Law enforcement officer seniority and PAI variables in psychological fitness for duty examinations

  • Beth A. Caillouet
  • Cary D. Rostow
  • Robert D. Davis


Sixty-two police officers were administered the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) during employer referred psychological Fitness for Duty Examinations (FFDEs). PAI scores were analyzed as a function of the length of time the officers had worked within law enforcement occupations. PAI subtest scales ARD, ARD-P, ARD-T and DEP scores all produced significant positive correlations between both the amount of time spent on the current police job and the total time served as a police officer within a bivariate Pearsonr correlation matrix. Implications for an understanding of psychometric test results within the FFDE context and the evolution of law enforcement officer personality patterns are discussed.


Police Officer Criminal Psychology Personality Assessment Inventory Duty Evaluation Psychometric Test Result 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bartol, C.R. (1996). Police psychology: Then, now, and beyond.Criminal Justice and Behavior, 23, 70–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Blau, T.H. (1994).Psychological services for law enforcement. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, J.M., & Campbell, E.A. (1990). Sources of occupational stress in the police.Work and Stress, 4, 305–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Burke, R.J. (1993). Career stages, satisfaction and well-being among police officers.Psychological Reports, 65, 3–12.Google Scholar
  5. Coman, G.J., & Evans, B.J. (1991). Stressors facing Australian police in the 1990s.Police Studies International Review Police Development, 14, 153–165.Google Scholar
  6. Cooper, W.H. (1982). Police officers over career stages.Canadian Police College Journal, 6, 93–112.Google Scholar
  7. Douglas, K.S., Hart, S., & Kropp, P. R. (2001). Validity of the PAI for forensic assessments.International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 45(2):183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hargrave, G.E., Hiatt, D., Ogard, E.M., & Karr, C. (1994). Comparison of the MMPI and MMPI-2 for a sample of peace officers.Psychological Assessment, 6, 27–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hays, J.R. (1997). Note on concurrent validation of the Personality Assessment Inventory in law enforcement.Psychological Reports, 81(1):244–246.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Larsson, G., Kempe, C., & Starrin, B. (1998). Appraisal and coping processes in acute time-limited stressful situations: A study of police officers.European Journal of Personality, 2, 259–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Morey, L.C. (1991).The Personality Assessment Inventory: Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.Google Scholar
  12. Morey, L.C. (1996).An interpretive guide to the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc.Google Scholar
  13. Rostow, C.R., & Davis, R.D. (2002). Psychological fitness for duty evaluations in law enforcement.The Police Chief, 69(9):58–66.Google Scholar
  14. Sewell, J.D. (1983). The development of a critical life events scale for law enforcement.Journal of Police Science and Administration, 11, 109–116.Google Scholar
  15. Stone, A.V. (1990). Psychological fitness for duty evaluation.The Police Chief, 57(2):39–53.Google Scholar
  16. Violanti, J.M., & Aron, F. (1993). Sources of police stressors, job attitudes and psychological distress.Psychological Reports, 72, 899–904.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Westernik, J. (1990). Stress and coping mechanisms in young police officers.Australian Police Journal, 44, 109–11Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Police and Criminal Psychology 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Beth A. Caillouet
    • 1
  • Cary D. Rostow
    • 1
  • Robert D. Davis
    • 1
  1. 1.Matrix, Inc.Baton RougeUSA

Personalised recommendations