In response to Costa and McCrae's reply to our article (1992, this issue), we wish to clarify the following points: (a) "Normal" personality instruments such as the NEO-PI should not be used in place of clinical measures, but may serve to provide useful supplemental information. (b) Evaluation of the clinical validity of individual test protocols is a vital component of clinical assessment. (c) Ordering of scales on a profile implies configural interpretation of test scores, which is common practice in clinical assessment. (d) Anxiety, depression, and impulsiveness are viewed by some clinicians as being related to different higher order domains. (e) Clinical correlates thought to be associated with Conscientiousness are readily assessable by clinical inventories.