The Conners' Parent Rating Scales (CPRS) have undergone a considerable amount of scrutiny--and subsequent refining, reshaping, and revising--since their development in 1970. While such longitudinal scrutiny has ultimately led to a more reliable, valid assessment tool, it has left behind a wake of literature filled with misinformation and ambiguity. Multiple versions of the Conners' Rating Scales (CRS), their misuse, and inaccurate reporting by researchers have created a body of literature that is difficult to interpret and misleading to both researchers and clinicians. This review is aimed at clarifying issues regarding the proper use of the CPRS as both a diagnostic instrument and a research tool.