What the APA Says After a Personality Assessment

What does the statement promise after the test?

The statement’s clearest post-test expectations are an understandable explanation, confidentiality within the limits of law, and a route for raising concerns. It says test takers should receive an oral or written explanation within a “reasonable” time, in terms they commonly understand. It also says they should be able to present concerns about testing or results and learn the procedures for addressing them. The same list expects results to be kept confidential to the extent allowed by law. These are expectations about the testing relationship, not a promised deadline, automatic access to every testing document, or interpretation of a particular personality score. [The reproduced statement](https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED457436.pdf) defines testing broadly to include psychological and educational instruments used to make inferences about people.

The publication trail matters. The accessible ERIC record reproduces the Joint Committee on Testing Practices statement dated August 1998, and the surrounding chapter cites its APA publication as 2000. ERIC’s record is a reproduction within a chapter about the statement’s development, rather than the current APA page itself. Its appendix is the accessible text for the listed expectations. It explicitly says the document is intended to improve testing practice and does not have the force of law; it describes judgments about what participants can reasonably expect of one another.

So the statement is best read as a prompt for a conversation, not a guarantee that every setting must deliver a particular report or release raw materials. It also places responsibilities on testing professionals. When different organizations develop, administer, interpret, and use a test, the statement says their roles should be clarified. A practical first request is therefore: Who is responsible for explaining this result, who will receive it, and what procedure should I use if I think something went wrong? The answer may differ between a voluntary coaching questionnaire and an assessment used within an organizational or regulated process.

Sources: Development of a Statement of Test Takers' Rights and Responsibilities (ERIC ED457436); Rights and responsibilities of test takers: Guidelines and expectations (American Psychological Association)

How can I tell what the report does—and does not—support?

An explanation tells you what a score or report statement is intended to mean; it does not by itself show that the interpretation is supported. An interpretation is a conclusion drawn from test information. For example, a report may display a score and then describe a tendency in planning or collaboration. The score is the reported result; the description is an inference. To judge that inference, you need to know what the instrument measures, why it was administered, and what evidence supports using it for that purpose.

The 2014 joint *Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing* make this distinction more explicit than the broad test-taker statement. Standard 10.11 says scores and interpretations should be shared in understandable language when appropriate or required by law, while noting that feedback can have unintended consequences in some clinical situations and must fit applicable legal standards. Standard 10.12 says psychological interpretations should consider other factors that may affect a result and, when appropriate, describe alternative explanations. Standard 10.14 requires relevant evidence when recommendations or decisions are presented as having an actuarial basis. Those provisions do not turn every report into a legal entitlement; they clarify that accessible wording, disclosure, and evidential support are separate questions.

For a personality report, ask what comparison is being made. If it gives a percentile, ask which norm group it uses; if it supplies only a descriptive statement, ask whether it is a score-based inference, a coaching prompt, or a general reflection. A readable explanation can clarify the claim without validating it. Likewise, a technical report can contain relevant evidence while remaining hard to use. The Standards also recognize context: current state, language, testing conditions, and other factors can shape results. A work-style description should therefore be treated as a tendency to compare with actual behavior, not a diagnosis, fixed identity, or stand-alone job verdict.

Sources: Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (2014)

What should I ask before acting on the report?

Use the statement as a three-part follow-up: request an explanation, check the basis of the interpretation, and clarify access or challenge procedures. First, ask the person responsible to translate the result into plain language and explain its intended use. Next, ask which parts are directly scored and which are interpretive, what comparison group or evidence supports the claim, and what limits could change it. Finally, confirm who may see the report and whom to contact if you believe the administration, scoring, or interpretation missed something. The older statement’s professional guidance also mentions asking about sources such as technical manuals, norms, and comparison groups, and about options for a second interpretation. Whether a particular document or review is available depends on the setting and applicable rules.

There is adjacent evidence for why understandable reporting is useful, but its scope should stay clear. A 2026 systematic review and meta-analysis indexed by PubMed compared accessible and traditional psychological evaluation reports in 14 experiments with 1,283 readers. The reports concerned children and adolescents in educational or clinical settings. The review found better reader outcomes for versions using plain language, clearer organization, concrete examples, and less technical wording. That supports asking for a comprehensible explanation; it does not test adult personality reports, establish the APA statement’s authority, or show that clearer prose makes an interpretation valid.

The verdict: the APA-listed statement is a useful checklist for what to ask after testing, especially about explanation, confidentiality, and how concerns are handled. It cannot tell you what your score means, guarantee that a report will be released in every context, or create legal rights. Before using a label in self-reflection, coaching, or a work conversation, ask what the result supports and what might alter the interpretation. Then compare one report claim with a concrete example from the situation it is meant to describe. If the assessment informs a consequential decision, ask the provider or decision-maker to identify the intended use, evidence, and review process before relying on it.

Sources: Development of a Statement of Test Takers' Rights and Responsibilities (ERIC ED457436); Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (2014); Accessible Communication in Psychological Evaluation Reports: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PubMed record); Rights and responsibilities of test takers: Guidelines and expectations (American Psychological Association)

Questions readers ask