Some of the author's conclusions are particularly startling, including the fact that the personality testing industry is, for the most part, unregulated and that many personality tests are administered by untrained and unqualified personnel. However, perhaps the most striking conclusion is that personality tests are overly reductionistic and neglect to account for the context, situation, and environment in which an individual lives and works. Herein lies the danger to personality tests: "People are too erratic and complex to be so pigeonholed" (3) by tests that reduce complex personality traits into narrow, one-dimensional labels. Although this conclusion should not surprise most Psychiatric Services readers, considering the pervasiveness of the biopsychosocial approach to the diagnosis and treatment of psychiatric disorders, it should sound an alarm for anyone who administers personality tests, anyone who interprets the results of personality tests in clinical decision making, and, most important, those who are subjected to a personality test. Most, if not all, ordinary individuals who are subjected to personality tests either as a condition of employment or as mandated by court order are powerless to protect themselves from the damage of being condemned to a one-dimensional label. Despite the evidence that many personality tests lack reliability and validity, they are unlikely to disappear from use in corporations, courts, schools, and other institutions in the near future. The take-home point, therefore, is caveat emptor (buyer beware).