Legal issues at the state and constitutional levels and associated misconceptions related to written preemployment integrity tests are addressed. Common misconceptions include the beliefs that: (1) such tests fall within the purview of state antipolygraph statutes; (2) unfair discrimination doctrines are violated by integrity testing; and (3) integrity tests constitute an invasion of individual privacy. Although there are legal and legislative reasons for exercising caution when using preemployment integrity tests, there are also countervailing trends that indicate that such tests should be used more extensively. One of these trends is the expansion of the doctrine of negligent hiring; at least 39 states recognize some form of this common law tort. Relevant to psychological testing, plaintiffs have alleged that an employer should have been aware of the characteristics of an employee causing harm. Although no court has specifically stated that psychological testing is necessary to discharge an employer's duty, in many cases such testing would be probative in ascertaining whether an employer has fulfilled his or her duty. Cases illustrating misconceptions about integrity testing and the probative use of integrity testing are provided. (TJH)