Part II

The Assessment Process

Part I of this article (MAGNET, May 2017, pp. 6-11) explained how psychological assessment ought to be done. After explaining the ethics of such screening, the author presented the main tests used in such assessment. This second part deals with other practical issues—how the tests should be administered and the results interpreted, how the reports are to be prepared and communicated, and to whom. The author then explains how this type of assessment is a positive formation tool and a help in vocational discernment. The article concludes by presenting the Church’s stand on the use of psychological tests.—Editor.

Administering the Tests

Administering psychological testing requires both attention t/o the details of testing procedures,  as well as attention to the client. To gain the candidate’s cooperation and best effort, it is important to build a good rapport with her/him. In order to develop this rapport, the psychologist ought to convey a sense of respect for the candidate, interest in what s/he has to say, and empathic understanding toward whatever discomfort or difficulty that may be experienced. Simple courtesies, such as, being in a comfortable room, proper seating, providing drinking water, opportunity to use the bath room, etc., matter for the interview.

The assessment can be turned into an opportunity for dialogue between the psychologist and the candidate about the candidate’s situations and self-understanding. It is good to check with the candidate what s/he knows about psychological assessment and how s/he feels about taking it and what she expects from it.  “What is your understanding of what assessment is about and why we are doing it?” is a good question to ask. “How do you feel about doing this assessment?” is another very important question that can open up a number of issues. The psychologist could make the assessment a collaborative effort by asking “What would you want from the assessment?” and “What can help us get the most accurate results?” Sometimes candidates can provide helpful suggestions.

The psychologist then provides his/her own explanations about what the assessment is about, what s/he expects from the candidate, and obtains a written consent from him/her to be a willing participant in the assessment process.

He then administers the tests and conducts the interview in a helpful and relevant sequence. Since many candidates may have difficulties in English and since most of the test content and procedures are presented in English, the psychologist gives due attention to explaining the procedures and content of tests to make sure candidates understand them right. Sometimes this may require the psychologist’s reading and explaining each item of a test.

Scoring

Proper scoring and analysis of the tests require that the psychologist records the candidate’s responses fully and accurately. The responses in some of the tests, like the Rorschach and the TAT, have to be recorded verbatim. All this requires great attention from the psychologist.

Scoring takes a good deal of time. In many tests, the psychologist’s job includes a sizable amount of clerical work, e.g., assigning scores to responses, computing ratios, transforming raw scores into standardized scores, obtaining composite scores, etc. Every step in this process is vulnerable to human error. It is a healthy practice always to double check (especially computations) before moving on to analysis and interpretation.

The raw data (the assessment tools used and information provided by the candidate) remains with the psychologist and is not returned to the candidate or the formator who commissioned the assessment. The psychologist has the ethical responsibility for the safe storage of these materials. The shelf-life, that is, the validity of test results, is generally accepted to be five years. Hence, after five years the psychologist destroys all the raw data and the report he prepares based on them. It is the responsibility of the one to whom the assessment report is given to destroy it after five years (or at least not to use the report for any further evaluation).

Interpreting the Results

The psychologist has to analyze the wealth of data collected. To be able to do this, a psychologist should possess a wide range of psychological expertise: knowledge of developmental and personality theories and of abnormal psychology, as well as expertise in regard to the tests used.

The first important question the psychologist has to consider in analysis and interpretation is: “Are the test scores valid?” When, for some reason, the validity of the results is questionable, or caution is needed in interpretation, this must be explained in the report. If there are situational factors (noise, language problems, stress, anxiety, …) that may modify or bring into question the validity of the assessment, they should be noted with statements like, “The test result should be viewed with caution, because …”

If there are contradictory findings in different tests, the psychologist should point this out and offer reasonable explanations.

A second question is this: “What does the testing add to the understanding of the client?”

This question implies that the psychologist’s initial understanding of the client is based on history, interview data, and the referral question. The testing and the face-to-face structured contact between the psychologist and the client supply additional information. The report should provide a representational description of events during the assessment, that is, behaviour of the candidate during the assessment process.

A third question: “How should the referral question be answered?”

Based on the test results the psychologist should provide answers to the referral question, that is, the reasons why testing was requested. The referral question must be answered clearly and fully. He also needs to identify other issues that came up during the assessment process and from the test results and provide suggestions as to how these need to be addressed.

Preparing the Assessment Report

The assessment report integrates the multiple test scores with information derived from interview data, referral sources, and observed behaviour during the assessment, all in the context of the referral question.

The psychologist has the responsibility to prepare the report in such a way that it not only answers the referral question but also to use a language that makes the results and interpretations easily understandable to the candidate and the formator.

In presenting the test results, it is useful to give a brief description of each test, highlighting what the test is intended to measure.

It is important that the psychologist emphasizes what stands out and is unique about the individual rather than make broad generalizations. He points out positive signs of emotional and spiritual maturity, as also the presence of gross inadequacies.  As a general rule, information should only be included if it serves to increase the understanding of the candidate.

In stating his conclusions it is important that the psychologist indicates his relative degree of certainty. Conclusions should be based on data and not be a mere speculation. When he is not certain, it is important that he be tentative and use phrases such as “it appears,” “tends to,” “probably” and so on. This helps the candidate and the formator to distinguish what is clearly established and what is tentative.

Over the years, a standard format for written reports has developed. The generally accepted format (components) of the Report is:

1. Identifying information (e.g., client’s name, sex, date of birth, date of assessment, name of examiner, date of report, etc.)
2. Referral question
3. Tests administered
4. Relevant history (Interview data)
5. Behavioural observations
6. Test results
7. Discussion and conclusions
8. Recommendations and follow-up plans

Communicating the Results

The usefulness of the assessment comes from the self-knowledge that the candidate gains and the knowledge about the candidate that the formator gains from the assessment. This depends not only on the manner in which the assessment report has been prepared but also on how it is communicated.

The psychologist takes reasonable steps to ensure that he can communicate the report in person to the candidate and the formator rather than just sending it to the formator and expecting her to understand it by herself and communicate it to the candidate.

It is a practice among many psychologists not to give the whole report to the candidate or the formator to read, as there is likelihood of their misinterpreting it. They prefer to paraphrase and elaborate on selected portions of the report. This increases the likelihood that the candidate and the formator will readily understand the most important material and will not be overloaded with too much content.

The detailed report could be several pages long. It is useful to provide the candidate and the formator a single page summary of findings and recommendations in simple jargon-free language that is easily understandable.

Feedback need to be collaborative as well. The psychologist first presents the report to the candidate, highlighting his major findings. He checks with the candidate how s/he feels about the conclusions of the report and listens with interest to her comments and incorporates her feedback into the report, modifying the report if found relevant.

The psychologist then gives feedback to the formator about his findings and interpretations. He also tells her the opinions and reactions of the candidate to the feedback. In case he has modified the original report based on the candidate’s feedback, he communicates this too to the formator.

It is to be noted here that the psychologist gives the report only to persons authorized by the candidate to receive them. It is important to specify who these are in the consent form that the candidate signs before the assessment begins.

The original complete assessment report is usually given to the formator for safe keeping. It is her responsibility that the report is not accessible to anyone who is not authorized. As pointed out earlier, the validity of an assessment report is considered to be five years. Hence, it is the responsibility of the formator (or whoever is authorized to keep it) to discard it after five years and not to use its content for any evaluations after that period.

Assessment as a Formation Tool

The psychological assessment can be made into an effective formation tool. This depends very much on the way the feedback is given to the candidate and the formator.

As indicated above, feedback given in person is much more effective than one that is just mailed to the formator. Communication in person enables the psychologist to turn the feedback mechanism into an effective dialogue. He gets the reactions of the candidate and the formator. He can share and discuss with both candidate and the formator the client’s strengths and weaknesses and suggest ways to deal with issues.

The formator can dialogue with the candidate on the results and conclusions of the assessment and use them to help the candidate toward a better understanding of herself and use that understanding as aid to growth in her humanity and her spiritual journey. Based on the   candidate’s personality profile provided by the assessment and the recommendations made by the psychologist, the formator, along with the candidate, can draw up a plan for the candidate’s further growth on the formation journey.

Often it happens that there is not enough time in the pre-novitiate to work with the candidate on issues highlighted in the report. Hence it is helpful to share the assessment feedback with the novice master or mistress. This can be done in two ways. The candidate herself can share the results, including the short written summary statement, with the novice mistress. A second, and more effective, way is for the pre-novitiate mistress, with the written authorization of the candidate, to give a feedback to the novice mistress in person,

In practice, however, many formators—like Sr. Leonie, presented at the beginning of Part I of this article—see the psychological assessment only as a screening tool. They do not see its possibilities for enhancing the formation process. Many psychologists who do assessment also consider the assessment only as a screening or selection tool. Their feedback methods fail to harness the potentials of the assessment to be a growth-promoting exercise.

Assessment and Vocational Discernment

The psychologist does not make a judgment about the vocational suitability of the candidate. He does not have the qualifications, expertise or experience to do this. This is the task of the formator. What the psychologist does through the assessment report is to provide a psychological profile of the candidate, pointing out strengths, weaknesses, motivational drives and psychopathological tendencies. He can point out the challenges a candidate with a particular personality profile might face in religious life. All this can assist the formator and the candidate in the discernment process. However, a formator does not rely only on a psychological report in making evaluation of a candidate’s suitability. The psychological report is only one of the resources she has at her disposal for appropriate discernment.

Here I like to recall a very useful tip that an experienced priest psychologist involved in assessment of candidates to the priesthood and religious life shared with a group of formators. He said: “In regard to judging the suitability of a candidate to the priesthood or religious life, your gut feeling (strongly felt conviction) as a formator is a much more reliable tool than the best psychological assessment. You have lived with the candidate and have the kind of experience-based knowledge of him or her that no psychological tool can provide. Go with your gut feelings. You will be seldom wrong.”

This supposes, of course, that the formator is a person of good judgement, and is not biased for or against a candidate.

Unfortunately, sometimes formators abandon their gut feelings and rely more on an assessment report given by the psychologist. I wonder if Sr. Leonie acted as she did because the assessment confirmed her gut feelings or she only relied on a conclusion that a psychologist had arrived at, a conclusion that went beyond his professional competence.

Psychological assessment is a helpful, but not essential, tool in vocational discernment. It is also important to point out that many of the assessment tools have not been validated with the Indian population, although some (like ASPIRES) have been. Hence the interpretations and conclusions based on the tests that have not been validated for the specific population have to be taken with some healthy skepticism. This is further reason for not using the psychological report as the sole criterion for discernment but to use it in conjunction with knowledge of candidates gained from other sources. Knowledge of the candidate gained from the formator’s many personal interactions with the candidate and from observation of her day-to-day behaviour within and outside the formation settings can provide the formator valuable insight into the candidate’s motives, interests, coping capacities, styles of functioning and relating. This knowledge is invaluable in making proper discernment. Insights from the assessment is only an additional resource.

The Church’s View on Psychological Assessment

For quite some time the Church had an antagonistic attitude toward psychology. One of the senior priest psychologists I know once told me that there was a time when priests were not allowed to study or teach psychology. This is not surprising, because psychology too had a very negative attitude toward religion and spirituality.  Psychologists had referred to religion as pathology, illusion, infantile wish fulfillment and so on, and had dismissed it as something ridiculous, meant only for weaklings.

Things are different now. Both psychology and the Church have left behind their mutual antagonism. The American Psychological Association, the largest professional body of psychologists in the world, for example, has acknowledged the role religion and spirituality play in mental and emotional health. It has a Division that deals specifically with religion. It has published a numerous books and journal articles that deal with the interface between psychology, religion and spirituality, as well as research data that have found positive correlation between religious belief and practice and mental and physical health.  It publishes a peer reviewed journal “Psychology of Religion and Spirituality” four times a year.

The Church too has changed its attitude toward psychology. Through its official documents the Church has acknowledged that psychology can be of great help for spiritual growth and can contribute significantly to priestly and religious formation. “The Directives on Formation in Religious Institutes” published by the Congregation for Institutes of Consecrated Life and Societies for Apostolic Life  in 1990 made a brief reference to the usefulness of psychology in religious formation.

Pope John Paul II’s 1992 post-synodal apostolic exhortation “Pastores Dabo Vobis” did the same in reference to the formation of priests. Referring to the various dimensions of priestly formation, the Pope observed that the human dimension is the foundation of all formation and that psychology can make a valid contribution here.

However, it is in the document “Guidelines for the Use of Psychology in the Admission and Formation of Candidates for the Priesthood” published by the Congregation for Catholic Education on 29 June 2006 that the Church clearly acknowledged and elaborated on psychology’s specific contribution to priestly and religious formation.

The document observes that every formator should be able to accurately comprehend the candidate’s personality, potentialities, dispositions, and the types of any psychological wounds, evaluating their nature and intensity, perceive the candidate’s motivations, discern the barriers that stop the candidate from integrating human and Christian maturity, especially unhealed wounds from the past, see strong and weak points, recognize the level of awareness that the candidate has of own problems, and pick up on any psychopathic disturbances present in the candidate. To that end, much advantage can be derived from meeting experts in the psychological sciences. Therefore, it is very useful, the document noted, for the formators to be able to count on the co-operation of experts in the psychological sciences.

Specifically, the document states that the psychological sciences can help in the formation process in the following specific ways:

1. evaluating the candidate’s psychic state;
2. evaluating the human dispositions of the candidate to respond to God’s call;
3. providing extra assistance for the candidate’s human growth;
4. offering opinions to the formators about the candidate’s psychic state and any therapy that may be needed;
5. and, especially, helping to heal wounds of the past that block the ability to grow in virtue.

The first four points easily come under the rubric of psychological assessment. Hence it is clear that psychological assessment is a tool that the Church considers very helpful in vocational discernment and formation. (Point 5, about healing, is the area of counselling, psychotherapy, spiritual direction and healing prayer.)

The document asserts the Church’s right to verify the suitability of its ministers, including through recourse to medical and psychological science. Moreover, it states that,a especially when there is doubt about one’s suitability, admission to the seminary or formation house will sometimes only be possible after a psychological evaluation of the candidate’s personality.

The Church expects the psychologist who does the evaluation to provide the formators authorized by the candidate his understanding of the candidate’s personality and the problems she faces and is likely to face. He will also indicate the possibilities as regards the growth of the candidate’s personality and forms of psychological support required or will be of help. He is also to help the candidate reach a greater knowledge of herself, of her potentialities and vulnerabilities and their possible consequences. (This implies that the psychologist gives feedback not only to formators, but also to the candidate herself.)

There is something significant in regard to the use of psychology that the document points out. It says that, considering the particularly sensitive nature of specialized psychological or psychotherapeutic techniques, formators must avoid using them themselves. This means psychological work, and especially psychological assessment and psychotherapy, are to be left to the professional psychologists and is not be engaged in by formators who have not been trained to offer these services. Sometimes, formators who do not have formal psychological training offer psychological services. The Church disapproves this.

The document also upholds the candidate’s right to privacy. It points out that recourse to psychological help be done in such a way that the candidate’s reputation and right to privacy is safeguarded. Hence a candidate’s psychological assessment can only begin with her “previous, explicit, informed and free consent” (no. 12). If the candidate refuses to undergo a psychological consultation the formators will not force her. Instead, they will prudently proceed in the work of discernment with the knowledge they gain from other sources.

The document observes that, for candidates to be open to the assessment without fear or misgivings, it is important that the atmosphere of the formation house and the relationship between candidates and the formators be marked by openness and transparency.  The manner in which formators present to the candidate the rationale for the psychological assessment is also an important factor. They need to avoid the impression that a referral for assessment is the prelude to the candidate’s inevitable dismissal from the seminary or house of formation.

The document also observes that the psychologist makes available the results of the assessment only to those formators agreed to by the candidate and that he requires the written consent of the candidate to do so. It calls attention to the obligation the formators have to use the assessment report only for the purpose for which it was undertaken. It is worthwhile to quote verbatim here the Church’s stance. “In order to protect, in both the present and the future, the candidate’s privacy and good reputation, let particular care be taken so that the professional opinions expressed by the expert be exclusively accessible to those responsible for formation, with the precise and binding proscription against using it in any way other than for the discernment of a vocation and for the candidate’s formation” (no. 13).

In case a candidate who has undergone psychological assessment has left or has been dismissed wishes to join another seminary or formation house, the new formators can access the candidate’s psychological assessment report only with the written permission of the concerned candidate. The previous formator also cannot forward the report to them without written authorization from the candidate.

The Church, thus, appreciates the value of psychological assessment as a formation tool and shares with the psychological fraternity a strong concern for the rights, reputation and welfare of those who avail of these services. May all those who use these psychological services, particularly the formation fraternity and Church personnel in general, have the same appreciation and uphold the same concerns.

Five Characteristics of a Helpful Assessment Report

• Is written in clear, easy-to-understand language using non-technical words.
• Clearly answers the referral question.
• Integrates the results of the different tests and knowledge gained from the clinical interview to draw up a useful psychological profile and indicates the implications of the same.
• Highlights strengths and weaknesses and indicates the presence or absence of psychopathological (unhealthy mental and emotional) traits and tendencies.
• Makes 2-4 practical recommendations flowing from the findings.

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

Asking the candidate, “How do you feel about doing this assessment?” is very important.

The report should be easily understandable to the candidate and the formator.

The psychologist points out positive signs of emotional and spiritual maturity, as also the presence of inadequacies.

The usefulness of the report depends on how it is prepared and how it is communicated.

The formator should destroy the report after five years, and should not use it for any evaluations after that.

The psychologist does not judge the candidate’s vocational suitability. This is the task of the aformator.

The church insists that we protect the candidate’s privacy and good reputation.

To subscribe to the magazine     Contact Us