During a recent government meeting, significant concerns were raised regarding the communication practices of the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB) and the implications of their proposed changes to the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP).

Dr. Janet Farrell from San Diego highlighted the confusion surrounding the term \"pause\" used by ASPPB, suggesting it could lead to misunderstandings about the organization's intentions. She expressed concerns that ASPPB's decision to pause the mandatory EPPP2 requirement was financially motivated, fearing it could lead to increased costs for new psychologists. Dr. Farrell pointed out that the Texas Sports Psychology had filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, alleging antitrust violations due to a lack of state involvement in the approval process.

Further complicating the issue, Dr. Farrell noted that the Texas board is seeking state funding for a less expensive alternative test for incoming psychologists, which could alleviate financial burdens on students. She criticized ASPPB for what she perceived as a conflict of interest, operating as both a representative body for state boards and a test publisher profiting from the same market they serve. Dr. Farrell referenced a 2017 budget report indicating ASPPB had substantial financial resources, questioning the necessity of increasing costs for new entrants into the profession.

In response to public comments, Dr. Elizabeth Winkleman from the California Psychological Association expressed gratitude for the board's careful consideration of the EPPP2, reiterating the association's opposition to the exam due to concerns over its validity, potential biases, and the financial burden it places on prospective psychologists. She sought clarification on whether any formal action was needed to reverse a previous decision to adopt the EPPP2, which the board confirmed was not necessary.

The meeting underscored the ongoing debate over the EPPP2 and its implications for the psychology profession, particularly regarding accessibility, equity, and financial transparency. As discussions continue, stakeholders are urged to remain vigilant about the potential impacts on future psychologists and the profession as a whole.