grey matter

Explainer: Why conducting psychometric tests on school employees will do little for child safety

The CBSE has asked its schools to conduct psychometric evaluations of all school staff. But these tests cannot predict psychopathic behavior, say psychiatrists.

After a boy was found murdered in a Gurugram school last week, the Central Board for Secondary Education or CBSE, issued a circular to affiliated schools giving them two months to complete psychometric evaluation of all school staff. However, psychiatrists who have worked with criminals and those who have worked with children say that psychometric tests cannot be used to predict psychopathic or criminal behavior. These tests do not have scientific validity to be used as metrics to hire or fire employees.

People working in the field of child safety advocate a broader set of actions like instituting a child protection policy that includes proper training of staff, establishing a code of conduct and a robust complaint redressal system. However, the school board has decided to focus on the task of trying to detect psychopathic traits in school employees.

Psychopathy is defined as a “constellation of affective, interpersonal, and behavioral characteristics including impulsivity, irresponsibility, shallow emotions, lack of empathy, guilt, or remorse, pathological lying, and persistent violation of social norms and expectations”. Psychometric analysis includes both quantitative and qualitative tests used to assess psychological behavior, abilities and problems. The tests can be written, interview-based or projective where a person is presented with images, words or situations and his or her response is gauged.

If CBSE’s aim in issuing the notification is to find potential psychopaths and keep them away from schools, then the education authority has misunderstood the efficacy of psychological tests and what they tell us, say experts.

These tests are not like blood tests that can detect diseases like diabetes or hypertension, said Dr Soumitra Pathare, psychiatrist and the director of the Centre for Mental Health and Policy at the India Law Society in Pune. “The tests are subjectively interpreted,” she said. “There are also questions raised about the scientific validity of these tests.”

As Pathare points out, psychometric tests do not predict outcomes and, at most, help in diagnosing a mental condition and designing treatment protocol.

Dr Suresh Bada Math, a forensic psychiatrist from National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences in Bengaluru, called the CBSE’s exercise a “sham”. He works with undertrials and convicts within the prison system and counsels two or three such incarcerated persons every day. He observes that even among those suspected or convicted of violent crimes psychometric tests do not always provide any indication of history of violent behaviour.

The results of these tests may not mean much if they are conducted on people with no history of psychological problems. Psychiatrists consider the tests in context of a person’s behavioural history and not in isolation.

“A psychological test may reveal a psychopathic tendency or traits,” said Dr Savita Malhotra, former head of psychiatry at the Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research in Chandigarh. “But with no history taken, the test results cannot tell us if the person is likely to commit an offence.”

At best, psychometric tests can be one in a broad set of tools that can help mental health workers treat their patients. “The tests can have additional value [to other forms of tests and therapy], but cannot provide substantial evidence of any condition,” said Bada Math. “For instance, if the tests show that someone has psychopathic tendencies, we can suggest they do yoga or try anger control.”

Ethically questionable

Subjecting a large number of people to psychometric tests poses an ethical problem.

“Once you decide that a person is a potential child abuser based on such tests, the person is labelled for life,” said Pathare. “Nobody sets out to be an abuser.”

Denying anyone a job based on these tests would also be discriminatory. “What if someone has a psychopathic trait?” asked Bada Math. “It cannot be the basis of denying anyone a job.”

Besides this, the CBSE announcement will open up the commercial interests for people selling the service of conducting psychometric tests,” said Dr Harish Shetty, a psychiatrist in Mumbai. “As it opens up the commercial interests, it will also result in exclusion of people based on these tests,” said Shetty.

We welcome your comments at
Sponsored Content BY 

Why should inclusion matter to companies?

It's not just about goodwill - inclusivity is a good business decision.

To reach a 50-50 workplace scenario, policies on diversity need to be paired with a culture of inclusiveness. While diversity brings equal representation in meetings, board rooms, promotions and recruitment, inclusivity helps give voice to the people who might otherwise be marginalized or excluded. Inclusion at workplace can be seen in an environment that values diverse opinions, encourages collaboration and invites people to share their ideas and perspectives. As Verna Myers, a renowned diversity advocate, puts it “Diversity is being invited to the party, inclusion is being asked to dance.”

Creating a sense of belonging for everyone is essential for a company’s success. Let’s look at some of the real benefits of a diverse and inclusive workplace:

Better decision making

A whitepaper by Cloverpop, a decision making tool, established a direct link between inclusive decision making and better business performance. The research discovered that teams that followed an inclusive decision-making process made decisions 2X faster with half the meetings and delivered 60% better results. As per Harvard Business School Professor Francesca Gino, this report highlights how diversity and inclusion are practical tools to improve decision making in companies. According to her, changing the composition of decision making teams to include different perspectives can help individuals overcome biases that affect their decisions.

Higher job satisfaction

Employee satisfaction is connected to a workplace environment that values individual ideas and creates a sense of belonging for everyone. A research by Accenture identified 40 factors that influence advancement in the workplace. An empowering work environment where employees have the freedom to be creative, innovative and themselves at work, was identified as a key driver in improving employee advancement to senior levels.


A research by stated the in India, 62% of innovation is driven by employee perceptions of inclusion. The study included responses from 1,500 employees from Australia, China, Germany, India, Mexico and the United States and showed that employees who feel included are more likely to go above and beyond the call of duty, suggest new and innovative ways of getting work done.

Competitive Advantage

Shirley Engelmeier, author of ‘Inclusion: The New Competitive Business Advantage’, in her interview with Forbes, talks about the new global business normal. She points out that the rapidly changing customer base with different tastes and preferences need to feel represented by brands. An inclusive environment will future-proof the organisation to cater to the new global consumer language and give it a competitive edge.

An inclusive workplace ensures that no individual is disregarded because of their gender, race, disability, age or other social and cultural factors. Accenture has been a leading voice in advocating equal workplace. Having won several accolades including a perfect score on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate equality index, Accenture has demonstrated inclusive and diverse practices not only within its organisation but also in business relationships through their Supplier Inclusion and Diversity program.

In a video titled ‘She rises’, Accenture captures the importance of implementing diverse policies and creating an inclusive workplace culture.


To know more about inclusion and diversity, see here.

This article was produced by the Scroll marketing team on behalf of Accenture and not by the Scroll editorial team.