Assessment Questionnaire-2 (AQ-2)

Abstract

The Assessment Questionnaire-2 (AQ-2) is a specialized measure designed to evaluate the client’s subjective experience following a psychological assessment. Developed in the context of Therapeutic Assessment, the instrument focuses on assessing the impact of the assessment process and the feedback provided, rather than the content of the test results themselves. The AQ-2 captures four primary dimensions of client experience, including therapeutic gains such as self-awareness, the quality of the client-assessor relationship, positive validation (accurate mirroring), and negative emotional reactions to the process.

Keywords

Psychological assessment, therapeutic assessment, client experience, self-awareness, accurate mirroring, assessment feedback, psychometrics, scale development.

Authors

Stephen E. Finn, D. Gregory Schroeder, Mary E. Tonsager.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Assessment Questionnaire-2 (AQ-2) is to quantify the client’s perception of the assessment experience, particularly focusing on the therapeutic outcomes and relational dynamics. It serves as a critical measure for researchers and clinicians interested in the non-traditional, therapeutic effects of psychological testing. The scale helps determine if the assessment served as a catalyst for new self-understanding or personal change, moving beyond the traditional model of assessment purely as an information-gathering exercise.

The AQ-2 is frequently used in studies examining the benefits of providing structured assessment feedback, such as feedback derived from the MMPI-2, to individuals seeking psychological services. It helps evaluate whether clients feel respected, understood, and whether the process facilitated positive introspection.

Construct

The AQ-2 measures the client experience across four distinct psychological constructs related to the assessment process. These constructs reflect the degree to which the assessment was perceived as meaningful, validating, and relationally positive, versus distressing or negative. The underlying theoretical framework emphasizes the client as an active participant whose personal understanding and relationship with the examiner are key therapeutic variables.

Validity

The validity of the AQ-2 is primarily supported by its consistent factor structure and its application within the established framework of Therapeutic Assessment. Although specific details regarding exhaustive concurrent or predictive validity studies are not detailed in the source, the instrument’s widespread use in doctoral dissertations and peer-reviewed studies (e.g., Finn & Tonsager, 1992, 1997) confirms its strong content and construct validity in measuring the intended outcomes of assessment feedback.

Reliability

The AQ-2 demonstrates high internal consistency, indicating excellent reliability across its subscales. The reliability is consistently measured using Cronbach’s Alpha, with coefficients generally falling into the excellent range (above 0.80).

• New Self-Awareness/Understanding: Alpha coefficients reported between 0.84 and 0.94.
• Positive Accurate Mirroring: Alpha coefficients reported between 0.80 and 0.91.
• Positive Relationship with Assessor: Alpha coefficients reported between 0.87 and 0.92.
• Negative Feelings about the Assessment: Alpha coefficients reported between 0.79 and 0.92.

Factor Analysis

The AQ-2 is empirically structured into four distinct factors, which emerged consistently across various administrations and populations, demonstrating the scale’s robust factorial structure. These factors correspond directly to the key domains of client experience targeted by the instrument.

The four identified factors and their corresponding item distributions (based on the Allen, 2001 adaptation) are:

1. Self-Awareness/Understanding: Items related to gaining new insights, organizing thoughts, and changing perspectives (Items 1, 5, 9, 13, 17, 21, 24, 30, 34, 40, 43, 44, 45). Note that Item 1 requires reverse scoring.
2. Positive Accurate Mirroring: Items reflecting feeling confirmed, validated, and positively described by the assessment (Items 2, 6, 10, 14, 18, 22, 25, 27, 31, 35, and 41).
3. Positive Relationship with the Examiner: Items assessing the quality of the therapeutic alliance, trust, respect, and warmth felt toward the assessor (Items 3, 7, 11, 15, 19, 23, 26, 28, 32, 36, 38, and 42).
4. Negative Feelings about the Assessment: Items capturing feelings of distress, humiliation, being judged, or emotional drain (Items 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 29, 33, 37, and 39).

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire measuring client perception of the assessment process.

Format: Likert-type scale.

Language Available: English (Original).

Population Group: Clinical and non-clinical populations undergoing psychological assessment or participating in related experiments.

Age Group: Typically utilized with adults (e.g., college students, psychotherapy clients).

Population Details: Primarily used with individuals receiving psychological assessment feedback, such as those tested with the MMPI-2.

Test Methodology: Respondents rate their agreement with statements regarding their experience of the assessment and the assessor on a 5-point scale: 1=Strongly Disagree, 2=Disagree, 3=Neutral, 4=Agree, 5=Strongly Agree.

Keywords

Psychological testing, client feedback, therapeutic relationship, psychodiagnostics, self-understanding, MMPI-2, personality assessment.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source content.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not provided in source content.

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source content.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Assessment Questionnaire-2 (AQ-2) was initially developed and documented in an unpublished manuscript in 1994 by Finn, Schroeder, & Tonsager. The instrument itself appears to be available for academic use, often cited in doctoral research and academic publications related to therapeutic assessment models. The full instrument is referenced in several publicly available academic papers and dissertations.

Reference’s

• Allen, Andrea. (2001). Informational effects of assessment feedback. Florida International University Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 1094. http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/etd/1094
• Finn, S. E. (1996). Manual for using the MMPI-2 as a therapeutic intervention. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
• Finn, S. E. (2007). In our clients’ shoes: Theory and techniques of Therapeutic Assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Finn, S. E., Schroeder, D. G., & Tonsager, M. E. (1994). The Assessment Questionnaire-2 (AQ-2): A measure of clients’ experiences with psychological assessment. Unpublished manuscript.
• Finn, S. E., & Tonsager, M. E. (1992). The therapeutic effects of providing MMPI-2 test feedback to college students awaiting psychotherapy. Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 4, 278-287.
• Finn, S. E., & Tonsager, M. E. (1997). Information-gathering and therapeutic models of assessment: Complementary paradigms. Psychological Assessment, 9(4), 374-385.

The original PDF for the instrument and related materials can be downloaded here: http://therapeuticassessment.com/PDFs/Finn%26Tonsager1992.pdf.

Additional academic resources mentioning the instrument are available here:

• https://repositories.lib.utexas.edu/bitstream/handle/2152/ETD-UT-2010-08-1790/DURHAM-FOWLER-DISSERTATION.pdf?sequence=1 (This is a PDF file link to a dissertation.)
• http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2228&context=etd
• http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2391&context=etd

Items of the Assessment Questionnaire-2 (AQ-2)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

Items (Finn, Schroeder, & Tonsager, 1994 version):

1. The assessment did not teach me anything new about myself.
2. The assessment made me proud of who I am.
3. The assessor earned my respect.
4. I felt I was under a microscope.
5. The assessor introduced me to new aspects of myself.
6. The assessment made me feel good about myself.
7. It was easy to trust the assessor.
8. The assessment hurt me.
9. I gained a new understanding of myself.
10. The assessment captured the “real” me.
11. The assessor seemed to like me.
12. The assessment was unsettling to me.
13. The assessment confirmed parts of me that I had only suspected.
14. The assessor said nice things about me.
15. I felt very close to the assessor.
16. The assessment was a humiliating and degrading experience.
17. The assessment made me think of myself.
18. The assessment made me feel important.
19. The assessor treated me warmly.
20. The assessment was emotionally draining.
21. I am more aware of how I behave with other people.
22. I felt special.
23. I really connected with the assessor.
24. At times during the assessment, I felt like I did when I was a child.
25. The assessment helped me organize my thoughts about myself.
26. The assessment confirmed how I see myself.
27. I liked the assessor.
28. The assessment made me feel that my life is nothing but problems.
29. I have changed the way I think about my problems.
30. I feel more sure of who I am.
31. The assessor was interested in what I had to say.
32. I felt judged by the assessor.
33. I am more aware of how I am feeling.
34. I felt my strengths were recognized.
35. The assessor treated me as an equal.
36. The assessor made me feel inadequate.
37. The assessment will make a difference in my upcoming decisions.
38. The assessment made me think about where I am headed in my life.
39. I felt that the assessor respected me.
40. The assessor insulted me.
41. I am more aware of why people react to me the way they do.
42. I know that how I see myself is really true.
43. The assessor and I worked as a team to learn more about me.
44. I felt exposed.
45. I can think of myself as I never had before.
46. The assessment described thoughts & feelings I have about myself.
47. The assessor was on my side.
48. The assessment made me rethink the way I already viewed myself.

Items (Allen, 2001 adaptation, focused on “experiment participation”):

1. Participation in this experiment did not teach me anything new about myself.
2. Participating in this experiment made me proud of who I am.
3. The examiner earned my respect.
4. I felt I was under a microscope.
5. The examiner introduced me to new aspects of myself.
6. Participation in this experiment made me feel good about myself.
7. It was easy to trust the examiner.
8. Participation in this experiment hurt me.
9. I gained a new understanding of myself.
10. This experiment captured the ‘real’ me.
11. The examiner seemed to like me.
12. Participation in this experiment was unsettling to me.
13. Parts of me that I had only suspected were confirmed.
14. The examiner said nice things about me.
15. I felt close to the examiner.
16. Participation in this experiment was a humiliating and degrading experience.
17. Participation in this experiment made me think of myself.
18. Participation in this experiment made me feel important.
19. The examiner treated me warmly.
20. Participation in this experiment was emotionally draining.
21. I’m more aware of how I behave with other people.
22. I felt special.
23. I really connected with the examiner.
24. Participation in this experiment helped me organize my thoughts about myself.
25. Participation in this experiment confirmed how I see myself.
26. I liked the examiner.
27. I feel more sure of who I am.
28. The examiner was interested in what I had to say.
29. I felt judged by the examiner.
30. I am more aware of how I am feeling.
31. I felt my strengths were recognized.
32. The examiner treated me as an equal.
33. The examiner made me feel inadequate.
34. Participation in this experiment will make a difference in my upcoming decisions.
35. Participation in this experiment made me think about where I am headed in my life.
36. I felt that the examiner respected me.
37. The examiner insulted me.
38. The examiner and I worked as a team to learn more about me.
39. I felt exposed.
40. I came to think of myself as I never had before.
41. Thoughts and feelings I have about myself were described.
42. The questions I had after taking the test were sufficiently answered.
43. Participation in this experiment made me rethink the way I already viewed myself.
44. I feel that participation in this experiment was a positive and valuable experience for me as a person.
45. I would recommend that a friend go through this testing experience.