PRE-EMPLOYMENT SELECTION

Five Point Rating Scale | Three Rating Framework | Law Enforcement Screening Difficulties

Our staff includes board certified clinical and industrial/organizational psychologists, psychologists with degrees in law and university based opportunities for research and community involvement. We know of no other firm that has services with the depth of experience we offer.

Screening conducted prior to a preliminary offer of employment is behaviorally based, using the B-Pad System. As required by the Americans with Disabilities Act, only industrial/organizational and research psychologists who do not have mental health training conduct these evaluations, as required by law.

Post-preliminary offers of employment can be followed by assessment of psychological suitability for the position considered. These are comprehensive evaluations to determine the status of personnel and their suitability for performing the essential elements of the job sought.

Our procedures comply with and exceed all of the guidance available from the American Psychological Association and the International Association of Chiefs of Police. Further, completed evaluations are reviewed for quality assurance by a second, qualified police psychologist. All psychologists working with our firm comply with professional requirements for supervision and oversight of their work, as required by the State in which they are licensed and the American Psychological Association. Our purpose is to enhance the quality of the force, and to do so without incurring liability by involving malpractice.

After completing testing, psychologists review test results.   Each candidate is then interviewed using a structured, or standardized, interview protocol. This interview is an essential element that permits a defendable recommendation. Law enforcement personnel must be effective interacting with others. Without a sample of interaction, the evaluating psychologist cannot effectively assess candidates' interpersonal skills. Standardization is essential because the interview is in every way a performance test. How well one does depends in large measure on what is asked. If it is not standardized, there is a critical flaw in the selection process, as applicants cannot be assured of the fairness of the procedure, nor can Agencies/Departments be confident that all of the relevant issues are explored.

Experienced police psychologists know that the only set of guidelines that exist recommend standardizing this interview. The International Chiefs of Police (IACP) guidelines established the criteria for screening over a decade ago. This guidance has become the rule for law enforcement psychological services and will surely be encountered in any appeal or litigation that would challenge the employer's process.

The structured interview that our firm uses has been in use in thousands of law enforcement screenings. It has been generated by Dr. Hibler over some two decades of development, use and validation. None of the thousands of applicants screened has appealed a finding. The content of this interview has been developed for its relevancy to assessing reliability and the psychological attributes that are involved in law enforcement duty. The sequence of topics and how inquiry is made are designed to facilitate rapport. At the same time, the careful choice of topics and questions logically build an understanding of the interviewee that is relevant to the demands of law enforcement duty.

We ask for permission to tape record interviews so there is a record of what was or was not said. This interview is copyrighted and although proprietary, is sufficiently protected by copyright law and professional ethics that it is not necessary for departments to handle it with any special precautions.

It should also be mentioned that psychologists have no way of knowing if biographic or historical information provided by an applicant is accurate or complete. In the worst case scenario, applicants maximize their accomplishments and minimize or omit their shortcomings and wrong-doings. This is another reason why the structured interview is vital. Attempts to manipulate are recorded and are undisputable. Yet manipulation and deceit are usually evident only when the Department's applicant processing unit compares histories and explanations provided during psychological screening to the background investigation. Accordingly, where dishonesty occurs, we are pleased to update our earlier report by revising the final rating as a failure; reliability requires integrity.

It should be noted, however, that there is no normative test data for such definitive analysis of non-sworn personnel. Accordingly, Dispatchers, Corrections Officers, Fire Marshalls and other occupational groups are reported only with a three rating framework. These categories are "Recommended," "Recommended with Reservation" and "Not Recommended."

[ Home ] [ Selection ] [ Fitness for Duty ] [ Intervention & Consultation ] [ Training ] [ Investigative Consultation ] [ Expert Testimony ]