By S. Kathryn Steele, Psy.D./HSP
Modern pre‑employment psychological evaluations (PPEs) typically include validated testing (personality assessments), a focused clinical interview, and review of collateral/background tied to a job analysis. A PPE should be aligned with IACP and state POST standards. [theiacp.org], [post.ca.gov]
1) Emotional Stability
On the street (example):
At a fatal‑collision scene, an officer calmly secures the perimeter, coordinates EMS, and delivers clear, compassionate updates to family despite bystanders filming and shouting. The officer is able to continue with the family with calm, effectiveness, and stability; and no indication of any internal emotions surfacing.
What examiners look for (how it’s assessed):
Guideline‑based PPEs probe affect regulation and recovery from intense emotions through validated measures and a structured interview anchored to a police job analysis. [theiacp.org], [post.ca.gov]
Evidence‑based indicators (what predicts outcomes):
Elevations on emotional‑dysfunction domains of the MMPI‑3 are associated with supervisor‑rated problems and complaints post‑hire (effects become moderate–strong after correcting for range restriction). [psycnet.apa.org]
2) Impulse Control
On the street (example):
During a heated stop, a driver abruptly exits the car. The officer creates distance, issues clear commands, and calls for backup. The officer chooses time and tactics, following training procedures; without impulsivity or a reflexive hands‑on approach.
What examiners look for:
Acting‑out/behavioral dyscontrol is a frequent reason candidates are rated unsuitable; practicing police psychologists most often cite impulsivity, substance misuse, and antisocial patterns as top concerns in applicant pools.
Evidence‑based indicators:
MMPI‑2‑RF behavioral/externalizing scales predict later problem behaviors and civilian complaints. In risk‑ratio analyses, certain pre‑hire elevations were linked to as much as 10× higher likelihood of problem behavior post‑hire.
3) Stress Tolerance
On the street (example):
After a double shift and critical incident, the officer continues to produces accurate reports, debriefs with the team, and uses sleep/fitness routines. The officer is able to effectively return to baseline by the next shift by utilizing effective coping; rather than pushing forward and risking potential risky behavior.
What examiners look for:
IACP/POST models require assessment of chronic stress coping, not just one‑time crisis response, using standardized tests, interview probes, and collateral that map to job stressors. [theiacp.org], [post.ca.gov]
Evidence‑based indicators:
Pre‑hire scores reflecting negative emotionality reliably forecast lower suitability ratings and more post‑hire performance problems. Normal‑trait measures add incremental validity beyond MMPI‑3 for these stress‑related outcomes.
4) Interpersonal Skills
On the street (example):
At a loud neighbor dispute, the officer listens, reflects each side’s concerns, sets ground rules, and negotiates a short‑term plan; resolving the call without force or arrests.
What examiners look for:
Agencies prioritize communication, empathy, and conflict resolution as job‑relevant screening dimension. Best practice PPEs apply test findings and interview behavior to those dimensions. [theiacp.org], [post.ca.gov]
Evidence‑based indicators:
MMPI 3 interpersonal functioning scales predict lower supervisor ratings and increased complaints. Using police‑candidate norms improves interpretive accuracy in these domains.
5) Integrity & Ethical Judgment
On the street (example):
An officer finds cash under a counter during a burglary call, immediately acknowledges it, secures it with a witness, and documents the chain of custody; all with initiative.
What examiners look for:
Rule adherence, honesty, and responsible decision‑making are central to suitability. POST and state regulations (e.g., 11 CCR §1955 in California) explicitly require screening for conditions that could impair safe/ethical performance. [post.ca.gov], [law.cornell.edu]
Evidence‑based indicators:
Pre‑hire MMPI‑3 correlates of integrity violations and disciplinary outcomes have been demonstrated in evidence based research, with meaningful associations across emotional/thought/behavioral dysfunction domains.
6) Cognitive Functioning
On the street (example):
During a perimeter security breech, the officer tracks, identifies the suspect, and repositions to close a gap, avoiding high risk engagement.
What examiners look for:
While PPEs are not academic tests, they consider attention, processing, and decision quality under stress within the broader job‑relevant criterion standard outlined by IACP/POST. [theiacp.org], [post.ca.gov]
Evidence‑based indicators:
Cognitive/decision‑making correlates often appear indirectly (e.g., through MMPI‑3 scales tied to thought‑dysfunction), which have shown predictive links to real‑world performance outcomes.
7) Work–Life Balance & Support Systems
On the street (example):
After witnessing a traumatic event, the officer proactively uses peer support, keeps a regular sleep/exercise routine, and maintains family rituals. These positive behaviors assist in maintaining resilience and buffering of the cumulative effect of the job.
What examiners look for:
Contemporary guidelines encourage evaluating lifestyle stability and help‑seeking readiness because they relate to long‑term resilience and lower burnout risk.
Evidence‑based indicators:
Normal‑trait measures capture positive emotionality/constraint facets that together predict fewer post‑hire performance problems and complement MMPI‑3 risk detection.
Data Snapshot
How common are PPEs?
National sources report over 90% of municipal departments require psychological screening; among agencies serving ≥25,000 residents, the figure is about 98%.
- State mandates & consistency.
A 50‑state review found remarkable variation in statewide requirements, with many jurisdictions falling short of best‑practice standards—highlighting the need to adhere to IACP/POST criteria. - Observed rejection (“not suitable”) rates.
A multi‑conference survey of practicing police/public‑safety psychologists (2018–2019) reported a mean current rejection rate 10% (range 1–50%). - Why tests matter (predictive validity).
Pre‑hire MMPI‑3 scores predict supervisor‑rated performance problems, citizen complaints, and integrity issues (effects moderate–strong after range‑restriction correction). - Standards & defensibility.
The IACP Pre‑Employment Psychological Evaluation Guidelines and the California POST Psychological Screening Manual (updated through Feb 2024) outline defensible procedures (evaluator qualifications, tests, interview, collateral, reporting) used widely as benchmarks.
Practitioner References (quick links)
- IACP Pre‑Employment Psychological Evaluation Guidelines
- California POST Psychological Screening Manual (2024 update page)
- CA regulation 11 CCR §1955 (Peace Officer Psychological Evaluation)
- Predictive validity studies (MMPI‑2‑RF) — Assessment/Psychological Assessment articles & Honolulu PD study
- MPQ construct/predictive and incremental validity for police candidates
- Snapshot survey of rejection rates among police/public‑safety psychologists (2018–2019)
