We, the members of the Washington State Psychological Association Board of Trustees and Good Trouble Committee, were moved by and stand in solidarity with the Society for the Advancement of Psychotherapy‘s (American Psychological Association Division 29) recent statement regarding their concerns with the Examination for the Professional Practice of Psychology (EPPP). A small but growing body of research indicates that BIPOC test-takers are less likely to pass the EPPP on their first attempt (Bowman & Ameen, 2018; Macura & Ameen, 2020; Sharpless, 2019a & 2019b), and that doctoral programs with higher proportions of BIPOC students have lower EPPP pass rates (Sharpless & Barber, 2013). Any psychologist with an interest in advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion in our field should be uncomfortable with these findings and their implications.
EPPP inequities are an ethical issue. Section 9.05 of our Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct speaks directly to the ethics of test construction: Psychologists who develop tests and other assessment techniques use appropriate psychometric procedures and current scientific or professional knowledge for test design, standardization, validation, reduction or elimination of bias, and recommendations for use. Reducing and hopefully eliminating bias in the EPPP is not only aligned with this specific ethical mandate, but also speaks to our more general ethical principle of justice: Psychologists recognize that fairness and justice entitle all persons to access to and benefit from the contributions of psychology and to equal quality in the processes, procedures, and services being conducted by psychologists. If a biased EPPP produces inequities in who becomes a psychologist, it is likely that these inequities are also reflected in access to care. Specifically, by creating barriers to entry into our profession for linguistically and culturally diverse test-takers, we also create barriers to care for the linguistically and culturally diverse people whom these test-takers might be best suited to serve.
We support Div. 29‘s recommendations regarding the future of the EPPP, and any other recommendations that are rigorously interrogated to avoid the current injustices described above (e.g., Callahan, et al., 2021). We hope that instead of perpetuating inequities, a licensing exam for psychologists might instead set the psychometric standard for eliminating bias in test construction.
References
Bowman, N., & Ameen, E. (2018, June). Exploring differences in pass rates on the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology. Communique. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/pi/oema/resources/communique/2018/06/pass-rates
Callahan, J. L., Bell, D. J., Davila, J., Johnson, S. L., Strauman, T. J., & Yee, C. M. (2021). Inviting ASPPB to address systemic bias and racism: Reply to Turner, Hunsley, and Rodolfa. American Psychologist. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000801
Macura, Z., & Ameen, E. J. (2020). Factors associated with passing the EPPP on first attempt: Findings from a mixed methods survey of recent test takers. Training and Education in Professional Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000316
Sharpless, B. A. (2019). Are demographic variables associated with performance on the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP)?. The Journal of Psychology, 153(2), 161-172. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2018.1504739
Sharpless, B. A. (2019b). Pass rates on the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) according to demographic variables: A partial replication. Training and Education in Professional Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000301
Sharpless, B. A., & Barber, J. P. (2013). Predictors of program performance on the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP). Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 44(4), 208–217. https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0031689