The Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) is a requirement for licensure as a psychologist across the entire United States as well as in numerous territories and provinces. Despite many longstanding criticisms and findings of bias, the EPPP is being expanded (adding a second, putatively competency-based, portion to the overall exam) and rebranded as the Enhanced EPPP. A review of literature reveals strong skepticism surrounding these developments, particularly with respect to the issue of criterion validity. The current study sought to examine the criterion validity of the EPPP by (1) drawing archival competency assessment data from existing measures (convergent validity) and (2) gathering new neurocognitive and emotional intelligence data, along with demographic data (discriminant validity), with copies of EPPP score reports from individuals who have recently taken the EPPP. Competency ratings did not significantly positively correlate with EPPP scores and, instead, indicated the opposite trend. Analyses also revealed a significant relationship between ethnicity and exam scores, with White individuals scoring higher than other ethnicities. Finally, performance on neurocognitive tests significantly positively correlated with exam scores, indicating that general test taking abilities play a larger role than abilities and competencies unique to the psychology field. Given the gatekeeping role the EPPP plays in the profession of psychology, external validation of the EPPP is of vital importance and was not supported in this study. Implications for the exam and the field are discussed.

Participants from earlier nationwide studies on predictors of internship match were contacted 7-10 years after obtaining their doctoral degree to gather additional data concerning their attained early career competencies and benchmarks (e.g., scores on the national licensing exam). In this sample (N = 190), licensure exam scores were significantly positively associated with scores obtained on the Graduate Record Examination (GRE), family of origin socioeconomic status, and student debt load. However, obtained licensure scores were not found to be significantly associated with any pre-doctoral training variables (e.g., intervention/ assessment hours, number of integrated reports, number of publications, rank order of matched internship site) or most post-doctoral early career activities. Weak positive associations between licensures scores and engaging in teaching / supervision / consultation services were observed. Few self-reported early career competencies were found to be weakly positively associated with scores on the national licensing exam (i.e., integrity, seeking supervision, scientific mindedness, evidence-based practice). Significantly inverse associations were found between national licensing exam scores and self-reported competencies in the areas of management and systems change. Findings are discussed and implications for the national licensing exam considered.