Current Practices in the Use of Psychological Testing by Police Agencies

Abstract

The National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders (1968) in its report to the President concerning the role of the police pointed out that there existed a need to weed out those individuals in the law enforcement field who displayed signs which indicated that their personal prejudices would interfere with the proper administration of their duties. It was indicated that the mere testing of individuals on their ability to answer questions pertaining to grammar, mathematics, and local ordinances was not sufficient by itself to perform this important task. Some agencies in addition to administrating examinations of the type noted above also use an oral interview to assess the character of applicants. The Commission criticized this procedure because it considered the oral interview too subjective a method of testing an individual's qualities. This type of test was considered insufficient to recognize unsuitable individuals because of the difficulty in developing valid and reliable oral tests. In addition, this type of examination was looked at as a means of utilizing political influence to sway the interviewer's judgement. The Commission recommended that there should be some other method of screening applicants in addition to the methods currently in use. It was pointed out that the current procedures were insufficient by themselves to eliminate those candidates that have personality disorders or other similar defects. It was recommended that police agencies use trained personnel, psychologists and psychiatrists, to conduct interviews with police applicants. It was also recommended that each candidate be subjected to a battery of psychological examinations in order to determine whether a particular candidate was qualified for police work. This concept is not new. For years police administrators have been aware of the need to eliminate those individuals who were emotionally unsuitable for police work. It was first proposed by Terman (1917) to use mental and scientific testing techniques in the selection of policemen and firemen. Terman administered the Stanford Revision of the Binet-Simon Intelligence Test. Terman felt that the testing of general intelligence was the most important factor, aside from moral integrity, in determining the fitness of an applicant for police or fire work. Kates (1950) conducted a study with twentyfive volunteer New York City patrolmen to ascertain the personality traits possessed by policemen. He was of the opinion that an individual with certain personality characteristics, just short of a thoroughgoing psychotic disorganization might be attracted to and satisfied with an occupation because his personality traits were compatible with its demands. He tested this group to find out if this type of relationship existed in police work. He also postulated that there would be a relationship between personality and adjustment or maladjustment in the emotional sphere with interest and satisfaction in the occupation. Kates administered the Rorschach Test and the Strong Vocational Interest Blank. As a result of the Rorschach Test he found that the degree of maladjustment of policemen was slightly but insignificantly greater than that of biologists and slightly but insignificantly smaller than that of routine clerks. He concluded that policemen probably, as a whole, demonstrated as many signs of maladjustment as may be found in other groups. The policemen that were tested showed a high level of job satisfaction although there was no relationship between this and job interest. Kates correlated the results of the Rorschach and the Strong Vocational Interest Blank tests and concluded that there was a significant relationship between job satisfaction and maladjustment. Finally, Kates pointed out that policemen with high police interests tended to be markedly introversive, to have adequate ability to accept their own strivings and outlook as mature,