Rogers Richard
Department of Psychology, University of North Texas, Denton 76203-1280, USA.
J Pers Assess. 2004 Feb;82(1):31-4; discussion 44-7. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa8201_5.
APA ethics have sought to uphold the practice of psychology and protect its invaluable contribution to psychological assessment, namely the development and validation of tests and other psychometric measures. Faced with formidable challenges from the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) regulations, the 2002 revision of the American Psychological Association (APA) ethical standards abandoned its protective stance. It makes previously protected material (i.e., answers, notes about testing, other forms of raw data, scoring, and test items included on protocols with answers) almost completely accessible to clients and others. Without any professional protections, the worldwide dissemination of these materials via the Internet is virtually assured. In this article, I examine the confused language of Ethical Standard 9.04 (a) with its permissive language and concatenated use of the or conjunction. I evaluate the release of test materials in light of nonmaleficence as both an aspirational principle and an enforceable standard (3.04). Relying on official statements from APA and other prestigious organizations, I document the substantial harm to clients, the community, and the profession of psychology in eroding test security.
美国心理学会（APA）的伦理准则一直致力于维护心理学实践，并保护其对心理评估的宝贵贡献，即测试及其他心理测量方法的开发与验证。面对1996年《健康保险流通与责任法案》（HIPAA）法规带来的巨大挑战，美国心理学会（APA）2002年修订的伦理标准放弃了其保护立场。它使得先前受保护的材料（即答案、测试记录、其他形式的原始数据、评分以及附有答案的协议中的测试项目）几乎完全向客户和其他人员开放。由于没有任何专业保护措施，这些材料通过互联网在全球范围内传播几乎是必然的。在本文中，我审视了伦理标准9.04（a）中令人困惑的措辞，其采用了许可性语言并串联使用了“或”连词。我根据不伤害原则（这既是一项理想原则也是一项可执行标准，即3.04）来评估测试材料的发布。依据美国心理学会（APA）和其他知名组织的官方声明，我记录了测试安全性受到侵蚀对客户、社会以及心理学专业所造成的重大危害。
