Encyclopedia of Clinical Neuropsychology

2018 Edition
| Editors: Jeffrey S. Kreutzer, John DeLuca, Bruce Caplan

Detroit Edison v. NLRB (1979)

  • Robert L. HeilbronnerEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57111-9_965


Disclosure of tests and raw data; Release of psychological test materials; Test security

Historical Background

Petitioner employer (Detroit Edison), in response to a request made by a Union (National Labor Relations Board: NLRB) in connection with arbitration of a grievance filed on behalf of employees in a bargaining unit, supplied the Union with certain information pertaining to petitioner’s employee psychological aptitude testing program under which certain unit employees had been rejected for certain job openings because of their failure to receive “acceptable” test scores. However, petitioner refused to release the actual test questions, the actual employee answer sheets, and the scores linked with the names of the employees who received them, maintaining that complete confidentiality of these materials was necessary to insure the future integrity of the tests and to protect the examinees’ privacy interests. Petitioner offered to turn over the scores of any employee who...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References and Readings

  1. American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology. (2003). Official position of the American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology on ethical complaints made against clinical neuropsychologists during adversarial proceedings. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 17, 443–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology. (2007). AACN practice guidelines for neuropsychological assessment and consultation. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 21, 209–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. American Psychological Association. (2002). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. American Psychologist, 57, 1060–1073.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bush, S. S., & Martin, T. A. (2006). The ethical and clinical practice of disclosing raw test data: Addressing the ongoing debate. Applied Neuropsychology, 13, 125–136.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. Detroit Edison Co. v. NLRB, 440 U.S. 301, (U.S. 1979).Google Scholar
  6. Freides, D. (1993). Proposed standard of professional practice: Neuropsychological reports display all quantitative data. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 7, 234–235.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. Grote, C. (2005). Ethical practice of forensic neuropsychology. In G. Larrabee (Ed.), Forensic neuropsychology: A scientific approach. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Jaffe v. Redmond, 518 U.S. 1 (1996).Google Scholar
  9. Kaufman, P. M. (2009). Protecting raw data and psychological tests from wrongful disclosure: A primer on the law and other persuasive strategies. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 23, 1130–1159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. National Academy of Neuropsychology. (2000). Test security: Official statement of the National Academy of Neuropsychology. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 15, 383–386.Google Scholar
  11. National Academy of Neuropsychology Policy and Planning Committee (2003). Test security: An update. Official statement of the National Academy of Neuropsychology. See http://www.nanonline.org/NAN/Files/PAIC/PDFs/NANTestSecurityUpdate.pdf
  12. NLRB v. Pfizer, Inc., 763 F.2d 887 (7th Cir., 1985).Google Scholar
  13. NLRB v. U.S. Postal Service, 17 F. 3d 1434 (4th Cir., 1994).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chicago Neuropsychology GroupChicagoUSA