Operationalizing Informed Consent in Psychological Assessment: Ethical Issues and Considerations.
Saved in:
| Title: | Operationalizing Informed Consent in Psychological Assessment: Ethical Issues and Considerations. |
|---|---|
| Authors: | Cowie, Kiefer D. (AUTHOR), Shea, Kelly E. (AUTHOR), Wu, Jenny Liang (AUTHOR), AhnAllen, Christopher G. (AUTHOR), Sinclair, Samuel Justin (AUTHOR) |
| Source: | Ethical Human Psychology & Psychiatry. 2026, Vol. 28 Issue 1, p49-70. 22p. |
| Subjects: | Informed consent (Law), Ethical problems, Psychological tests, Professional standards, Genomics, Consent (Law) |
| Abstract: | Psychologists routinely conduct psychological assessment in a wide range of contexts to inform various referral questions and decision-making processes. The results of psychological assessments can have meaningful real-world consequences on a person's life, and psychologists therefore shoulder an important ethical responsibility to obtain informed consent (with few exceptions). Despite this, the existing professional guidelines established by governing bodies like the American Psychological Association for operationalizing and obtaining informed consent are opaque at best and at points inherently inconsistent. Given this, there is great potential for assessors to differ substantively in the depth, specificity, and quality of information that is provided to patients during this process, which raises important ethical questions. This article reviews the current heterogeneity (and inconsistencies) in informed consent standards and ethical dilemmas to consider when conducting psychological assessment. A review of concepts from the genomics literature that are relevant to these issues is also discussed as a means of informing current practices in psychological assessment contexts. The article concludes with a call for clearer guidance and specific standards for operationalizing informed consent processes within psychological assessment settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
| Copyright of Ethical Human Psychology & Psychiatry is the property of Springer Publishing Company, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) | |
| Database: | Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| Abstract: | Psychologists routinely conduct psychological assessment in a wide range of contexts to inform various referral questions and decision-making processes. The results of psychological assessments can have meaningful real-world consequences on a person's life, and psychologists therefore shoulder an important ethical responsibility to obtain informed consent (with few exceptions). Despite this, the existing professional guidelines established by governing bodies like the American Psychological Association for operationalizing and obtaining informed consent are opaque at best and at points inherently inconsistent. Given this, there is great potential for assessors to differ substantively in the depth, specificity, and quality of information that is provided to patients during this process, which raises important ethical questions. This article reviews the current heterogeneity (and inconsistencies) in informed consent standards and ethical dilemmas to consider when conducting psychological assessment. A review of concepts from the genomics literature that are relevant to these issues is also discussed as a means of informing current practices in psychological assessment contexts. The article concludes with a call for clearer guidance and specific standards for operationalizing informed consent processes within psychological assessment settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 15594343 |
| DOI: | 10.1891/EHPP-2025-0011 |
