USING PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS IN EMPLOYMENT

Leonard D. Goodstein

Psichometrics, International, LLC.

A decision on June 14, 2005 by the United States Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals (Karraker, et al, v. Rent-a-Center, et al.) has caused undue concern among human resources professionals about the degree to which this case impacts the use of psychological tests in pre-employment and employment screening and selection.

First, let us consider the facts of the matter.  Rent-a-Center used a battery of tests—the APT Management Trainee-Executive Profile—to assess current account managers for promotion. The APT included the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) as one instrument in the battery.  Any applicant with more than 12 “weighted deviations,” otherwise undefined, was not considered for promotion.  Apparently, the three plaintiffs fell into this category and sued Rent-a-Center for discrimination as the use of the MMPI constituted a medical examination as a violation of the Americans with Disability Act of 1990 (ADA).

While the District Court found on behalf of the defendants, this decision was overturned by the Seventh Circuit on appeal.  The appeals court ruled that the MMPI was a medical examination, even if it was not interpreted by a professional psychologist, because of the nature of the questions asked in the MMPI.

The appeals court ruling specifically points out that “the MMPI does not simply measure such potentially relevant traits as whether someone works well in groups or is comfortable in a fast-paced office.  Instead, the MPPI considers where an applicant falls on scales measuring such traits as depression, hypochondrias, hysteria, paranoia, and mania.  In fact elevated scores on certain scales of the MMPI can be used in diagnosis of certain psychiatric disorders.”

The Court finding further notes that the ADA prohibits the use of medical tests that lack job-relatedness and/or business necessity.  As the Court noted, “At the heart of this case is whether the MMPI fits the ADA’s definition of a “medical examination.”  The Court’s comparison of the MMPI items with both ADA and the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission’s guidelines led the Court to conclude that “we think that the MMPI is best categorized as a medical examination,” and thus its use by Rent-a-Center violated the ADA.

What are the implications of this case for the use of other psychological tests?  While the Appeals Court’s decision is not explicit on this point, a number of inferences about what constitutes the legitimate use of testing in employment settings can be drawn.  First and most importantly, are the measures job-related?  This question must be answered in two ways.  One, the various questions asked should be clearly and explicitly job-related—what is typically called content validity.  Two, a statistical relationship should be established between personality test scores and important on-the job behaviors, such as productivity, spoilage, absenteeism, and tardiness, a further index of job-relatedness.  I would strenuously argue that would be difficult for a court to outlaw a selection process that met this two-fold test of validity.

It is my opinion that much of the furor that has accompanied the news reports of this important decision is caused by a failure by too many to understand the issues that were involved, what the court decided, and how this decision was reached.  Further, in my judgment, the several screening instruments—JobClues and Candid Clues—currently being marketed by Psichometrics International are clearly job-related and the benchmarking process that is now in place can provide any user of these instruments with a strong defense against litigation.  Obviously, in our litigious society, anyone can sue anybody for just about anything.  But, as this case illustrates, most of the time our courts come up with the correct verdict.