Should You Get a Virtual Psychological Evaluation for High-Stakes Testing Accommodations?

It’s reasonable to wonder whether a virtual evaluation is “good enough” for high-stakes exams like the LSAT, MCAT, Bar Exam, or other professional licensing tests.

The short answer is:
Sometimes, but it depends.

Virtual testing isn’t automatically better or worse than in-person testing. What matters is whether it’s appropriate for your specific case, and whether it’s conducted under tightly controlled conditions.

Here are the main things to think about.

1. Double-Check With Your Testing Board First

Before you schedule anything, review your testing board’s documentation guidelines carefully.

Some boards explicitly allow telehealth-based evaluations. Others are silent on the issue. Policies change, and interpretation can vary.

Ultimately, you are responsible for making sure the documentation you submit meets the board’s requirements.

If there’s any uncertainty, it’s worth clarifying in advance.

2. Virtual Testing Requires Controlled Conditions

High-stakes evaluations are not casual Zoom appointments. Whether testing is conducted in person or remotely, the goal is the same: to preserve standardized conditions as much as possible.

For virtual testing to be appropriate, you need:

• A stable, high-speed internet connection

• A quiet, private space

• No interruptions

• Proper camera positioning

• No access to outside materials unless instructed

• Clear visibility for behavioral observation

If those conditions can’t be ensured, in-person testing may be more appropriate.

When documentation will be reviewed by a licensing board, small environmental inconsistencies matter.

3. Not Every Case Is Appropriate for Remote Testing

Some evaluations are more complex and may be better conducted in person. For example:

• Suspected learning disorders requiring extensive academic testing

• Significant visual-motor concerns

• Situations where environmental control is uncertain

Part of a responsible consultation process is determining whether teleassessment is clinically appropriate before proceeding.

4. What Do Test Publishers Say?

Many standardized psychological tests were originally normed using in-person administration. That hasn’t changed.

However, several major publishers — including Pearson, which produces the WAIS and other Wechsler measures — have released telepractice guidance allowing certain assessments to be administered remotely under specific conditions using secure digital platforms (such as Q-interactive or Q-global).

These telepractice resources emphasize:

• Use of approved digital materials

• Careful adherence to modified administration procedures

• Clinical judgment about appropriateness

• Clear documentation of testing conditions

Importantly, telepractice guidance does not mean remote administration is identical to in-person testing.

When testing is conducted remotely, the report should explicitly document:

• That telehealth was used

• The platform and materials used

• How stimuli were presented

• Whether any technological issues occurred

• Any deviations from standard administration

Transparency strengthens defensibility.

5. What Does the Research Show?

There is a growing body of research examining teleassessment.

Studies of Wechsler intelligence scales have found strong agreement between in-person and videoconference administration in adult samples when procedures are carefully controlled.

Research involving the RBANS (Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status) has also shown acceptable reliability in supervised remote formats.

More broadly, teleassessment studies suggest that many cognitive tasks can produce comparable results remotely — provided environmental and technological factors are well managed.

At the same time, most test norms were collected in person. Some motor-dependent or highly time-sensitive tasks may be more vulnerable to variability in remote settings.

This is why careful case selection and documentation matter.

6. Advantages of Virtual Evaluation

When appropriate, virtual assessment can offer:

• Greater scheduling flexibility

• Reduced travel burden

• Access to specialized evaluators outside your geographic area

For busy professionals, that flexibility can be significant.

7. The Bottom Line

When conducted under controlled conditions, using publisher-supported protocols, and documented transparently, virtual testing can produce valid and defensible data.

But it isn’t appropriate for every situation.

The most important factors are:

• Careful case screening

• Strict adherence to standardized procedures

• Clear documentation of methods and any deviations

• An evaluator who understands high-stakes documentation standards

If you’re considering a virtual evaluation, the first step is determining whether it’s appropriate for your specific history and testing goals. Feel free to reach out for a free 20-minute consultation.