The Enhanced Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology: A Viable Approach?

Sep 17, 2026

The Enhanced Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) is designed as a two-part licensing assessment, with Part 2 focused on competency-based evaluation rather than knowledge testing. The article argues that broader validation of EPPP Part 2 is still limited and that implementing it before adequate validation may harm applicants and the public, including risks such as reduced workforce diversity and potential legal challenges. It concludes with feasible research directions to strengthen validation and criteria for when jurisdictions should implement the Enhanced EPPP.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages14

Reading Time35 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Competency-based evaluation and licensure context

Enhanced EPPP structure and validation needs

Part 1 vs Part 2 roles

Risks of implementing before validation

Public significance statement

Keywords and author information

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers . This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly . American Psychologist © 2020 American Psychological Association 2020, Vol. 75, No. 1, 52–65 ISSN: 0003-066X [http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000586](http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/amp0000586) The Enhanced Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology: A Viable Approach? Jennifer L. Callahan University of North Texas Joanne Davila Stony Brook University Timothy J. Strauman Duke University Debora J. Bell University of Missouri—Columbia Sheri L. Johnson University of California, Berkeley Cindy M. Yee University of California, Los Angeles Health disciplines have increasingly required competency-based evaluations as a licensure prerequisite. In keeping with this trend, the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) has begun to develop a second part to the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) . The resulting 2-part examination is collectively referred to as the Enhanced EPPP. Part 1 of the Enhanced EPPP, which consists of the current exam, is designed to be an assessment of knowledge. Part 2 of the Enhanced EPPP is newly developed and intended to address the need for a competency-based evaluation. To date, ASPPB has addressed some standard facets of validity for the EPPP Part 2, but not others. In addition, the EPPP Part 2 has yet to be subjected to a broader validation process, in which the suitability of the test for its intended purpose is evaluated. Implementation of the EPPP Part 2 before validation could have negative consequences for those seeking to enter the profession and for the general public (e.g. , potential restriction of diversity in the psychology workforce) . For jurisdictions implementing the EPPP Part 2, failure to gather and report the evidence required for use of a test in a forensic context may also open the door for legal challenges. We end with suggestions for feasible research that could significantly enhance the validation process for the EPPP Part 2 and offer jurisdictions concrete suggestions of features to look for in determining whether and when to implement the Enhanced EPPP. Public Significance Statement The national licensing exam for psychologists acts as a gatekeeping evaluation intended to protect public welfare. To date, the suitability and value added of the EPPP Part 2 is unclear, and ASPPB has described only limited plans to conduct validation of the EPPP Part 2 . Validation of the planned revision to the exam is of crucial significance to the entire profession and serves to protect the discipline’s reputation as a health service provider. Keywords: licensure, validity, validation, Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP), Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) Jennifer L. Callahan, Department of Psychology, University of North Texas; Debora J. Bell, Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Missouri—Columbia; Joanne Davila, Department of Psychology, Stony Brook University; Sheri L. Johnson, Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley; Timothy J. Strauman, Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, Duke University; Cindy M. Yee, Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles. Subsequent to Jennifer L. Callahan, authors are listed alphabetically and contributed equally to the manuscript. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jennifer L. Callahan, Department of Psychology, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle 311280, Denton, TX 76205 . E-mail: jennifer.[callahan@unt.edu](callahan@unt.edu) VIABILITY OF THE ENHANCED EPPP 53 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers . This article is intended solely for the personal use

FAQs

What is the Enhanced EPPP, and how do Parts 1 and 2 differ?

The Enhanced EPPP is a two-part examination. Part 1 assesses knowledge, while Part 2 is newly developed to support competency-based evaluation of licensure candidates.

Why does the article emphasize validation for EPPP Part 2?

The suitability and added value of EPPP Part 2 are unclear, and the article notes that broader validation has not yet occurred. Implementing it before validation could negatively affect those entering the profession and the public.

What risks does the article associate with early implementation?

It highlights potential harms including restriction of diversity in the psychology workforce and the possibility of legal challenges if evidence required for a test in a forensic context is not gathered and reported.

Sep 17, 2026

Uploaded by Bill Black