APTi Ethics - Full Text

APTi Guidelines for Administering and Giving Feedback

On Psychological Type Instruments

There are three phases to the administration and feedback of a psychological type instrument:

Phase 1 -     Setting the contract
Phase 2 -     Administering the psychological type inventory
Phase 3 -     Providing feedback and type verification, which itself has two components:

• Explaining type preferences, self assessment by the client, and providing the results (reported type)

• Verifying the best fit type of the individual and exploring applications

At each stage, meaningful interaction must take place between the professional type user (the Professional) and the person taking the type instrument (the Respondent). Each interaction will ideally take place face-to-face in real time and space. Where this is not possible, other media allowing "person-to-person" communication are acceptable. Examples are given below. The key issue to best practice is that at each stage there is true interaction between the Professional and Respondent to enable the asking and answering of questions and the exploration of the personal meaning of the data and process to the Respondent.

Examples of acceptable communication media in order of preference:

• Face-to-face

• Voice-to-voice (e.g., via telephone)

• Image-to-image (e.g., via video or web-conferencing)

• Email-to-email

Phase 1 - Setting the Contract

Fundamental to the effective and ethical use of type is the establishment of a clear and professional contract with the Respondent (and often also the commissioning client).

The Professional should discuss and agree on the following with the Respondent before agreeing to administer the psychological type questionnaire. This can be achieved using any of the communication media listed above with an emphasis on real interaction.

Exploration and agreement about the way in which the Respondent wishes to apply type information and his or her desired outcome(s).

• Clarification about the degree to which type information is likely to be relevant and helpful to the Respondent's objectives.
• Clarification of the Professional's expertise in applying type in this context.
• Agreement concerning confidentiality and data protecting issues.
• Assurance that completing the type inventory is voluntary.
• Clarification that the type inventory results will never be used to label, evaluate or limit the Respondent.
• How the questionnaire will be administered and results given back.
• Costs and timeframe.

There will be times when the Respondent's desired outcomes will need to be modified or the Respondent and Professional will agree that psychological type is not the appropriate tool given the Respondent's objectives:

• If the Respondent expects the type instrument to tell him or her what job he/she should do, the Professional will need to clarify that type cannot do this, but can be a useful aid in the career exploration process.

• There may also be time when the application of the type data may be outside the Professional's competence, for example if a Respondent wants to use type results to improve his/her marriage, but the Professional does not have expertise in couples counseling.

• At other times the client's aims will not match what type offers, e.g. a client who wants to use type in a selection context.

Phase 2 - Administering the Psychological Type Inventory

It is best practice to administer a type inventory face-to-face. This enables the Professional to observe the Respondent's body language, develop rapport and put the Respondent at ease. It is also the method most likely to enable the majority of Respondents to ask questions they have about the questionnaire before they complete it.

Where it is not feasible to administer the psychological type instrument face-to-face, it is permissible to send it by mail or electronically via SkillsOne. In these circumstances it is best practice for the Professional to communicate with the Respondent by phone, letter, or e-mail to encourage questions and address any concerns.

Phase 3 - Providing Feedback

1. Explaining type preferences and providing the results

Explaining the type preferences, self-assessment of preferences, and giving back type results should follow the following guidelines:

• Feedback on a psychological type questionnaire should NEVER be provided solely through a written report that is handed, mailed or sent electronically to the Respondent. It is NOT acceptable to simply offer person-to-person follow-up to a Respondent receiving results. A method for providing that follow-up must be built into the process.

• Type feedback should be a process that enables the Respondent to explore for him/herself which preferences fit best. The Professional's role is to encourage that exploration by engaging the client in discussion and reflection as well as describing the preferences.

• Before the type results are returned to the Respondent, there should be considerable communication between the Professional and Respondent to ensure that the Respondent understands the nature of type and the meaning of the preferences AND has made an initial self-assessment of how they use all of the preferences within the type framework. Whatever communication media is used the following principles apply:
  • Provide a brief history of the theory of type including reference to CG Jung.

• Remind the Respondent that no theory can fully explain the complexity of human behavior.

•   Provide an illustration of "preference" such as asking the Respondent to write with their preferred and non-preferred hands.

• Convey that the type questionnaire is not a test and that there are no better or worse types. Describe the preferences in non- judgmental terms and communicate that all types can be equally valuable.

• Ideally differentiate what descriptors of preferences have been shown by research and what are anecdotes to illustrate type or are from your own experience.

• Be aware of your (the Professional's) own type biases and how these influence your description of the preferences.

• Present the type preferences and types as describing probable patterns of behavior rather than fixed "trait like" behaviors, i.e. talk in terms of tendencies and inclinations rather than absolutes.

• Use a context that is meaningful to the Respondent to provide examples of behaviors that may be related to the preferences.

• Be sure to ask the Respondent how they experience each of the preferences, ask for examples, encourage the Respondent to ask questions and reflect.

• Ask the Respondent to indicate which preferences he/she believes might fit best given the descriptions provided to that point. Discuss and explore further any preferences where the client is unsure.

2. Verifying Best-Fit Type and Exploring Applications

The type questionnaire results should only be given to the Respondent once there has been a thorough, mutual exploration of the eight type preferences and the Respondent has indicated which preferences fit best. The Professional should:

• Present reported type as a working hypothesis based on the way the Respondent answered the questions on the inventory.
• Explore through discussion areas where there are differences between the initial self-assessed type and the reported type.
• Encourage the Respondent to explore whether the reported type may fit, but also be clear that the Respondent can disagree with the reported type. Remember that in practice about 25% of Respondents end up disagreeing with at least one letter of their reported type.
• Present type preferences as inclinations or tendencies; use language such as "your preferences " rather than "you are …"
• Clarify that the preference clarity index does not imply excellence, competence, or ability, but is an indication of consistency in "voting" for the preference.
• Provide time and opportunity for questions.
• Where relevant, explore reasons why the reported type does not fit, e.g. pressures from the environment to behave in certain ways.
• Help the Respondent to arrive at their best-fit type.
• Provide a full description of the Respondent's best-fit type using materials such as Introduction to Type.
• Ideally provide a description of all 16 types for the Respondent.
• Do not counsel the Respondent towards or away from a particular career, relationship or activity based solely upon type information.
• Support and guide the Respondent in applying type knowledge to achieve their desired outcome(s).
• Ensure that the Respondent see the feedback session as the beginning of the process. Knowing one's type is not a one-time understanding, but a guide to ongoing growth and development towards an individual's potential.

Reminders For Type Professionals

• Accurately represent your competence and expertise to clients.
• Be sure you are professional qualified before using any psychological instrument.
• Participate in conferences, workshops and networking with colleagues to keep your knowledge of psychological type theory, applications and research up-to-date. Be aware of new materials related to psychological type, especially in your area of expertise.
• Honor copyright laws; do not reproduce copyrighted materials without permission of the copyright holder.
• Be aware of and adhere to federal and state laws governing the conduct of professionals using psychological instruments.
• Be responsible to educate others who misuse type.
• If you make reference to the MBTI® instrument be sure to use the trademark ® and use the term MBTI® only as an adjective (MBTI® instrument) or adverb (MBTI®qualified), not alone.

Effective and Ethical Use of Type in Groups and Workshops

• Be sure participants know that taking a psychological type instrument is voluntary.
• Communicate and make certain that all individual type results are the property of the individual to be shared or not as that person chooses.
• Provide supporting materials that describe all 16 types and basic information about psychological type for participants to take.
• Describe preferences and present type descriptions prior to sharing results to allow for individual self-assessment of their preferences.
• Use language that says "Your preferences..." rather than "You are..."
• Inform the participants that preference scores do not imply excellence, competence, or ability but are an indication of consistency in "voting" for the preferences when they filled out the inventory.
• Inform the participants that preference scores do not imply excellence, competence, or ability but are an indication of consistency in "voting" for the preferences when they filled out the inventory.
• Remind the participants that they are the final judges of their best-fit type. This may not be the same as the reported type they receive as results from an inventory.
• Provide time and opportunity for individual questions about type results.
• Be aware of your own type biases and how these might influence your communication of type information.

Where to Turn With Your Ethical Concerns

If you have concerns about the ethical use of type, call APT International at (301) 634-7450 for the phone number of the current Chair of the APT Ethics Committee.

The following articles are provided to further clarify the ethical use of psychological type instruments:

APA Ethical Principles (refer to sections 3, 4, and 9)

Person-to-Person by Roger R. Pearman, APT Bulletin of Psychological Type, Early Spring 2002

"Person-To-Person" Interpretation Is New Minimum Standard by Ray Zeisset, APT Bulletin of Psychological Type, Late Autumn 2002

Throwing the Baby Out With the Bathwater by Roger R. Pearman, APT Bulletin of Psychological Type, Winter 2003

Feedback Requirements for the MBTI Instrument: Part I by Naomi Quenk and Jeffrey Hayes, APT Bulletin of Psychological Type, Spring 2003

Feedback Requirements for the MBTI Instrument: Part II by Naomi Quenk and Jeffrey Hayes, APT Bulletin of Psychological Type, Summer 2003