Psychology control

A psychological report is a professional assessment with the aim of making psychological complications of a situation understandable and enabling interventions . The appraisal is carried out by a qualified expert. For questions relating to psychopathology , this is usually a licensed doctor or psychotherapist , for questions outside of medical science, an appropriately qualified expert, e.g. a psychologist or social worker . Psychological reports claim to be objective, independent and neutral. However, the norms and assumptions of the reviewer are inevitably taken into account.

Forms of expertise

Because psychologically relevant issues various parts of the scientific psychology (u. A. Clinical psychology , forensic psychology , business psychology , communication psychology , neuropsychology (eg.) And related subjects pedagogy , communication studies , social work ) that there is a correspondingly wide range of different forms of psychologically relevant reports .

The psychological report

According to the guidelines of the Professional Association of German Psychologists, it applies within psychological diagnostics that a psychological report “is a scientific achievement that consists in making statements on specific issues based on scientifically recognized methods and criteria according to established rules for the acquisition and interpretation of data ". One can also distinguish the psychological report from the forms of assessment mentioned below.

The expert opinion

In contrast to the psychological report, the expert opinion is an answer derived from scientific psychology to a restricted question of detail. The psychological statement represents a professional evaluation of an already available psychological report or a given question without collecting your own data. The psychological (examination) finding is a statement about the results of a psychological examination that is understandable for non-psychologists. This means that results are presented in a purely descriptive manner.

Expert opinions with a psychological reference

Expert opinions on issues that take psychological issues into account - but do not contain any psychological diagnostics in the narrower sense - are legally not "psychological reports". Such reports, which are used, for example, in the area of personnel development , family law and career counseling , often deal with psychological aspects, but do not provide any psychological diagnosis in the narrower sense.

Professional criticism

According to the Professional Association of German Psychologists (BDP), it is a problem that virtually "everyone" is allowed to offer to draw up a (legal) psychological report. However, every applicant "must submit documents about their qualifications and professional experience and is then either placed on the list of experts of the respective court or not." The candidates are not only psychologists, "but above all doctors, teachers or social workers or even Heilpraktiker ". The BDP has therefore created a register of certified forensic psychologists for the selection of a competent expert. All courts could access this reservoir to ensure the required quality of the expert opinion. The law on the procedure in family matters provides for procedures in care matters, contrary to the demands of the professional association of psychologists as an expert, a doctor for psychiatry or a doctor with experience in the field of psychiatry ( Section 280 FamFG ).

Quality standards for psychological-diagnostic reports

From the recommendations of the working group "Quality standards for psychodiagnostic reports on behalf of the German Society for Psychology DGPs:

Order acceptance

The order will only be accepted after a positive check

own expertise
the expected knowledge gain for the client
whether the order can be processed neutrally (open-ended)
whether the order complies with the statutory provisions as well
is compatible with one's own conscience

Psychological questions

The derivation of the psychological questions

is based on scientific knowledge and other reasonable assumptions
is explicitly shown in the written report
justifies the establishment of decision criteria for answering the questions

Procedure

The procedures for answering the psychological questions

must be related to the individual psychological questions
are to be justified in their selection and
must be precisely named in the written presentation

examination

The course of the investigation must be documented in such a way that it is clearly traceable and, if necessary, repeatable.

Results

Only the results that are necessary to answer the psychological questions are reported
It must be stated in each case on which procedure a result is based
The particularity of the procedure is taken into account when presenting the results
The results are explained in a way that is appropriate for the target group
The observation of behavior during the examination (test processing, interview) is a necessary part of the results

Interpretation of the results

The results are to be interpreted with reference to the psychological questions and the question
A critical assessment of the individual validity of the individual results must be made
All results relevant to the psychological questions must be taken into account in the interpretation
Particular attention must be paid to contradictions / discrepancies between individual results. If individual results contradict an interpretation, adherence to the interpretation requires special justification
It must be checked whether the interpretation made is the only possible one or whether the existing results are also compatible with other interpretations. If this is the case, adherence to the interpretation requires special justification
Facts (results) and their interpretation must be separated from one another and clearly distinguishable
Interpretations must be justified in detail. The interpreation process described under a) to e) must be reproduced in writing
All conclusions should indicate the results on which they are based
What is not clear must be named

Answering the client's questions

The client's question must be answered in full
Only questions that have been asked are answered

Individual evidence

↑ Marion Sonnenmoser: Psychological reports and expert opinions: misunderstandings inevitable . In: Deutsches Ärzteblatt International . No. 5 , 2006, p. 511 .
^ Klaus D. Kubinger: Psychological diagnosis: theory and practice of psychological diagnosis. Göttingen 2009. Chapter 1.
↑ Flat rate appraisal scolding doesn't help anyone. BDP takes a position on quality assurance in judicial reports. Professional Association of German Psychologists - Press release No. 03/12, February 16, 2012. ( bdp-verband.de Accessed on February 22, 2015)
^ Gunter Heinz: Sources of error in forensic-psychiatric reports: an investigation based on retrial . Heidelberg 1982, ISBN 3-7832-1481-5 . ; Gunter Heinz: Error in the psychiatric assessment . In: Dtsch Arztebl . tape 95 , no. 41 , 1998, pp. A-2552 / B-2194 / C-2041 .
↑ Guidelines for the preparation of psychological reports. Deutscher Psychologen Verlag., Bonn 1988, ISBN 3-925559-09-4 .
↑ Guidelines for the preparation of psychological reports. Deutscher Psychologen Verlag, Bonn 1988, ISBN 3-925559-09-4 , p. 3.
^ Karl Westhoff, Marie-Luise Kluck: Psychological reports: write and assess. Springer, 2013.
^ Klaus D. Kubinger: Psychological diagnosis: theory and practice of psychological diagnosis. Göttingen 2009. Chapter 1
^ KD Kubinger: Psychological diagnosis: theory and practice of psychological diagnosis. 2., revised. and exp. Edition. Hogrefe, Göttingen 2009, ISBN 978-3-8017-2254-8 .
↑ Joseph Salzgeber: Family psychological reports: legal requirements and an expert approach. Beck, 2011.
^ Karl Westhoff, Patricia Terlinden doctor, Antje Klüber: Decision-oriented psychological reports for the family court. Berlin 2000.
↑ Flat rate expert scolding does not help anyone BDP takes a position on quality assurance in judicial reports. Professional Association of German Psychologists - Press release No. 03/12, February 16, 2012. ( bdp-verband.de Accessed on February 22, 2015)
↑ Quality standards for psychological-diagnostic reports. (Version 2.2) on: tu-chemnitz.de

[1] Marion Sonnenmoser: Psychological reports and expert opinions: misunderstandings inevitable . In: Deutsches Ärzteblatt International . No. 5 , 2006, p. 511 .

[2] Klaus D. Kubinger: Psychological diagnosis: theory and practice of psychological diagnosis. Göttingen 2009. Chapter 1.

[3] Flat rate appraisal scolding doesn't help anyone. BDP takes a position on quality assurance in judicial reports. Professional Association of German Psychologists - Press release No. 03/12, February 16, 2012. ( bdp-verband.de Accessed on February 22, 2015)

[4] Gunter Heinz: Sources of error in forensic-psychiatric reports: an investigation based on retrial . Heidelberg 1982, ISBN 3-7832-1481-5 . ; Gunter Heinz: Error in the psychiatric assessment . In: Dtsch Arztebl . tape 95 , no. 41 , 1998, pp. A-2552 / B-2194 / C-2041 .

[5] Guidelines for the preparation of psychological reports. Deutscher Psychologen Verlag., Bonn 1988, ISBN 3-925559-09-4 .

[6] Guidelines for the preparation of psychological reports. Deutscher Psychologen Verlag, Bonn 1988, ISBN 3-925559-09-4 , p. 3.

[7] Karl Westhoff, Marie-Luise Kluck: Psychological reports: write and assess. Springer, 2013.

[8] Klaus D. Kubinger: Psychological diagnosis: theory and practice of psychological diagnosis. Göttingen 2009. Chapter 1

[Kubinger_2009_a-9] KD Kubinger: Psychological diagnosis: theory and practice of psychological diagnosis. 2., revised. and exp. Edition. Hogrefe, Göttingen 2009, ISBN 978-3-8017-2254-8 .

[10] Joseph Salzgeber: Family psychological reports: legal requirements and an expert approach. Beck, 2011.

[11] Karl Westhoff, Patricia Terlinden doctor, Antje Klüber: Decision-oriented psychological reports for the family court. Berlin 2000.

[12] Flat rate expert scolding does not help anyone BDP takes a position on quality assurance in judicial reports. Professional Association of German Psychologists - Press release No. 03/12, February 16, 2012. ( bdp-verband.de Accessed on February 22, 2015)

[13] Quality standards for psychological-diagnostic reports. (Version 2.2) on: tu-chemnitz.de