How to evaluate a psychological test: the published standards
Two reference frameworks that professional reviewers use, and a scorecard you can apply to any assessment before you buy it. Sources checked 5 November 2026.
Two frameworks in one view
| Framework | Who publishes it | Status |
|---|---|---|
| Test Review Model, Version 5.0 | European Federation of Psychologists' Associations (EFPA) | Published August 2025, replacing the 2013 version |
| Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing | AERA, APA and NCME | 2014 edition, open access; a revision committee was announced in June 2024 |
Sources: EFPA Test Review Model, Version 5.0, August 2025; EFPA consultation page; APA, Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing.
What the EFPA model reviews
- Part A describes the test.
- Part B evaluates it: rationale and documentation, test materials, norms, reliability, validity, support for fair use, and digitally generated reports.
- Part C lists the bibliography.
How the EFPA model rates
Reliability and validity are rated from 0 (not possible to rate) through 1 (inadequate), 2 (adequate) and 3 (good) to 4 (excellent). If an attribute that is critical to safe use is rated 0 or 1, the model treats the test as below minimum standard, for use only in exceptional circumstances by highly skilled experts or in research (EFPA Test Review Model, Version 5.0, August 2025).
What the Standards add
The Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (2014) treat validity as evidence for a specific use, not as a property a test simply has. See are personality tests accurate? for the five sources of validity evidence.
A scorecard you can reuse
| Question | What a good answer looks like |
|---|---|
| Is there a technical manual? | Published, dated, and naming the samples used |
| What is the evidence for reliability? | Internal consistency and test-retest figures, with sample sizes |
| What is the evidence for your use? | Validity evidence for the purpose you have in mind, not another one |
| How are scores compared? | Clear norms, or a clear statement that scores are within-person |
| How is fair use supported? | Group comparisons, accommodations and guidance on misuse |
| Has anyone independent reviewed it? | A named review, or a plain statement that none exists yet |
How the ICA answers today
Self-reported, not independently reviewed: the ICA publishes its study protocol, its claims ledger and its changelog. No EFPA or other independent review has been obtained. Its accuracy is currently being studied.
Questions
Has the ICA been reviewed under the EFPA model?
No. ANTHRL has not obtained an independent review. The claims ledger shows the status of every claim.
Which framework should a US buyer use?
Both are useful. The Standards are the reference in the United States; the EFPA model gives a structured checklist that works anywhere.
Sources
Keep reading
Take the next step.
How to judge a psychological test with the EFPA Test Review Model 5.0 (2025) and the 2014 Standards, with a scorecard buyers can reuse.