Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology Advance Access originally published online on March 6, 2009
Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology 2009 24(1):1-2; doi:10.1093/arclin/acp002
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Secretive Recording of Neuropsychological Testing and Interviewing: Official Position of the National Academy of Neuropsychology
a Long Island Neuropsychology, P.C., Lake Ronkonkoma, NY, USA
b Neurobehavioral Medicine Consultants, Ltd., Oak Brook, IL, USA
c Department of Psychiatry, University of California–San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA
d Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia and Research Department, British Columbia Mental Health and Addiction Services, Vancouver, BC, Canada
e Department of Psychiatry and Neurobehavioral Sciences, University of Virginia School of Medicine, Charlotesville, VA, USA
* Corresponding author at: Long Island Neuropsychology, P.C., 290 Hawkins Avenue, Suite B, Lake Ronkonkoma, NY 11779, USA. Tel.: 631-334-7884; fax: 631-980-3715. E-mail address: neuropsych{at}shanebush.com (S. S. Bush)
 |
Abstract |
|---|
Neuropsychologists are occasionally asked to have neuropsychological testing observed via the presence of a third party, through one-way mirrors, or with audio or video monitoring or recording devices. The primary reasons for not allowing observation are its effect on the validity of the examination results and the security of copyrighted test materials. To overcome the problem of observer effects on the examinee's performance, some individuals have suggested that examinations be monitored or recorded without the examinee's awareness (i.e., secretly). However, secretive recording of neuropsychological interviews and testing is deceptive, which is inconsistent with ethical principles. In addition, such recording may affect the behavior of the examiner. For these reasons, neuropsychologists do not, and should not, encourage, condone, or engage in secret recording of neuropsychological interviews or testing.
Keywords Secret; Recording; Neuropsychological; Evaluation; Forensic; Ethical
Accepted: January 14, 2009
This paper has been written, reviewed, and edited by members of the National Academy of Neuropsychology (NAN) Policy and Planning Committee. The Policy and Planning Committee is charged with writing position papers regarding important issues that affect the profession of neuropsychology and consumers of neuropsychological services. Possible topics for the position papers are suggested by the NAN Board of Directors, members of the NAN Policy and Planning Committee, or individual NAN members. Primary authors are identified and approved by the NAN Policy and Planning Committee. These authors typically are experts on the topic and can come from within or outside the Policy and Planning Committee. Primary authors, Policy and Planning Committee members, and selected outside reviewers provide extensive peer review for all papers. All topics and the final manuscripts submitted by the Policy and Planning Committee are reviewed and approved by the NAN Board of Directors.