.C.(1990),“Preemploymentpsychologicaltestingasapredictorof
policeperformanceduringanFTOprogram”,AmericanJournalofPolice,Vol.9No.4,pp.6584.
Abouttheauthors
JonathanLoughisaPhDCandidateattheDeakinUniversity,Melbourne,Australia.HeisalsothePrincipalof
theLoughResearchServices,andaPsychologistandanIndependentResearchConsultantinMelbourne,
Australia.Hespecializesinresearchdesign,analysisandstatistics,surveywriting,andpsychological
assessment.Overthelasttenyears,hehasworkedwitharangeofprivateandgovernmentclients,including
ANZBank,ClemengerBBDO,andtheAustralianInstituteofForensicPsychology.PriortoestablishingLough
ResearchServices,JonathanwasaResearchPsychologistattheMonashUniversity,workingintheareaof
publicsafetyandinjuryprevention.JonathanLoughisthecorrespondingauthorandcanbecontactedat:
jlough@optusnet.com.au
DrKathrynvonTreueristheAssociateHeadoftheSchool(PartnershipsandDevelopment)andtheCourse
ChairfortheOrganisationalPsychologyProgramattheDeakinUniversity.Sheutilizes20yearsofindustry
experienceinorganisationalpsychologyandseniormanagementtoinformherresearch,teachingandservice
rolesattheUniversity.Sheishighlyregardedandsoughtafterbyindustrygroups,andisanationalleaderin
areasoforganisationalpsychologypracticeandresearch.DrKathrynvonTreuercompletedpostgraduate
studiesinpsychology,businessandeducation.Herdoctoraldissertationwasawardedtheprestigious
“ResearchExcellence”awardfromtheSwinburneUniversityin2006,forinvestigatingorganisationalfactors
thatfacilitateworkplaceinnovation.Shewasrecentlyinvitedtoprovideakeynoteaddressonorganisational
resilience,andistheManagingEditoroftheAustralianandNewZealandJournalofOrganisationalPsychology.
... Psychological testing has perhaps garnered the most research attention of all law enforcement selection procedures and is among the most common components of selection systems (Cochrane et al., 2003). The most widely used of these tests is the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI; Cochrane et al., 2003;DeCicco, 2000;Lough & Von Treuer, 2013), which uses a combination of personality and clinical scales to psychologically screen test takers for dispositional traits and potential psychopathologies (Ben-Porath & Tellegen 2008). Yet, despite the popularity of the MMPI among law enforcement agencies, empirical examinations of its criterion-related validity have revealed a complicated pattern of findings. ...
... Yet, despite the popularity of the MMPI among law enforcement agencies, empirical examinations of its criterion-related validity have revealed a complicated pattern of findings. To elaborate, evidence for the predictive validity of the MMPI remains inconclusive (Aamodt, 2004;Lough & Von Treuer, 2013) and suggests that perhaps only certain subscales of the MMPI predict performance (Aamodt, 2004). This has led to the creation of numerous indices for scoring the MMPI, such as the "good cop/bad cop" index, which defines a "good cop" profile as someone who scores below 60 on the Hysteria, Hypochondriasis, Psychopathic Deviate, and Hypomania scales and less than 70 on the remaining clinical scales (Blau et al., 1993). ...
... Other commonly used tests include the California Psychological Inventory (CPI), which shares items with the MMPI but focuses on general personality rather than psychopathology, and the Inwald Personality Inventory (IPI), which assesses prior behaviors, personality, and psychopathology (Cochrane et al., 2003;Hartman, 1987;Lough & Von Treuer, 2013). As with the MMPI, validity evidence for the CPI and IPI is similarly mixed and differs across subscales (e.g., Aamodt, 2010, advocated for using the tolerance scale from the CPI because it predicted academy performance, job performance, and misconduct). ...
Article
Full-text available
The country has been gripped by the events that have unfolded in the wake of the police killings of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor. In response to these new examples of long-standing police violence, there have been calls to substantially reimage policing to reduce the number of violent incidents that occur between officers and the public and to combat officers’ disproportionate use of force with Black Americans. In this article, we call on industrial-organizational (I-O) psychologists to leverage their expertise to help actuate meaningful change within law enforcement. To help guide our collective efforts as a field, we provide a review of the current state of affairs as they relate to recruitment, selection, training, performance management, occupational stress, and organizational culture in law enforcement and then offer recommendations for ways to change current practices to encourage more equitable and responsible policing. We also highlight areas in which further investigation is needed and urge I-O psychologists to invest in building the knowledge necessary to inform future practices. We hope this article can facilitate a discussion about how our field can contribute to achieving evidence-based and lasting change that benefits officers and the members of the communities they serve.
... The MMPI and its successors concentrate on assessing clinical constructs (e.g., depression, antisocial behavior; Graham, 1993Graham, , 2006, whereas the CPI is aimed at assessing "normal" personality constructs (Gough, 1956). Research has suggested that there are not consistent, strong correlations between most of the MMPI scales and officer performance or discipline problems (cf., Lough & Von Treuer, 2013). ...
... According to Lough and Von Treuer (2013), extant re-search on the CPI generally mirrors the pattern of evidence for the MMPI with some studies suggesting its predictive validity and others failing to find support. They do note, however, that meta-analytic evidence from Aamodt (2010) suggests the CPI scales of intellectual efficiency, capacity for status, and tolerance significantly predict performance or disciplinary problems. ...
Article
Full-text available
Despite decades of attention paid to police reform, cases of office misconduct still continue to plague policing organizations. Assuming that organizations may still experience such officer malfeasance even when attempting to pursue best practices, we aim to explore how things can go wrong when everything else seems right. Specifically, we rely on trickle-down models of organizational justice, group engagement, and social identity to articulate how otherwise desirable organizational outcomes may produce detrimental outgroup biases. Based on our theoretical premise, we articulate specific changes that may be made to personnel systems that can avoid such officer misconduct in policing contexts.
... Although one can find similar cluster profiles from crossing these axes, it is important to keep in mind that the axes themselves are not coincident and that the clusters do not comprise the same countries. It is also worth stressing that no methods of selection are perfect (Decker & Huckabee 1999), but one should recommend that the ideal instrument would be a test that is specifically built for police selection, rather than a test that has been adapted for use in the police environment (Lough & Von Treuer, 2013). It is also worth emphasizing that a successful recruitment campaign must use a fine-tuned mixture of components to ensure strong informational output (Wilson, Wilson, Luthar, & Bridges, 2013). ...
... Accepting that no method of selection is perfect (Decker & Huckabee 1999) but also that the police functions will not vary deeply between countries, in line with Lough and Von Treuer (2013), we recommend to build processes for police selection, instead of adapting existing ones for this specific environment. The study also suggested that the initial training in Psychological subjects had no common ground, leading to the idea of a possible future common policy at least at the European Union level. ...
Thesis
Full-text available
Competence is a core concept in HRM as it offers the possibility of being the strategic reference around which all HR practices are articulated. Competence models and profiling have been developing by integrating extant literature but are yet to fully grasp the role emotions play in daily organizational life. The present research is set to explore emotion-based competence modelling by focusing on an emotional demanding profession: that of criminal investigator, linking with recruitment and selection as well as initial training. After reviewing the institutional context in which criminal investigators work (PSP), the study starts by exploring police recruitment and selection, and initial training practices in European police forces, focusing both on officials and officers. Findings showed divergences both between police forces and careers thus showing no emergent pattern on these issues. More importantly, no emotion-driven practices was reported. The research evolved to explore how emotions could be mapped under the performance agenda conditioning the entire building of competence model as proposed by Bartram and Roe (2005). With a sample of 703 questionnaires filled in by criminal investigators we collected data on emotional commands, personality, abilities, knowledge, skills, attitudes and values to test a sequential set of relations between these constructs. Findings from SEM analysis show streams of associations linking emotional commands up to specific competences, moderated at certain level by values. The resulting syncretic model addressed both competences and emotions (at the lowest layer), following a modelling methodology in sequenced layers (interfaces) which rendered it a different composition and relation between layers. Findings suggest that it is possible to structure a competence model for criminal investigators with emotions considered at the ground layer as the emotional foundations of human personality (Davis & Panksepp, 2011) expressed as the Emotion Command Systems. A competência é um conceito central na GRH, pois oferece a possibilidade de ser a referência estratégica em torno da qual todas as práticas de RH podem ser articuladas. Os modelos e perfis de competência existentes têm sido desenvolvidos através da integração da literatura, mas ainda não integram bem o papel que as emoções desempenham nas organizações. A presente investigação pretende explorar os modelos de competências com base em emoções, concentrando-se numa profissão emocionalmente exigente: a do investigador criminal, articulando com o recrutamento e seleção, bem como com a formação inicial. Depois de caracterizar o contexto institucional em que trabalham os investigadores criminais da PSP, o estudo começa por explorar o recrutamento e seleção de polícias bem como as práticas de formação inicial nas forças de segurança europeias, focando quer oficiais quer agentes. Os resultados mostraram divergências entre forças de segurança e entre as duas carreiras, não tendo sido possível identificar qualquer padrão emergente. Adicionalmente, não foram identificadas práticas de base emocional. A investigação evoluiu para explorar como mapear as emoções numa perspectiva do desempenho, condicionando todo o modelo de construção de competências proposto por Bartram e Roe (2005). Com uma amostra de 703 questionários preenchidos por investigadores criminais, recolhemos dados sobre comandos emocionais, personalidade, aptidões, conhecimentos, habilidades, atitudes e valores para testar um conjunto sequencial de relações entre estes construtos. Os resultados de análises de equações estruturais mostram fluxos de associações que ligam os sistemas de comando emocional a competências específicas, moderados num determinado interface pelos valores. O modelo sincrético resultante incorporou quer competências quer emoções (na camada basilar), seguindo uma metodologia de modelação em interfaces, o que lhe conferiu uma composição e relação diferentes entre os interfaces. Os resultados sugerem a possibilidade de estruturar um modelo de competências para investigadores criminais assente em emoções, expressas como os fundamentos emocionais da personalidade humana (Davis & Panksepp, 2011) designados por sistemas de comando emocional.
... The RCMP currently uses several strategies to provide information regarding potential psychopathology (Butcher, 2011;Butcher et al. 2001;Detrick et al. 2001) which is common practice among policing organizations (Weiss 2010). Choosing police officers who exhibit personality factors (i.e., Extraversion, Agreeableness, Openness to Experience) associated with positive overall job performance and reduced risk of psychological harm from job related stressors is also considered a necessary and crucial step for law enforcement agencies (Lough and von Treuer 2013). Police officers have been stated to have personality characteristics that bolster their mental health against the intense inherent occupational stressors (Salters-Pedneault et al. 2010). ...
Article
Full-text available
Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) report frequent exposures to diverse potentially psychological traumatic events (PPTEs) that can lead to symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and other mental health disorders. Personality traits may partially inform the substantial mental health challenges reported by serving RCMP. The current study examines associations between HEXACO personality factor and facet-level dimensions and mental health disorders of RCMP cadets starting the Cadet Training Program (CTP). RCMP cadets ( n = 772) starting the CTP self-reported sociodemographics, personality, and mental health disorder symptoms. Emotionality was associated with MDD, GAD, and SAD (AORs ranged from 6.23 to 10.22). Extraversion and Agreeableness were inversely associated with MDD, GAD, and SAD (AORs ranged from 0.0159 to 0.43), whereas Openness to Experience was inversely associated with SAD (AOR = 0.36). Several facet-level personality dimensions were associated with mental health disorders. Inconsistent differences were observed between men and women for relationships between personality factors, facets, and positive screenings for mental disorders. The relationship patterns allude to possible risk and resilience factors associated with personality factors and facets. Early training, interventions, and resources tailored to cadet personality factors and facets might reduce risk and bolster mental health resilience.
... The personnel selection process (Guion & Gibson, 1988;Guion & Gottier, 1965;Ryan & Ployhart, 2014) has been investigated in different professions (Sackett et al., 2022;Schmidt & Hunter, 1998), including the military (Campbell, 1990;Hydren et al., 2017), firefighters (Henderson, 2010;Henderson et al., 2007), and law enforcement (Aamodt, 2004;Annell et al., 2015a;Annell et al., 2014;Lough & Von Treuer, 2013). However, studies explicitly pertaining to personnel selection for police tactical intervention units are sparse. ...
... Choosing police officers who have personality factors that correlate with positive overall job performance and reduced risk of psychological harm from job related stressors is considered a necessary and crucial step for law enforcement agencies in personnel selection during recruitment and job assignment (Lough and Von Treuer 2013). Personality profiles associated with policing applicants who were subsequently considered "the best" entrylevel police officers based on field evaluations have typically included low scores for Neuroticism, high scores for Conscientiousness and Extraversion, and average scores for Agreeableness and Openness to Experience, all relative to the general population (Detrick and Chibnall 2013). ...
Article
Full-text available
Personalities of those entering the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) Cadet Training Program (CTP) are unknown and may differ to the general public. The current study provides the first known detailed analyses of personality trait, sociodemographic, and gender differences among RCMP cadets. The current study draws data from the RCMP Longitudinal PTSD Study (www.rcmpstudy.ca). Participating RCMP cadets (n = 772) starting the CTP completed a web-based questionnaire which included sociodemographic questions and the six-factor HEXACO personality inventory. Cadet women reported significantly higher scores on the HEXACO factors of Honesty-Humility, Emotionality, and Conscientiousness and lower scores on Agreeableness and Openness to Experience than cadet men. Older cadets (+ 40 years old) and cadets with more education (university degree or higher) also scored significantly higher on all factor-level scales, except for Extraversion. Relative to the general population, participating cadets reported significantly higher levels of Honesty-Humility, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness and lower levels of Emotionality and Openness to Experience. Cadets also reported significantly higher scores on the HEXACO facet-level scales of Fairness and lower scores on Fearfulness and Unconventionality. The current results highlight potentially important HEXACO factor-level and facet-level differences between cadet men and women and between the general population and RCMP cadets.
... Thus, to make the best decisions, scholars and practitioners suggest integrating multiple pieces of information about a candidate (Kwaske & Morris, 2015). Importantly, Lough and Von Treuer (2013) suggest (a) it is important for an instrument to focus not just on pathology, and (b) appropriate outcome variables need to be used in the validation of such an instrument. As such, our goal was to provide evidence for the use of a new instrument that meets these criteria. ...
Article
Full-text available
Pathology, personality, and integrity-related construct assessments have been widely used in the selection of police officers. However, the incidence of police brutality and misconduct is still concerning. The present study explored the feasibility of the assessment of cultural competence in police officers. We explored the extent to which the change to the agency’s first ever Black CEO would affect cultural competence of the officers as well as incidence of misconduct. Results showed that scores on a cultural competence factor of an in-basket simulation used for promotional assessments at a state highway patrol agency were not predictive of either supervisor-rated performance or incidence of misconduct. Whereas results showed that misconduct was not predicted by the agency’s first Black CEO, cultural competence of the officers did increase after the change in command. Practical implications for law enforcement agencies and suggestions for future research are discussed.
... Second, correctional agencies need to administer psychological tests to selectout applicants from the hiring process who pose a risk of violating professional boundaries. The functioning of psychological testing is well documented (Lough & Treuer, 2013). Criminal justice agencies use psychological tests to evaluate applicants' personality traits, psychopathic behaviors, cognitive abilities, and critical thinking skills to determine their suitability or unsuitability to perform specific tasks or respond to specific situations. ...
Article
Full-text available
Correctional officer excessive use of force has not been the focus of previous research inquiries, even though it is an inevitable feature of corrections work. Utilizing court cases from the U.S. District Courts and U.S. Courts of Appeals, this study seeks to add to the body of knowledge by examining criminal liability for correctional officer excessive use of force. The most consistent theme influencing correctional officers’ decisions to use excessive force was prisoners’ display of disrespectful or hostile behavior. Correctional officers involved in gang criminal activity, sexually assaulting prisoners, and using force on prisoners with pre-existing medical conditions were other themes that emerged from the analysis. This study expands our knowledge of individual, situational, and organizational characteristics that might contribute to excessive force in corrections settings. Our study shows that correctional agencies can reduce excessive force levels by implementing simulation-based training, administering psychological tests, and creating mandatory reporting laws.
Article
This study investigates the predictive validity of psychometric tests included in the Norwegian Police University College selection process for 106 accepted trainees. Predictor variables were from the Scales (lst, verbal admin, lt-no) cognitive ability tests and the Shapes (basic) personality test, distributed by the contractor Aon Assessment Norway AS (formerly cut-e). The criterion variable was from the on-the-job training phase of the police bachelor program, in which instructors rated trainees’ work behaviors two years after initial selection. The results revealed a lack of predictive validity, as witnessed in both correlational analysis and a regression approach controlling for police academy performance. Contrary to expectations, cognitive ability test scores negatively predicted trainee work behaviors in the regression model. These results are compared with those of other relevant studies and are evaluated in light of this study's main strengths and weaknesses. The results of this study deserve an exploratory interpretation, given the limited sample size and a lack of hitherto peer-reviewed psychometric documentation for the tests. This study substantiates the need for further research with respect to the use of psychometric tests in law enforcement selection, particularly contractor-distributed tests, which are rarely studied.
Article
Since the 1960s, the application of psychological services and research to law enforcement settings (known as “police psychology”) evolved from being practically nonexistent to almost universal in a relatively short period of time (Scrivner 2006). Currently, psychologists provide a variety of services to law enforcement agencies, including performing evaluations for pre-employment selection, “fitness-for-duty” evaluations (FFDE), and counseling/treatment for psychologically troubled officers and first responders. The extensive use of personality assessment instruments in police psychology is not surprising given the fact psychologists have traditionally concerned themselves with issues of psychological measurement and test construction. In the contemporary practice of police psychology, assessment using personality measures is essential, being utilized in all of the abovementioned evaluations, in addition to other occasional applications (Weiss et al. 2008). This article provides a brief history of personality assessment in police and public safety psychology as it developed from 1916 to 2008.
Article
The problem of selecting candidates for law enforcement agencies is difficult and poorly understood. Behavioral scientists are becoming more involved as consultants to police departments and are being asked to validate current selection procedures. The MMPI is being used as a screening device. This study explored the interrater reliability of two experienced judges using the MMPI “clinically” in a simulated selection procedure. The judges used markedly different selection strategies and disagreed on nominal placement into two classes on about one-third of the cases. They reached the near maximum non-chance agreement possible, given that they used the nominal classes at different rates. Neither judge was more accurate in his selections than the other despite different selection strategies. They could not improve their over-all individual performances when collaborating. Criterion variables require improved definition before the search for valid predictors can be objectified.
Article
The current study expands upon the authors' previous work. The performance of two groups of Tasmania Police constables was evaluated after their first three years of employment. Group membership was a function of initial selection process — one group undertook detailed psychological profiling as part of their pre-employment testing, and the other group did not. The screened group consistently outperformed the non-screened group, with three of the differences statistically significant. Additionally, the screened group had a lower dropout rate, and were less likely to make serious on-the-job errors resulting in formal disciplinary action or investigation. Implications for applied practice, and further research and development are also discussed.
Article
Examined the relationship between police officer's performance on psychological assessment instruments and on-the-job performance. 65 prospective police officers (mean age slightly over 27 yrs) who were eventually selected for work in either an inner-city police department, a major university police department, or a community college police department were evaluated initially using a battery of psychological tests (the MMPI, the Eysenck Personality Inventory, the FIRO-B, the Shipley-Institute of Living Scale for Measuring Intellectual Impairment, the SCL-90, and the Bender-Gestalt). Ss were seen for reevaluation every 2 yrs. Performance criteria were derived from a 22-item supervisor's rating scale, measures of technical ability, and 7 performance criteria. Information from personnel records was also obtained. Analysis showed that community-college-based Ss earned higher ratings for both interpersonal and technical ability, and differences as a function of personality patterns emerged that cut across departments. The 5 female Ss had lower supervisory ratings of interpersonal ability. Positive attributes were influenced by Ss' departmental assignment, with inner-city Ss seeking more schooling and receiving more commendations than Ss in the other groups. Ss' in-service behavior was associated with patterns and elevation of their MMPI profiles and interpersonal needs. Overall results show a high amount of association between psychological variables and criterion behaviors. (21 ref)
Article
There are strong and compelling reasons for the careful selection of police officers, and careful assessment of candidates includes psychological assessment. The most commonly used instruments include the MMPI, MMPI-2 and the IPI. To assess the relative relationship of validity findings for the respective tests, 18 studies, which empirically related test findings to later police functioning, were reviewed in this study. The findings indicated both MMPI versions and the IPI provide modest correlations and effect size relationships to police behaviour (rs = 0.17 and 0.28, respectively). In addition, the IPI scores provided significantly higher findings along these lines. There continues to be a need for additional studies, as these results are based on only 18 studies, but the findings to date indicate better prediction of police job performance with the IPI. These results argue for increased use of the IPI, at times in combination with the MMPI-2, with increased attention to the normative samples and with increased assessment of the police, academy and corrections populations.
Article
Five MMPI items, which identified acceptable police officers in prior research, were investigated in a different major southern city. The items were not useful in identifying police recruit candidates who successfully met our selection criteria.
Article
The usefulness and validity of various personality tests in the selection of police officers has been recently considered. This study examines use of the MMPI to differentiate successfully between acceptable and unacceptable police candidates. An item analysis of the MMPI is presented, and five items which significantly differentiated the groups are combined in an index. The statistical errors of inference in a simulated selection procedure are examined with the use of Bayes theorem. The index has sufficient validity to warrant further investigation.
Article
This study reviewed and summarized the literature on the use of written tests in the selection of firefighters using a sample of 13,418 individuals drawn from 101 samples. For the prediction of job performance, cognitive tests showed substantial validity (.42), although mechanical comprehension tests showed even higher validity (.54). However, the best prediction was obtained by tests which were composites of cognitive and mechanical predictors (.56). Training criteria was best predicted by cognitive measures (.77), although mechanical comprehension predictors also showed substantial prediction value (.62). Tests which were composites of cognitive and mechanical measures showed validities equal to that of cognitive measures (.77).
Article
The application of a battery of psychological tests intends to “weed out” police applicants who are deemed mentally and psychologically unfit in terms of abnormality of personality traits and deficiency in psychometric measures (e.g., intelligence). This study employed various statistical analyses on a battery of psychological tests to analyze the interrelationship between psychologists' recommendations and police departments' recruitment decisions. This study's results showed that the applicant's general intelligence and police-oriented vocational profiling in a variety of social activities or interests demonstrated a significant effect on psychological assessment and hiring recommendation in terms of the applicants' fitness for being a police officer. Another important finding of this study was that the effect of the applicants' race was not statistically significant on police departments' recruitment decisions and psychologists' recommendations of hiring, while controlling for other factors.