Term
| Ethical Standards and Laws |
|
Definition
¡Adherence to ethics code is required by all A.P.A. members
¡Not a basis for civil liability
¡Violation of the Ethics Code does not determine liability in court
¡Laws regarding the delivery of psychological services and conduct of psychologists differ from state to state
¡Ethics code and law may sometimes be in conflict (do what is in the best interest of the client) |
|
|
Term
| Preamble General Principles |
|
Definition
¡Inspirational goals to guide psychologists toward the highest ideals of psychology
lNot enforceable rules
lPsychologists are committed to increasing scientific and professional knowledge of behavior and people’s understanding of themselves and others and to the use of such knowledge to improve the condition of individuals, organizations, and society.
lRespect and protect civil and human rights
lHelp people and society understand human behavior |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Beneficence and Nonmaleficence
¡Psychologists strive to benefit those with whom they work and take care to do no harm. In their professional actions, psychologists seek to safeguard the welfare and rights of those with whom they interact professionally and other affected persons, and the welfare of animal subjects of research. When conflicts occur among psychologists' obligations or concerns, they attempt to resolve these conflicts in a responsible fashion that avoids or minimizes harm. Because psychologists' scientific and professional judgments and actions may affect the lives of others, they are alert to and guard against personal, financial, social, organizational, or political factors that might lead to misuse of their influence. Psychologists strive to be aware of the possible effect of their own physical and mental health on their ability to help those with whom they work. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Fidelity and Responsibility
Psychologists establish relationships of trust with those with whom they work. They are aware of their professional and scientific responsibilities to society and to the specific communities in which they work. Psychologists uphold professional standards of conduct, clarify their professional roles and obligations, accept appropriate responsibility for their behavior, and seek to manage conflicts of interest that could lead to exploitation or harm. Psychologists consult with, refer to, or cooperate with other professionals and institutions to the extent needed to serve the best interests of those with whom they work. They are concerned about the ethical compliance of their colleagues' scientific and professional conduct. Psychologists strive to contribute a portion of their professional time for little or no compensation or personal advantage |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Integrity
Psychologists seek to promote accuracy, honesty, and truthfulness in the science, teaching, and practice of psychology. In these activities psychologists do not steal, cheat, or engage in fraud, subterfuge, or intentional misrepresentation of fact. Psychologists strive to keep their promises and to avoid unwise or unclear commitments. In situations in which deception may be ethically justifiable to maximize benefits and minimize harm, psychologists have a serious obligation to consider the need for, the possible consequences of, and their responsibility to correct any resulting mistrust or other harmful effects that arise from the use of such techniques. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Justice
Psychologists recognize that fairness and justice entitle all persons to access to and benefit from the contributions of psychology and to equal quality in the processes, procedures, and services being conducted by psychologists. Psychologists exercise reasonable judgment and take precautions to ensure that their potential biases, the boundaries of their competence, and the limitations of their expertise do not lead to or condone unjust practices. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Respect for People’s Rights and Dignity
Psychologists respect the dignity and worth of all people, and the rights of individuals to privacy, confidentiality, and self-determination. Psychologists are aware that special safeguards may be necessary to protect the rights and welfare of persons or communities whose vulnerabilities impair autonomous decision making. Psychologists are aware of and respect cultural, individual, and role differences, including those based on age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, and socioeconomic status and consider these factors when working with members of such groups. Psychologists try to eliminate the effect on their work of biases based on those factors, and they do not knowingly participate in or condone activities of others based upon such prejudices. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. Resolving ethical issues
2. Competence
3. Human relations
4. Privacy and confidentiality
5. Advertising and public relations
6. record keeping
7. Education- you being the education provider
8. Research
9. Assessment
10. Therapy |
|
|
Term
1. Resolving ethical issues |
|
Definition
Misuse
Law Vs Ethics
Ethics Vs Job
Informal resolution
Formal Reports
Compliance
False Claims
Discrimination |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
lPractice within area of education/training
lNotification of experimental practice
lEmergencies
lDelegation
Personal issues |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
lDiscrimination
lHarm
lHarassment
lDual relationships
lConflict of interests
lThird party requests
lExploitation
lInformed consent
lCooperation
Interruption in services |
|
|
Term
| 4. Privacy and Confidentiality |
|
Definition
lMaintaining
lLimits
lConsultation
lDisclosure
lConfidentiality Vs Privilege |
|
|
Term
| 5. Advertising and public statements |
|
Definition
lAvoid and rectify
lMedia
lEducation
lTestimonials
lSolicitation |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
lDo it
¡Replication
¡Referrals/Continued Treatment
¡Billing
¡Law
¡Check state requirements
lWithholding Records
lFees
lBarter (must place a $ value on services)
lAccuracy in records
lReferrals (do not accept payment for referrals) |
|
|
Term
| 7. Education- you being the education provider |
|
Definition
lDesign (syllabus, what they will gain from the experience)
lDescription
lAccuracy
lPersonal information
lTherapy participation
lPerformance Assessment (give feedback)
lRelationships (under our supervision) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
lApproval/IRB
lConsent
lPayment (not to high=coercion)
lDeception
lDebriefing
lAnimals
lReporting
lPublication
lPlagiarism
lDuplicate Data |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
lInformed consent
lProper use
lNecessary
lRelease of Data
lTest Construction
lInterpreting
lAssistants
lResults
Security |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
lInformed consent
lFamily Therapy
lGroup Therapy
lRelationship
¡Clients
¡Friends/Family of client
¡Former client
lInterruption
lTermination |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
When a therapist determines that a patient presents a serious danger of violence to another, the therapist is obligated to use reasonable care to protect the intended victim. This duty may require the therapist to take one or more steps, warning, apprising the victim of the danger, notifying the police or whatever steps are reasonable. |
|
|
Term
| Clinical versus actuarial judgment |
|
Definition
¡Clinical judgment = reaching a decision by processing information in ones head
¡Actuarial judgment = reaching a decision without employing human judgment, using empirically-established relations between data and the event of interest
lNote that some of the data in an actuarial judgment may be qualitative clinical observations, allowing a mixture of methods |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Clinical versus actuarial judgment
first addressed the question: Which is better?
His ground rules for comparison:
–Both methods should draw from the same data set (this was relaxed by others, with no changes in results)
–Cross-validation should be required, to avoid using variation specific to the data set
–
There should be explicit prediction of success, recidivism, or recovery |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
¡He looked at between 16 and 20 studies (depending on inclusion criteria)
“…it is clear that the dogmatic, complacent assertion sometimes heard from clinicians that ‘naturally’ clinical prediction, being based on ‘real understanding’ is superior, is simply not justified by the facts to date”.
¡In all but one case, predictions made by actuarial means were equal to or better than clinical methods
lIn a later paper, he changed his mind about the one.
|
|
|
Term
| Where are clinician’s strengths? |
|
Definition
-Theory-mediated judgments
If the predictor knows the relevant causal influences, can measure them, and has a model specific enough to take him/her from theory to fact
However, are there any reasons to doubt this potential advantage?
-Ability to use rare events
-If the predictor knows that the current case is an exception to the statistical trend, s/he can use that information to over-ride the trend
it is in theory possible to build these into actuarial methods
-Able to detect complex predictive cures
|
|
|
Term
| Where are actuarial strengths? |
|
Definition
-Immunity from fatigue, forgetfulness, hang-overs, hostility, prejudice, ignorance, false association, over-confidence, bias, and random fluctuations in judgment.
-
Consistency & proper weighting
-variables are weighted the same way every time, according to their actual demonstrable contributions to the criterion of interest
-irrelevant variables are properly weighted to zero
-Feedback and base-rates "built in" to the system
-Clinicians rarely know how they are doing because they don’t get immediate feedback and because they have imperfect memory
-actuarial records constitute perfect memories of how things came out in similar cases and can include a larger and wider sample than a human can ever hope to see
-not overly sensitive to optimal weighting
-even simple actuarial judgements often beat human judgements |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
§is valuable when the outcomes are objective and specific, when the outcomes are large and heterogeneous samples and when there is reason to concerned about bias. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
§is valuable when there is not adequate test for specific areas or events, when the interest in individual case is high, when clinical judgment involves situations or unforeseen circumstances of which statistical test are not available. |
|
|
Term
| There are several factors that can reduce the efficacy and validity of clinical judgment. |
|
Definition
-Information processing.
The clinician must avoid the tendency to oversimplify and learn to tolerate the ambiguity and complexity.
-The reading-in syndrome.
The clinicians tend to over interpret patient’s symptoms and make predictions that emphasize the negative symptoms. The clinicians should evaluate client’s strengths rather than the psychopathology.
-Validation and records.
The clinicians’ predictions should be compared with colleague, relatives who know the patient and can help to refine interpretations.
-Vague reports, concepts and criteria.
Vague reports and concepts lead to wrong prediction and lack of validity.
-structured interviews, rating scales, behavioral observations, objective personality tests reduce this risk
-The effects of predictions
The predictors influence on the behavioral situation. So they may become a error.
- Prediction to unknown situations.
Clinical judgment turns out to be in error when the clinician does not know the situation and environment in which their patients are living or working. However, many times the clinicians must make predictions with vague information about the patient’s environment. Also patient’s behavior may change from one situation to another (personality feat
•Fallacious prediction principles.
Intuitive predictions can lead into error if clinician ignores the statistical prediction related with those predictions. The reliability and validity did not increase as a function of increasing the amounts of test data. A mistake is to believe that the validity of inferences is inevitably correlated with test battery.
•Influence of stereotyped beliefs.
Clinician should avoid tendency to believe that certain diagnostic signs, demographic group may influence inevitably on clinical judgment.
|
|
|
Term
|
Definition
•Sick-sick fallacy.
–Tendency to perceive people unlike ourselves as being sick (maladjusted).
•Me-too fallacy.
–Denying the significance of an event in the patient's life because if has also happened to us.
•Uncle George’s pancakes fallacy.
–Things that we do could not be maladjusted behavior.
•Multiple Napoleons fallacy.
–A mistake is interpreted any patient’s belief as not pathological because although is not real for us, it is real for him/her.
•Understanding it make it normal fallacy.
–Understanding patient’s beliefs deprive them of their significance, context. |
|
|
Term
| Categorical Vs Dimensional |
|
Definition
¡Stein et al offered a middle ground between the two
¡Categorical approach
lPresence or Absence disorder/symptoms
lWhy it is needed
¡Research purposes
¡Statistics
¡Communication
¡Identification of main problem
Leads to/determines treatment
¡Problems with Categorical
lOverlap with diagnostic categories
lDenotes presence or absence not severity
lFails to capture whole individual
lRarely do we cure
Dimensional approach
¡Capture whole person
lSchizophrenic with some depression features
¡Appropriately weighs problems
¡Track treatment outcomes
Problems with Dimensional approach
¡Dallas made a great point in week 2
¡Reliability of determining severity |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
¡Over diagnosis?
lDepression and Elderly
lADHD girls
lAspergers (for now)
lLearning Disability
lSubstance Abuse
lSES & Cultural issues
¡Some truth to medication claim
lUse of psychotropic meds up across all categories
lMore GP’s are prescribing-off label prescribing
lPeople not seeking out mental health professionals
lSES factors
lResidential facilities
¡Lowered Thresholds
lWhat would really change with ADHD (presence & onset) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
•A. Recurrent episodes of binge eating. An episode of binge eating is characterized by both of the following:
–1. eating, in a discrete period of time (for example, within any 2-hour period), an amount of food that is definitely larger than most people would eat in a similar period of time under similar circumstances
–2. a sense of lack of control over eating during the episode (for example, a feeling that one cannot stop eating or control what or how much one is eating)
•B. The binge-eating episodes are associated with three (or more) of the following:
–1. eating much more rapidly than normal
–2. eating until feeling uncomfortably full
–3. eating large amounts of food when not feeling physically hungry
–4. eating alone because of feeling embarrassed by how much one is eating
–5. feeling disgusted with oneself, depressed, or very guilty afterwards
•C. Marked distress regarding binge eating is present.
•D. The binge eating occurs, on average, at least once a week for three months.
•E. The binge eating is not associated with the recurrent use of inappropriate compensatory behavior (for example, purging) and does not occur exclusively during the course Anorexia Nervosa, Bulimia Nervosa, or Avoidant/Restrictive Food Intake Disorder
|
|
|
Term
Disruptive Mood Dysregulation Disorder |
|
Definition
A. The disorder is characterized by severe recurrent temper outbursts in response to common stressors.
1. The temper outbursts are manifest verbally and/or behaviorally, such as in the form of verbal rages, or physical aggression towards people or property.
2. The reaction is grossly out of proportion in intensity or duration to the situation or provocation.
3. The responses are inconsistent with developmental level.
B. Frequency: The temper outbursts occur, on average, three or more times per week.
C. Mood between temper outbursts:
1. Nearly every day, the mood between temper outbursts is persistently negative (irritable, angry, and/or sad).
2. The negative mood is observable by others (e.g., parents, teachers, peers).
D. Duration: Criteria A-C have been present for at least 12 months. Throughout that time, the person has never been without the symptoms of Criteria A-C for more than 3 months at a time.
E. The temper outbursts and/or negative mood are present in at least two settings (at home, at school, or with peers) and must be severe in at least in one setting.
F. Chronological age is at least 6 years (or equivalent developmental level).
G. The onset is before age 10 years. |
|
|
Term
Disinhibited Social Engagement Disorder |
|
Definition
A. A pattern of behavior in which the child actively approaches and interacts with unfamiliar adults by exhibiting at least 2 of the following:
1) Reduced or absent reticence to approach and interact with unfamiliar adults.
2) Overly familiar behavior (verbal or physical violation of culturally sanctioned social boundaries).
3) Diminished or absent checking back with adult caregiver after venturing away, even in unfamiliar settings.
4) Willingness to go off with an unfamiliar adult with minimal or no hesitation.
B. The behavior in A. is not limited to impulsivity as in ADHD but includes socially disinhibited behavior.
C. Pathogenic care as evidenced by at least one of the following:
1) Persistent failure to meet the child’s basic emotional needs for comfort, stimulation, and affection (i.e., neglect)
2) Persistent failure to provide for the child’s physical and psychological safety.
3) Persistent harsh punishment or other types of grossly inept parenting.
4) Repeated changes of primary caregiver that limit opportunities to form stable attachments (e.g., frequent changes in foster care).
5) Rearing in unusual settings that limit opportunities to form selective attachments (e.g., institutions with high child to caregiver ratios).
D. There is a presumption that the care in Criterion C is responsible for the disturbed behavior in Criterion A (e.g., the disturbances in Criterion A began following the pathogenic care in Criterion C).
E. The child has a developmental age of at least 9 months. |
|
|
