Validity and cultural limitations of the Beck Depression Inventory-II

Post 1: Grace I also noticed that Arbisi (2001) and Farmer (2001) focus on different potential weaknesses with the Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II). Both authors mention the issues with self-reporting, as well as with gender differences in symptoms of depression, which may impact accuracy of the BDI-II. What I believe both authors could have discussed more in terms of gender was bias on the part of a counselor—whether counselors may issue the BDI-II in a discriminating way based on perceptions of normative behaviors of certain genders. Similarly, counselors need to become more culturally competent. Some attitudes, body language, and behaviors that signify a mood disorder may be more related to cultural norms or gender norms. One question I would ask to further the discussion is how counselors can prevent biases in their subjective assessments of clients. Based on the reviews of the BDI-II by Arbisi (2001) and Farmer (2001), it does seem that psychological tests are not developed as rigorously or as sensitively as they could be. As useful as these instruments are, they may fail to address the needs of diverse populations. How can counselors address the needs of diverse populations? Developing a more client-centered approach is always helpful (Whiston, 2017). Future counseling professionals may also work together to evolve more valid assessments. Assessments like the BDI-II can be used in conjunction with other tests, to provide more accurate insight into patient issues. Counselors have several options when using assessments. They can use them to refer clients to specialists, clarify client needs, or encourage client self-awareness. Moreover, assessments can help to reduce counselor biases in cases where the counselor may have missed manifest symptoms during therapy sessions. Self-reports can be useful, but only when they are administered sensibly.

References Arbisi, P. A. (2001). Review of the Beck Depression Inventory-II. In B. S. Plake & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The fourteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements. Farmer, R. F. (2001). Review of the Beck Depression Inventory-II. In B. S. Plake & J. C. Impara (Eds.), The fourteenth mental measurements yearbook. Lincoln, NE: Buros Institute of Mental Measurements. Whiston, S. C. (2017). Principles and Applications of Assessment in Counseling. Boston: Cengage Learning.

Post 2: Erick The BDI-II has been assessed for its validity and reliability, and yet fails to impress a large number of psychologists and counseling professionals. Both Arbisi (2001) and Farmer (2001) show that the BDI-II may be effective for evaluating the mood of white females but not of other populations. Yet the test remains in use, perhaps revealing some of the deeper problems when academia, research, publishing, and a for-profit mental health services system collide. It would be interesting to open this issue up for discussion, rather than just focus on the ethical implications of counselors who use the BDI-II and interpret its results. Certainly, though, the implications for clients can be tremendous—including the ability to access insurance resources that would cover funding for, say, clinical depression, but not an undiagnosed mood disorder. In fact, the use of assessments to label and classify clients for insurance purposes also raises an important ethical question about the function of these assessments and even the potential for insurance or medication fraud. On the other hand, it could be considered unethical to avoid using assessments altogether. Underserved clients need access to more mental health services, and assessments are a good place to start. Yet underserved clients often lack assessments or tests that are geared towards their needs: revealing the intersections of race, class, and gender. For instance, the experiences of new immigrants, or the homeless, and other vulnerable populations need to be taken into account when developing assessments. Counselors have a responsibility to ask questions that are directly related to race, class, and gender in order to offer comprehensive client assessments.