Return to APA Collection Inventory Page

Return to the APA Collection Series II

Copyright Restrictions

Image file of Printed Item

Text of Printed Item:

Division of Clinical Neuropsychology
Newsletter 40
American Psychological Association
Volume IX, Number 1 December, 1990

President's Message

Clinical neuropsychology has experienced remarkable growth as a specialty in the past two decades. Its growth and credibility are reflected in the rapidly expanding membership in professional organizations. Indeed, prior to the formation of the International Neuropsychological Society in 1966, no organization of this scope existed to represent the interests of neuropsychology. Historically, the establishment of the National Academy of Neuropsychology followed by Division 40 are also important benchmarks in the development of clinical neuropsychology. Clearly, division status within the APA was a major step in the development of clinical neuropsychology as a specialty in American Psychology. Although Di-ision 40 continues to be one of the-fastest growing and most vibrant divisions of the American Psychological Association (APA), we should not lose sight of the fact that we have existed for only some 10 years.

Basic and clinical research in neurology and neuropsychology set the stage for the recognition of clinical neuropsychology as a distinct specialty. With the APA having no formal policy regarding new specialties, the development of the specialty has only come with the leadership provided by various individuals. I should like to use this column, during my term of office, to recognize the contributions made by our colleagues.

It is a pleasure to announce that such an individual has been recognized for hiscontributions. The 1990 American Psychological Association Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Knowledge has been awarded to Professor Manfred Meier of the University of Minnesota Medical School.
This award is sponsored by the Board of Professional Affairs of the American Psychological Association and is meant to recognize individuals for the discovery and development of new information to the knowledge base of applied psychology. Specifically, these contributions must permit innovative applications in a wide variety of situations. Dr. Meier's contributions fulfill these criteria. ln a recent press release Dr. Robert Resnick, Chair of the Board of Professional Affairs, said, Manfred Meier has been the preeminent figure in the development of  clinical neuropsychology as a professional specialty. His years of hard work and dedication to the profession have more than earned him this award.” As a mentor, clinician and researcher, Dr. Meier has contributed to psychology for over 30 years.
Dr. Meier studied at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, where he earned his Doctorate in 1956. Professor of Psychology at the University of Minnesota Medical School, he developed and directs the Neuropsychology Laboratory at the University of Minnesota Hospital and Clnic.

Clearly, Dr. Meier has had a central leadership role in the development of clinical neuropsychology as a viable specialty. He provided leadership beginning in the late 1970's as our profession saw the need to establish standards of competence for the practice of clinical neuropsychology. His labors on a number of task forces are reflected in the establishment of the American Board of Clinical Neuropsychology (ABCN). Indeed, ABCN was the first new specialty to be incorporated within the American Board of Professional Psychology (ABPP) in some 28 years. His efforts to extend the use of the learning and assess-ment center” to the identification of neuropsychological competencies are seminal in new specialty identification. Dr. Meier has also served the Division in a number of roles ranging from our APA Counsel Representative to President.

The Award is a deserved personal honor for Dr. Meier. However, it also represents a further recognition of neuropsychology as a distinct clinical specialty in American Psychology.

Raymond S. Dean, Ph.D.
President, Division 40

Division Call for Participation
Training Programs

The listing of training programs in clinical neuropsychology (doctoral, internship and post-doctoral fellowship) maintained by Division 40 is currently being updated. Additions, deletions and changes in programs should be sent to Dr. Lloyd Cripe as soon as possible. The training program list will be published in early 1991.

[Page 2]

 Newsletter 40
Lloyd I. Cripe, Ph.D.
P.O. Box 2256
Sequim, WA 98382-2257

Program Committee
Due to a substantial increase in the number of submissions to the Division Program Committee for the APA convention, new members are being added to the committee. Anyone interested in serving on the committee should contact Dr. Carl Dodrill:
Carl Dodrill, Ph.D.
Harborview Medical Center
Neuropsychology Laboratory
Epilepsy Center 2A-50
Seattle, WA 98104

Division Participation
Division members who are willing to donate their time to divisional projects or activities can express their interest in participating by contacting Dr. Jim Horn:
Jim Horn, Ph.D.
Department of Psychiatry
University of Texas
Southwestern Medical Center
5232 Harry Hines Blvd.
Dallas, TX 75235-9070
214-688-3353

Executive Committee
(August, 1990 - August, 1991)

President: Raymond S. Dean
President-elect: Steven Mattish
Past president: Charles G. Matthews
Secretary: Kenneth M. Adams
Treasurer: Roberta F. White
Members-at-large:
Antonio E. Puente (1989-1991)
Gordon Chelune (1990- 1992)
Jeffrey Barth (1990- 1993)
Council representatives:
Nelson S. Butters
Robert K. Heaton
Standing committee heads:
Elections: Charles G. Matthews
Fellows: Manfred Meier
Membership: Jim Horn
Program: Carl Dodrill
Ad hoc committee heads:
Computers: Charles G. Matthews
Training Databank: Lloyd I. Cripe
Ethics: Kenneth M. Adams
Minority/Ethnic Affairs: Antonio E. Puente
Newsletter: Roberta F. White
Professional Affairs: Linas Bieliauskas
Task Force: Robert Bornstein

Minutes
Executive Committee (EC)
Division of Clinical Neuropsychology (40)
American Psychological Association
August l0,1990
Sheraton Hotel, Boston, MA

Members Present: Adams, Bornstein, Butters, Chelune, Dodrill, Fletcher, Goldstein, Heaton, Horn, Matthews, Meier, Puente, Rourke, White

1. Order - The meeting was called to order by President Matthews at 4 p.m. local time. He noted the rather lengthy agenda and the presence of certain guests as considerations in structuring this meeting.

2. Minutes - The minutes of the previous Mid-Winter Executive Committee Meeting were approved as drafted and published in preliminaryform in the Division 40 Newsletter.

3. Treasurer Report - Dr. White pointed out that the transfers and transition from Ray Dean's stewardship as Treasurer were nearly complete. She tabled a proposed budget (see Table) that had adjusted categories for two years of expenses. Council Representatives made inquiries to determine the degree to which APA covers expenses for Council Representatives, and Dr. White said that she would follow-up on this question.

4. Council Representatives Report -Drs. Butters and Heaton reported on a number of developments at the first council meeting. First, there are some proposed general changes afoot in how nominations are made for APA officers. Second, an assessment of $25 will likely be implemented to raise funds for advocacy and other private practice directorate activities. There are exceptions for full-time academic clinicians. Debate ensued as to whether or not Division 40 should request equal treatment for psychologists practicing in academic medical settings. The sense of the Committee was that this was a reasonable request and Council Representativeswould insist upon this in the structuring of the assessment: Third, the council received information on a proposed statement concerning the incidence of cognitive and other changes in seropositive patients with AIDS. The World Health Organization has offered a position statement that the APA is being asked to endorse. The initial study by the Division does not produce concurrence with a statement and Council Representatives were directed to indicate the Divisions opposition to generalized support from APA. Fourth, special guidelines for providing psychological services to Asian-Americans, Hassidic Jews, Appalachian residents, and others are being promulgated. Special attention will be invited to issues concerning norms, communications in the patient's own language and dialect, and a host of other issues. Fifth, discussion has been taking place in Council as to what constitutes a psychology department. In light of the renaming of various departments as cognitive science” departments, there is concern about the identity of psychologists and psychology within this and related rubrics. Discussion will continue on this count.

5. Publications - Dr. Matthews indicated that with the presence of a guest (Dr. Martha Storandt) it would be useful and timely for the Execu-

 [Page 3]

Newsletter 40

tive Committee to take this item out of sequence. With the assent of the committee, Dr. Matthews introduced Dr. Martha Storandt who would speak to the issues of neuropsychological journal publication in relation to activities of a recent ad hoc committee and the Publications and Communications Board of APA.
Dr. Storandt reviewed the history of the interest of APA in a neuropsychology journal. She noted that one assigned task of the Publications and Communications Board is to considerand survey the various fields of theoretical and applied psychology for emerging trends and developments that could be served by APA-sponsored journals or books. She noted that neuropsychology had been identified as an area that is rapidly expanding and could be reflected in the APA journals program. Discussion ensued between Dr. Storandt and the Executive Committee concerning the process by which the Publications and Communications Board and APA staff promoted the issue of a neuropsychoiogy journal. Dr. Storandt pointed out that it was APA's intention to develop new journals or modifications of existing ones in a thoughtful way with input from a variety of APA members and institutions. Several Executive Committee members offered that this particular intention was not born out in the action of APA staff. Considerable discontent was expressed concerning the apparent neglect of the Division s espoused statements regarding the journal publication issue and the failure of APA staff to encompass and perspect expertise available within the Divisions membership. With some mutual exchange in communication, the meeting moved from a focus on the relationship between the Division, the Publications and Communications Board, and the APA to the specific issue of a journal.
Dr. Storandt pointed out that the ad hoc committee charged with studying the prospect for a new neuropsychology journal had made a recom-mendation that the possibility of a PsychScan offering covering neuropsychology be developed. There was strong support amongst the ad hoc committee for this notion, and the Executive Committee at this meeting indicated its positive interest in such a development. The actual committee report from the ad hoc committee did not recommend a new journal in neuropsychology. Dr. Storandt offered that the Publications and Communications Board was consideringways in which existing journals could be modified to serve interests or needs not presentlyencompassed in neuropsychology. Several Executive Committee members expressed doubt that any interest in theoretical or applied neuropsychology was not presently served by the array of available journals. Dr. Storandt said that the committee was still studying the question of modification of existing journals and that the Divisions input would be considered and noted. Returning to the central question, Dr. Storandt was asked to describe the rationale for an additional jour-nal, since this notion seemed to remain alive despite numerous negative messages. Dr. Storandt stated that the motivation for a new APA journal in neuropsychology would not be based on need. Most Executive Committee members and observers noted that there is an over-supply of journals currently published in neuropsychology and that virtually every area of neuropsychology is encompassed in some way within the present spectrum. Dr. Storandt also stated that a financial gain was not a motivation in considering the introduction of the new APA journal. Asked what the motivation might be, Dr. Storandt expressed the view that APA should own and operate the leading journals in every area of psychology. It was her view that APA had a positive responsibility to psychology tooperate a journals publication program of the highest quality and service to the field. She did note that the area of neuropsychology is probably well served by the existing spectrum of journals and that APA is expressing interest rather late in the development of this publication field. Nonetheless, she felt that APA had a legitimate interest in examining this area for possible development independent of any need for a journal or financial gain and motivation.
Dr. Storandt expressed optimism that links between the Division and Publicationsand Communications Board could be maintained and developed in a fruitful way. On this note, Dr. Matthews thanked Dr. Storandt and the committee resumed deliberation. The Executive Committee in its discussions reaffairmed the opposition of the Division to APA starting a new neuropsychology journal in accordance with the membership survey in the 1988-1989 year. The Executive Committee adoped a subcommittee to monitor developments in this area. The Publications sub-committee was reconstituted with this communication and reporting charge with Dr. Matthews assigned as chairman, Dr. Puente and Dr. Butters as members. Finally, the Secretary was directed to communicate to the Publications and Communications Board, expressing the concern of the Executive Committee for the continuation of consultation with the Division and to indicate the Division's strong position that no new neuropsychology journal be developed. In addition, the Secretary was directed to indicate in the letter that the option of developing a PsychScan is a healing one that the Division would support. The issue of whether or not this would become a membership benefit was left open.

6. Division 40 - ASHA Joint Committee -The ad hoc liaison committee between the Division and ASHA meet earlier on August 10th. The joint statements concerning cooperative activity have been published in offi-cial outlets for both organizations. Further work and definition of agenda were topics of the earlier meeting. It was suggested that one area of focus might be ways and means of evaluating the efficacy of treatment. Future meetings have been scheduled to develop further the mutual ways in which efficacy of cognitive interventions could be measured and documented.

7. Newsletter Editor - Dr. White reported that the Newsletter will be changing its publication timing. The new publication format will be in late fall and again in July. Dr. White noted that there was the Executive Committee- mandated disclaimer on minutes. Therefore, Executive Committee members were placed on notice that contributions would be needed for target publication dates of October 1st and June 1st. Other informative reports were requested from

[Page 4]

 Newsletter 40

Council Representatives, Standing Committee Heads, and others.

8. Membership - Dr. Horn reported that there are currently 3,206 Division 40 members. There is a 55% increase in new memberships in the last year. The Executive Committee congratulated Dr. Horn on this achievement and noted that the increased membership of the Division needed to be accompanied by better representation on committees within APA. In addition, Dr. Horn will be developing a new mechanism and an improved protocol by which new members could be informed of their election. The Executive Committee inquired us to how public inquiries about membership are answered, and Dr. Horn noted that membership in Division 40 is confirmed without reference to expertise or competence. In all communications with public entities, it is noted that Divisional membership is an interest-based entity.

9. Nominations and Elections - Dr. Goldstein announced that Steven Mattis had been elected President and Jeffrey Barth had been elected to the Governing Board. He extended congratulations to these new officers on behalf of the Executive Committee and membership. Dr. Goldstein expressed the view that vigorous efforts need to be made to involve members in committee, electoral and other activities for the Division. He suggested that a survey might be circulated to members indicating their interests and also observations concerning their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the Division.

10. Ethics - Dr. Adams reported on two instances referred to the Committee with satisfactory resolution in both cases. Dr. Barth reported that he had completed an ad hoc committee review on new ethical principles being considered in major draft 13 by APA. The new draft has six principles as opposed to ten and the principal problems appear to be in phrasology and language. There are some conceptual issues left deliberately broad, including definition of competence, the use of psychological assistants, and certain fee requirements. The Executive Committee directed the Secretary to forward a letter drafted by Dr. Barth with these concerns as the Divisions official comment on this matter.

11. Fellows - Dr. Meier reported that there are no current completed applications for APA fellows. The Newsletter will carry a request for fellowship interests and nominations. In addition, an announcement concerning what fellowship status means and how to advance candidacies on behalf of oneself or others will be published in the Newsletter.

12. Program - Dr. Dodrill reported a 97% increase in papers. The Executive Committee offered enthusiastic congratulations on the quantitative and qualitative achievement that the Boston program represents. Dr. Dodrill announced that the new President (Dr. Dean) will be requested to add additional people for program review to the Program Committee. Announcements for Program Committee volunteers will be made at the Business Meeting and in the Division 40 Newsletter in the fall. Room sizes and layouts will continue to be monitored for possible improvements in upcoming programs. Dr. Dodrill also announced that supplies of TCN with the program issue have been made widely available.

13. Division 40 Task Force - The recent Division 40 Task Force report reviewed an Orlando represented the conclusion of the most current business of the Task Force. Awaiting reconstitution on future issues, the Task Force will not be convening.

14. Professional Affairs - Dr. Bieliauskas reported that he will be work-ing on a draft appreciation of the implications of prescribing privileges for neuropsychologists. Intense activity has occurred within APA amongst certain groups seeking support for such legislative efforts. Dr. Bieliauskas will be reporting back to the Committee concerningthe issues and how they can be construed. Other topics discussed included codes for cognitin will be forthcoming.

15. Dr. Cripe continued to receive and made modifications to the data base on training. Dr. Horn will be distributing these listings of training opportunities to any and all persons who may request them. The Executive Committee expressed the view that this data base is a valuable information source for students and others contemplating additional train-ing or service in neuropsychology.

16. The Executive Committee considered an invitation from The World Federation of Neuropsychological Society (WFNS) for affiliation and possiblesupport. Discussion ensued amongst the Executive Committee concerning the value of such relationships and goals in relation to Division objectives. The Executive Committee concluded that while the Division of Clinical Neuropsychology wishes the WFNS well in its liaison work, the Division will decline at this time to join the WFNS and cannot offer financial support at this point.

17. CAPP vs. Rank - Dr. Adams pointed out to members that copies of the complete CAPP vs. Rank decision were available for study of Executive Committee members and that duplication for others' information is encouraged.

18. Dr. Matthews drew the Executive Committee's attention to the fact that Dr. Tony Puente had been nominated for the Board of Convention Affairs. The Executive Committee offered its strong support for this nom-ination and the Secretary was instructed to communicate the Division's formal support for this nomination. There being no further business, the Executive Committee adjourned at 7:24 pm..
These minutes are subject to approval by the E.C.

[Page 5]

Newsletter 40
Report of the Division 40 Task Force on Education, Accreditation, and Credentialing
Guidelines Regarding the Use of Nondoctoral Personnel in Clinical Neuropsychological Assessment
Use of Nondoctoral Personnel in Neuropsychological Assessment

The practice of Clinical Neuropsychology involves the integration of data derived from a variety of sources which may include clinical or diagnostic patient interviews, clinical histories, and interpretation of data from various neuropsychological measures. There is a broad range of practice in regard to the use of neuropsychological measures in the assessment of behavioral consequences of impaired brain function. In the use of neuropsychological assessment techniques, individual psychologists may elect to perform their own assessment (in whole or in part) in order to directly observe specific aspects of behavior. However, there is no obligation for all psychologists to perform their own assessments in this manner. One practice in Clinical Neuropsychology includes the supervised participation of nondoctoral personnel (technicians, psychometrists, psychometricians, psychological assistants, etc. depending on the venue). The use of such technicians is a com-mon and accepted practice when the supervising psychologist maintainsand monitors high standards of quality assurance as suggested for such work in the General Guidelines for Providers of Psychological Services (American Psychological Association, 1987); Specialty Guidelines for the Delivery of Psychological Services by Clinical Psychologists by Clinical Psychologists, (American Psychological Association, 1981); and Ethical Principles of Psychologist, (American Psychological Association 1981).

Roles for Technicians in Clinical Neuropsychological Assessment

The neuropsychological technician occupies a critical role in the assessment process (for those psychologists who elect to use technicians). No neu-ropsychologist can interpret improperly obtained data, and it has been suggested that excellent examination technique is the sine qua non of neu-ropsychological evaluation” (Boll, 1981). However, technicians have a very narrowly defined and highly specific role in the overall process. These technicians are responsible only for the administration and scoring of neuropsychological tests under the supervision of a neuropsychologist who must be a licensed psychologist in that state or province. The selection of tests, interpretation of those tests, clinical interviewing of patients or family members, and communication of test results and their implications is the sole and exclusive responsibility of the licensed (neuro)psychologist. Experienced or senior” technicians may be involved in the training of new technicians or in the monitoring of testing procedures; however, the ultimate responsibility for testing procedures and training remains with the licensed supervising (neuro)psychologist. The professional rela-tionship in clinical neuropsychology is between the patient and the licensed (neuro)psychologist. Fees for service and accountability for the quality of pro-fessional work are exclusively the purview of the licensed (neuro)psychologist.

References
American Psychological Association. (1981). Ethical guidelines of psychologists. American Psychologist, 36,633-638.
American Psychological Association. (1981). Specialty guide-lines for the delivery of services by clinical psychologists. American Psychologist, 36,640-651.
American Psychological Association. (1987). General guidelines for providers of psychological services. American Psychologist, 42,712-723. Boll, T.J. (1981). The Halstead Reitan Neuropsychology Battery. In T.J. Boll & S.B. Filskov (Eds.). Handbook of clinical neuropsychology (pp. 577-607). New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Reports of the INS-Divison 40 Task Force on Education, Accreditation, and credentialing. (1987). The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 1 29-34. Reports of the Division 40 Task Force on Educationk, Accreditation, and Credentialing. (1988). The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 2, 25-29.
This statement reflects the official position of the Division of Clinical Neuropsychology and should not be construed as either contrary to or supraordinate to the policies of the APA at large.

Report of the Division 40 Task Force on Education, Accreditation and Credentialing
Recommendation for Education and Training of Nondoctoral personnel in Clinical Neuropsychology

The use of non-doctoral personnel (at both the Bachelor's degree and Master's degree level) is a common, recognized, and accepted practice in many areas of psychology when supervised by a qualified licensed psychologist who maintains and monitors high standards of quality assurance. In all such situations, these individuals represent the extension of the licensed psychologist, and fulfill limited and clearly circumscribed roles. The use of such non-doctoral personnel is consistent with the policies and procedures defined by the American Psychological Association (General Guidelines for Providers of Psychological Services, APA, 1987; Specialty Guidelines for the Delivery of Psychological Services by Clinical Psychologists, APA, 1981; and Ethical Principles of Psychologists, APA, 1981). In addition, the use of non-doctoral personnel in the area of clinical neuropsychological assessment has been previously addressed (Division 40 Task Force on Education, Accreditation and Credentialing, 1989). That document endorses the use of such personnel in neuropsychological assessment, and defines the roles and responsibilities of psychologists who elect to utilize such personnel. Discussion has

 [Page 6]

 Newsletter 40

arisen in several constituencies regardingthe requisite training and educational qualifications for non-doctoral personnel involved in neuropsychological assessment. The current document sets forward some recommended areas of education and training for these personnel (hereafter termed psychometrists). The committee members who contributed to the development of this document included R.A. Bornstein (chair), Roberta White, and James Horn.

Education
Psychometrists should have a Bachelor's degree from a regionally accredited college or university, preferably with a major in Psychology. This basic educational background provides individuals with the necessary background in the science of psychology, and provides the basic academic course-work which serves as a foundation upon which further training in neuropsychological test administration can be based. This coursework typically includes instruction in Abnormal Psychology, Personality, Statistics, and Psychological Testing. Individuals who have completed degrees with non-Psychology majors may also have completed course-work in this area. Individuals who do not have this academic background should be provided with specific information to supplement theirtraining in neuropsychological test administration.

Training In addition to formal university- or college-based preparation, individuals require training and instruc-tion in numerous areas that pertain to their role as a psychometrist. In addition to the learning of specific test procedures (see below), the psychometrist-trainee must become aware of the goals of neuropsychological examination and his/her specific role in achieving that end. The psychometrist-trainee should also receive training in ethical issues, methods of dealing with situations that arise in the context of assessment, and specific instruction in regard to the limits of his/her role, and relationships with the supervising neuropsychologist in addition to other psychometrists. Each of these topics are considered below. Administration and scoring of neuropsychological tests Without question the competence of the examiner is a critical aspect of all assessment (Boll, 1981). In most settings, the most demandingtechnical requirement for the psychometrist-trainee is to be thoroughly trained in the specific assessment techniques advocated by the supervising neuropsychologist. Psychometrists should be provided with manuals for each test which explicitly define the instructions for administration and scoring. Many neuropsychologists require that standardized test instructions be completely memorized. This complete memorization enhances the efficiency of test administration, permits the psychometrist to focus his/her attention on the patient, and may enhance patient motivation and cooperation. Psychometrists should not be permitted to administer any test to any patient until their mastery of instructions for that specific procedure has been documented by the supervising neuropsychologist (or in some cases a senior level psychometrist). Extensive early practice administering test to persons other than patients is essential. In many cases, psychometrist-trainees learn the various procedures in sequence so that they may begin to administer a limited number of tests (on which their mastery has been documented) to the patients being examined by other psychometrists while they learn additional tests. In all cases, the administration of tests to patients by new technicians should be closely supervised and monitored by the neuropsychologist or a senior psychometrist with extensive experience in administration of these procedures. At the completion of the training period, the supervising neuropsychologist should provide written documentation for the psychometrist's file which indicates the nature and duration of training, and which indicates that the psychometrist has satisfactorily completed the training program. For all psychometrists regularly scheduled follow-up supervisory sessions should occur to ensure that standardized administration and scoring procedures are maintained. Psychometrist's role in achieving the goals of assessment One typical goal of neuropsychological assessment is to determine a patient's optimal level of performance on a particular battery of tasks. It is important that the psychometrist-trainee understand the philosophical goal of the examination procedures. In addition to test administration, it is typically the role of the psychometrist to establish rapport with the patient, and to structure the assessment session to motivate the patient in order to facilitate accomplishing the goal of the examination. Psychometrist- trainees and new psychometrists should meet regularly with more experienced psychome-trists and/or the supervising neuropsychologist to discuss effective procedures for establishing rapport and facilitating patient motivatrion and performance. Ethics It is the responsibillity of the supervising neuropsychologist to provide explicit guidance regarding ethical issues that pertain to their activities in neuropsychological examination. These issues include (but are not limited to) protection of patient confidentiality, protection of the confidentiality of test information regarding patients, maintenance and protection of test security, and constraints about dual relationshipswith patients (or supervisors). The supervising neuropsychologist should provide access to the appropriate APA documents, and may also find it helpful to develop a document describing various eithical issues and the associated constraints these place on the psychometrist.

 [Page 7]

Situations arising in the context of assessment sessions Psychometrists may be working with patients who have a variety of neurological or other medical conditions. It is important for the psychometrist to be aware of appropriate institutional emergency procedures to deal with various medical emergencies such as heart attack, respiratory arrest, seizures, and so forth. In addition to medical emergencies, psychometrists should be aware of recommended procedures for dealing with incompetent or adjudicated patients who attempt to leave the testing setting without authorization. Psychometrists must be trained to be sensitive to subtle or overt suicidal or homicidal threats or innuendoes made during testing. Psychometrists may also be exposed to aggressive or sexually inappropriate behavior on the part of patients, and should be provided with specific instructions on how to handle these situations. The very nature of the assessment situation often elicits requests for information and reassurance by the patient in regard to the adequacy of their performance. It is critical that psychometrists understand the distinction between offering support or encouragement (which is within their role) and evaluative feedback (which is solely within the purview of the supervising neuropsychologist). Limitation of the psychometrists role It is essential that psychometrists have an explicit understanding of the limited nature of their role in neuropsychological examination. The supervising neuropsychologist must clearly delineate the lines of authority between him/herself and the psychometrist. The psychometrist should be made aware at the time of their employment that their role in the overall process is important, but nonetheless, by definition, is narrowly defined. As stated in a previous Task Force Report, the role of the psychometrist is strictly limited to the administration and scoring of certain test procedures that are selected, interpreted, and communicated by the licensed neuropsychologist. Similarly, psychometrists should be explicitly instucted not to present him/herself to patients in a manner that implies any independent professional prerogatives. Some prospective psychometrists may inappropriately view employment as an entry into the professional practice of neuropsychology. It is the responsibility of the supervising neuropsychologist to correct any misperceptions about the potential for growth in the roles and responsibilities of psychometrists. It should be specifically stated that test selection, interpretation, or communication of results are professional activities performed only by the supervising neuropsychologist. It should be further stipulated that these roles are not, nor will they ever be the responsibility of the psychometrist. Psychometrists may make notes duringthe examination of a patient's behavior, but the interpretation of those behaviors, and the incorporation into a report is strictly the responsibility of the licensed psychologist. Professional relationships with others The psychometrist should be provided with an organizational structure of the setting in which he/she works. This should include clear delineation of lines of authority, and directions regarding to whom the psychometrist is responsible for various aspects of his/her performance. Some settings employ more senior psychometrists with supervisory responsibilities over the daily conduct of the laboratory. These senior psychometrists may have Master's degrees or may have several years of experience (following a Bachelor's degree). In any case, the supervising neuropsychologist has the ultimate and legal responsibility for supervising all aspects of work by the psychometrist.
This document was approved by the Division 40 Executive Committee August 10, 1990, during its APA convention meeting in Boston, MA.
This statement reflects the position of Division 40 and should not be construed as either contradictory or supraordinate to the policies of the American Psychological Association at large.

Call for Fellowship Applications
Potential applicants for Fellow status in Division 40 are urged to contact the chairman of the Fellows Committee, Dr. Manfred Meier. He will forward materials which must be prepared and information on filling out the application forms. Each potential applicant receives these materials: 1. Division Fellowship Criteria, 2. Helpful Hints for an Aspiring APA Fellow, 3. Uniform Fellow Blank, and 4. Standard Evaluation Form (Fellow). Each fellow applicant must have three evaluation forms completed on his/her behalf, at least two by persons who are currently fellows in Divison 40. It is the applicant's responsibility to supply endorsers with the information necessary for them to accurately represent the applicant's interest. A key consideration in successfully attaining Fellow status is to show that the applicant has had national and regional impact in the area of clinical neuropsychology. Fellows who are members of other divisions who wish to become Fellows in Division 40 must follow the same procedures as new members. It is the members of a division who confer fellow status in their division. The Fellows Committee of the Division is available to provide assistance in completing applications. Application requests should be sent to: Manfred Meier, Ph.D. Chair, Division 40 Fellows Committee Box 390 Mayo University of Minnesota 420 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455

[Page 8]

 Newsletter 40
Newsletter 40 is the official newsletter of the Division of Clinical Neuropsychology (Division 40) of the American Psychological Association. It is published biannually. Address changes are automatically forwarded to Newsletter 40 when they are registered with APA.

Staff:
Roberta Firnhaber White, Editor
Psychology - 116B
Boston VA Medical Center
150 S. Huntington Ave.
Boston, MA 02130
Mark B. Moss, Associate Editor
Boston University Medical Center
Department of Neurology
720 Harrison Ave., Suite 707
Boston, MA 02118

(End of text)