Topics 3 & 4: Validity & Communicating Assessment Results {by 6/12}

Based on the text readings and lecture recordings due this week consider the following four discussion points: (1) Discuss your understanding of criterion-related validity (also known as: prediction or instrument-criterion). In your discussion, include why this particular type of validity is common/important for mental health assessments. (2) Discuss the difference between convergent evidence validity and discriminant evidence validity. If it helps, provide a mental health example (e.g., assessing depression or generalized anxiety). (3) For communicating results to clients (or parents), provide a couple points that stuck out to as very relevant (explain why). (4) Why is it so important in “what” and “how” you communicate mental health assessment results to clients?

Your original post should be posted by 6/12. Post your two replies no later than 6/14. *Please remember to click the “reply” button when posting a reply. This makes it easier for the reader to follow the blog postings.

17 Comments (+add yours?)

Madelyn Messier
Jun 11, 2025 @ 11:16:20
1. Criterion-related validity measures how effectively a test or assessment tool predicts an outcome based on a recognized standard, known as the criterion. It includes two main types: predictive validity, which evaluates how well a test forecasts future results (such as how a college entrance exam predicts academic success), and concurrent validity, which examines the correlation between a test and a criterion assessed at the same time. This type of validity is important in mental health evaluations, as clinicians rely on these tools to predict diagnoses, assess symptoms, and gauge the likelihood of specific behaviors. For instance, a depression inventory must closely align with established clinical assessments to be effective. Criterion-related validity ensures that the outcomes of these tools contribute to accurate diagnoses and informed treatment planning, making it a vital component in mental health practice.
2. Convergent validity refers to the extent to which two measures that are expected to be related actually demonstrate a strong correlation. For example, if a new test is created to assess anxiety, it should show a high correlation with an established measure like the Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7 or GAD 7. In contrast, discriminant validity evaluates whether a measure does not strongly correlate with unrelated constructs. For instance, a depression scale should not have a strong relationship with a test measuring mathematical ability, as these are completely different areas. Both types of validity are important in mental health assessments because they ensure that a tool accurately measures the intended construct, no more and no less. This distinction is vital for differentiating conditions that may share similar symptoms but require different interventions.
3. One important point that stood out is the need to use clear, non-technical language when communicating results to clients or parents. Mental health assessments can be complex, and using jargon can create confusion or even anxiety. When results are explained in everyday language, clients and families are more likely to understand and engage with the information. Another key point is the importance of presenting both strengths and areas of concern. Emphasizing strengths helps clients feel seen and respected, and it fosters hope and motivation. This balanced approach can be especially helpful when discussing difficult topics, as it reduces stigma and creates a more collaborative therapeutic environment.
4. The “what” in communication refers to the content of the information shared—accuracy and relevance are essential because clients rely on this information to make decisions about their mental health and treatment options. Miscommunication or sharing incomplete information can lead to misunderstandings, poor treatment outcomes, or unnecessary distress. Equally important is the “how” of communication, which includes tone, empathy, and sensitivity. The way information is delivered can greatly impact a client’s emotional response, sense of safety, and willingness to participate in treatment. A thoughtful, respectful approach that considers the client’s background, developmental level, and emotional state helps build trust and encourages a positive therapeutic alliance. Both the content and the delivery of assessment results play important role in supporting the client’s well-being and engagement in care.
Reply
- Alexis Culver
  Jun 11, 2025 @ 11:35:59
  
  Hi Madelyn,
  
  I agree with your question number four as to how important it is for clients to understand what you are trying to say. I also agree with your question three about explaining the results in everyday language. As well as the importance to emphasize the strengths so the client will have more hope and motivation.
  
  Reply
- Sydney Corfey
  Jun 11, 2025 @ 12:32:36
  
  I agree with your answer to question 3. Using complex language can confuse the client even more and produce more anxiety. We want our client to feel a sense of safety and comfort, so using strong, complex language can prevent that from happening. It’s good to keep that in mind. I also said it’s important to provide an environment where the client feels as though they can ask questions. The more questions asked and answered, the less confusion they will face and more comfort they will feel.
  
  Reply
- Kiera Mills
  Jun 12, 2025 @ 11:10:28
  
  Hi Madelyn,
  
  I thought your answer to question 4 was very good. The wording on the original question kinda confused me but your answer explained the “what” and “how” of communication very well. I also liked how you used GAD as an example in question 2 since it is a very common diagnosis.
  
  Reply
Alexis Culver
Jun 11, 2025 @ 11:31:51
1. Criterion related validity is used to see to what degree an instrument is a good predictor of criteria. This is helpful in mental health assessments because it allows the individual giving the assessment to know if the instrument they are using is a good predictor of what is happening to that individual. An example that the book gave is if the SAT is a good indicator of college performance.
2. Convergent evidence validity is when two measures are supposed to be measuring the same thing are related or correlated with each other. While, discriminant evidence validity is a measure that does not correlate strongly with measures of different unrelated constructs. Discriminant evidence validity makes sure that the test is not measuring something it shouldn’t.
3. If the instrument you are using discusses percentiles make sure that the client understands that if you are in the 50th percentile you are average and that they did not score a 50%. Some other things that stood out to me is the importance of using other terms that may be easier to understand for someone who deal with a standard deviation or a normal curve in day to day life. Also, use visuals and make the individual feel as comfortable as possible asking questions that they could perceive as “foolish”. One suggestion the book said was to try and have your client finish the sentence so you as the therapist can grasp how much they are understanding. It is important “how” and “what” you communicate to the client so they can understand it. You do not want them leaving still confused and wondering what you were trying to tell them. If you just say what the assessment said with little explanation then the client may feel as though they should know what that means. Instead of feeling comfortable asking questions that could help them paint a better picture.
Reply
- Nick Cedeno
  Jun 11, 2025 @ 14:32:25
  
  I thought that the mention of explaining 50th percentile in a more deconstructed way was helpful for communicating how speaking with natural language can be beneficial for the client, or whoever you’re reporting the results to, in the process of conveying results accurately. I also mentioned the importance of natural communication without adding too much terminology. I think that it allows for clients to feel like this is more of a collaborative process.
  
  Reply
- Madelyn Messier
  Jun 13, 2025 @ 22:13:55
  
  Hi Alexis ,
  
  I like how you mentioned the need to explain percentiles clearly so clients don’t think 50th percentile means 50%. It’s also important to use simple words and check in with the client to see what they understand, so they feel comfortable and not confused.
  
  Reply
Nick Cedeno
Jun 11, 2025 @ 11:58:36
1. When discussing criterion related validity, we are referring to instruments that can predict how the test taker’s performance correlates to a preexisting standard or criteria. The validity of this instrument tells us the extent to which this instrument can accurately predict the performance of the test taker. This is important for mental health professionals because when we are measuring a specific thing or dimension of a patient so that we can gain information on that one specific thing, we need to be sure that the instrument we are using is measuring the right thing. For example, if we are measuring the level to which a treatment will be effective with a particular client, we want to be sure that this instrument being used to gain insight on this topic is accurately predicting the performance of the client in the future, based on an established standard. This ensures more personalized care.
2. Convergent evidence validity is when two tests that measure the same thing are compared to determine how parallel the two tests are in what they measure. Discriminant evidence validity is like convergent evidence validity except instead of providing insight into how closely related two tests are that measure the same thing, it includes the comparison of two tests that are meant to measure different things. This type of validity measures the degree to which these two instruments’ measures are different. For example, you wouldn’t want a test that measures coping skills to highly correlate with a test that measures anxiety. Which would be different from convergent evidence validity where you have two measures that are supposed to measure the same thing, like the PHQ-9 and the Beck Depression Inventory.
3. I thought that it was important to mention how the results were communicated in unique situations. The book recommended to develop multiple strategies for communicating results, because not every single situation is going to be the same. In some situations, you may be sharing results with a client who may also be a peer or be familiar with some of the terms used in the process of measurement. It’s important to also recognize when the client is not well versed in the jargon used to communicate statistics and test results. When we communicate in a natural way without using too many complicated terms, it may allow the client to better understand the results.
4. The book emphasizes utilizing general counseling skills when communicating results, because interpreting test results can often be difficult to interpret without prior knowledge on how the systems work. Communicating results should be a cooperative process that involves the client and is an open forum where the client feels comfortable asking questions. Summarizing allows for further reflection and provides another opportunity for clients to clarify anything they were unclear on initially.
Reply
- Sydney Corfey
  Jun 11, 2025 @ 12:29:54
  
  I agree with your answer to question 4. The delivery of the “what” and “how” can help build rapport between the counselor and client which can lead to question-asking, reflection, and a start to begin a treatment plan all while the client feels a sense of safety and comfort.
  
  Reply
- Kiera Mills
  Jun 12, 2025 @ 11:12:47
  
  Hi Nick,
  
  I thought your answer to question 3 was very informative. I liked how you went into how different situations call for different ways of explaining results. I also liked how you said communicating results should be cooperative with the client so they are involved in the process.
  
  Reply
Sydney Corfey
Jun 11, 2025 @ 12:27:59
1. Criterion-related validity is an instrument used to predict relevant behaviors based on the recognized standards or criteria. The criterion or standard variable is what this instrument is designed to predict. This is helpful with mental health assessments because it can predict specific behaviors which can lead to proper diagnosis, treatment, and appropriate procedures based on the behaviors predicted.
2. Convergent evidence validity is comparing two tests that measure the same thing and they are correlated to each other and overall, they theoretically should be positively related. Discriminant evidence validity is when an instrument is not related or correlated from variables where it should differ. Discriminant evidence validity is specifically important regarding evaluating the validity of personality instruments because irrelevant constructs can influence or impact the scores in different ways.
3. Two points that stuck out to me in the book for communicating results to clients and/or parents would be the counselor having different ways of communicating the results, and the counselor encouraging the client and/or parent to ask questions. First, having different ways of communicating the results allows the counselor to be prepared to explain specific terms if needed, like “standard deviation”, because the clients will differ in many ways. Some may not understand specific terms, while others will fully understand. Second, the client and/or parent asking questions will help make sure the client understands as much as they can and as much as they should regarding their results. If a client is left uncertain about something, they should feel comfortable to ask about it for clarification and a full understanding.
4. The way the “what” and “how” is delivered to the client is crucial as it can impact their emotional well-being, thought process, sense of safety, and it can encourage the client to willingly participate in a treatment plan. Using general counseling skills to deliver the “what” and “how” can encourage the client to ask questions and reflect on what is being discussed. It could help the client be willing to participate in a treatment plan and feel a sense of safety which can help built rapport between the counselor and the client.
Reply
- pleasantducke5849b6498
  Jun 11, 2025 @ 13:05:28
  
  I agree with your point in question 4 how it can encourage the client to do treatment. I also really like your point about how the client can feel safe which will help build a rapport.
  
  Reply
- Nick Cedeno
  Jun 11, 2025 @ 14:47:48
  
  Hi Syd,
  
  I thought the way that you differentiated between convergent from discriminant evidence validity was helpful. I understand the main idea of the kinds and purposes of the two validities, but I had trouble putting it into words. When I put the two validities in context, like the BDI and PHQ-9 in the context of depression.
  
  Reply
- Madelyn Messier
  Jun 13, 2025 @ 22:16:50
  
  Hi Sydney,
  
  I agree that being able to explain terms like standard deviation in different ways is really important since not everyone will understand the same way. Encouraging clients or parents to ask questions helps make sure they leave feeling clear and confident about the results.
  
  Reply
Kiera Mills
Jun 11, 2025 @ 22:05:03
1. Criterion-related validity is a type of validity that assesses how well the instrument is correlated to its intended outcome. This means how well it is able to predict future behavior or achievement based on the results of the test. In psychology, this is most applicable to assessing the validity of a newly created measure by comparing it to historically valid tests measuring the same subject or behavior. If a measure has poor criterion validity this could lead to poor advice from therapists regarding future plans. For example; if a job assessment given by a career counselor has poor criterion validity it could push someone towards a career path they are not able to succeed in by making bad predictions of behavior.
2. Convergent evidence validity is when an instrument is expected to have a positive correlation/relationship with other instruments that measure related criteria. If you wanted to make a new depression scale, you would want high convergent evidence validity with existing depression scales. Discriminant evidence validity is when an instrument does not have a correlation when it is intended to have a negative correlation. If you wanted to make a measure of anorexia, you would want discriminant evidence validity with binge eating disorder measures since they are both eating disorders but with opposing symptoms.
3. Sharing results to clients can be therapeutic if done well due to providing a sense of closure and answers to what is troubling them. Difficult results should be presented as tentative, or subject to change, to minimize the negative emotions a client can have to perceived bad news. This gives clients a sense of hope, as their disorder is not set in stone and may not harm the rest of their life. Clients should also be told beforehand that they are going to be given results feedback, so they are not blind sighted or caught off guard by the news. Descriptive results should also be prioritized, as most clients are unable to interpret raw scores or percentiles without assistance.
4. What and How you communicate results to clients is important as each individual interprets data differently based on their understanding of how measurements work. Children and those unfamiliar with psychological procedures need to have results explained more carefully than adults familiar with the concepts. If you leave gaps in your explanation, the results can be misinterpreted by the client and potentially cause problems with misunderstanding the implications of a diagnosis. Severity of the diagnosis should also be communicated so that patients do not jump to the most extreme conclusion.
Reply
Olivia Ago
Jun 12, 2025 @ 18:43:44
1. Criterion-related validity helps us to understand whether the instrument administered is a sufficient predictor of, or related to, the certain criterion being assessed. This type of validity is often used for mental health assessments as it indicates whether an assessment given to evaluate either mental health status, a specific diagnosis or concern, is accurately measuring what it is intended to measure. This validity utilizes observable results or indicators in order to make a professional conclusion about a mental health diagnosis, which in turn assists with treatment goals and planning. Mental health professionals can then assess severity of concerns or symptoms, find best fit intervention methods, and continuously assess progress throughout treatment.
2. Convergent evidence validity is present when the instrument used for an assessment is positively related to another instrument used to assess the same construct. Whereas discriminant evidence validity is used in order to assess whether an instrument measures something other than what another instrument intends to measure, that the content of a particular instrument is differentiated in the correct manner from another assessment. For example, when an instrument is assessing a diagnosis like depression, convergent evidence validity would help examiners to compare if this instrument measures depression in relation to how other instruments assess depression. For discriminant evidence validity, the instrument aimed to assess depression should not be correlated with an instrument measuring another mental health diagnosis.
3. When communicating results to clients or the parents of a client, it is important to communicate results in a way that the client is able to fully comprehend and relate to their own personal experience and their treatment. By reviewing results of an assessment with a client or a client’s parents, these individuals have a sense of collaboration within the treatment and may feel more validated through the use of concrete evidence or results. This may also ease anxiety they may be experiencing about their current situation, as well provide a better understanding of the framework used within treatment to target specific goals and areas of need, and therefore better understand themselves and recognize moments of progress.
4. The way in which a mental health professional communicates results of a mental health assessment to clients is incredibly important for various reasons. When communicating results of an assessment, using language that the client is able to understand allows for the client to gain a better sense of what the results of that assessment mean to them and how that pertains to their understanding of themselves, their diagnosis, and how these results may affect treatment moving forward. Communicating the implications of results also allows for the client to feel more seen in their day-to-day experience with their mental health. Reviewing results of an assessment in an appropriate and understandable way provides the client with knowledge of the purpose for the assessment, what results indicate in terms of their current functioning and progress moving forward, as well as provide the client with validation of their symptoms and the reality of the current mental health status.
Reply
Xhesika Halili
Jun 12, 2025 @ 22:22:01
Hello everyone,
1. Criterion-related validity concerns the extent to which an instrument is systematically related to an outcome criterion. Researchers are interested in the degree to which an instrument is a good predictor of a specific criterion. For example a counselor creates a new depression questionnaire. To find out if the instrument in a valid tool, the psychologist gives both the new questionnaire and the well-known Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) to a group of clients at the same time. If the scores of new questionnaire are very similar to the scores from the BDI—meaning that instrument has criterion-related validity
2. Convergent evidence refers situation where an instrument is related to other instrument to wich it should be positively related. Example if a test is designed to measure depression and correlates highly with another well-established depression measure, this indicates convergent validity. On the other hand Discriminant evidence is not correlated with variables from wich it should differ. For example a reasearcher creates a new test to measure depression and compares it to a well-known trait anxiety test to assess discriminant validity, If the two tests show low or no correlation, it suggests the new test specifically measures depression, not anxiety. This is important for making accurate diagnoses and choosing appropriate treatments.
3. Some points that are important in communicating results are: Counselors need to develop multiple methods of explaining results and try to minimize the use of jargon. Interpretation should never be done in isolation. Clients need to be involved in the process so that they can address questions about whether the results make sense or if the results fit with other information. When describing results, therapists should involve clients in the interpretation to create a more collaborative and meaningful understanding
4. Communicating the results to clients is often one of the most important aspects of the assessment process. Parents often feel overwhelmed and need clear and empathic communication. Interpreting assessment results is part of the counseling process, to communicate assessment results adequately, counselors need to use effective general counseling skills. The counselor needs to be knowledgeable about the information contained in the manual. Counselors often serve as a bridge between the family and the assessment team. If they lack knowledge about the tests or the disorder being they may unintentionally give incomplete or misleading information. Being well-informed help families make sense of the next steps in treatment or school support planning
Reply

Dr. Adam M Volungis