On Carson's comment re diagnostic testing

Comments on Robert Carson's article titled The status of diagnostic testing . The article focuses on the importance of psychodiagnostic testing states very clearly and consistently a position shared by many in our profession, but one which is predicated on a number of assumptions which--as value judgments--lack empirical validity and, in fact, serve to engender and perpetuate interprofessional rivalry, professional mediocrity, and scientific stagnation. This writer does not deny the right to hold to and express value judgments per se; rather, he wishes to suggest alternatives to those underlying Carson's argument. Three assumptions are implied in the latter: (a) the "tripartite organization" of professions, i.e., psychiatry, clinical psychology, and psychiatric social work, constitutes a satisfactory state of affairs and should endure; (b) unique contributions to the service endeavor must arise from each profession and will obtain in the case of psychology via the psychodiagnostic enterprise; and (c) the service function (treatment?) is implemented, facilitated, or benefited as a result of the psychodiagnostic activity (testing) of psychologists. The commenter responds to the assumptions.