Provides a systematic approach to writing psychological reports for optimal clarity, thoroughness, and impact A clinical report should have all the clarity and precision of a military dispatch. Unfortunately, as anyone who deals with psychological reports knows, this is almost never the case. Extensive research has shown that with most psychologist's reports, there is a dangerously wide gap between author intent and reader interpretation. Since the quality of clinical reports can have a direct bearing on the quality of care a client receives --especially in an age of managed care --it is essential that psychologists arm themselves with a systematic approach to creating reports that in structure, content, and style have the utmost clarity, thoroughness, and utility. Psychological Reports, Third Edition, provides them with such an approach. The book begins with a theory-based analysis of report-writing problems, which is then used to construct a framework for identifying and correcting them. A valuable working resource for practicing psychologists and psychotherapists, Psychological Reports, Third Edition, is also must reading for students and psychologists-in-training.
The purpose of this study was to investigate parents' comprehension of psychological reports, employing the same method used by Wiener (1985) in a similar study of teachers. Forty-five parents of handicapped children completed questionnaires and semantic differentials to assess their comprehension of and preference for three formats of psychological reports. As in the earlier study with teachers, it was found that parents comprehended better reports that organize information by functional domain, that describe strengths and problems in clear behavioural terms, that describe the child's learning style fully, and that state specific and elaborate program recommendations. Parents preferred these reports over shorter reports that did not have the above features. They especially liked reports that explicitly respond to the referral questions.
Effective psychological reports are consumer-focused: They address the concerns of the referring persons, present data appropriately, communicate clearly and concisely, and include useful and appropriate recommendations. Although the importance of clear communication has been stressed repeatedly, psychologists often write reports that are very difficult for nonpsychologists to read. In this article, the author explores four reasons behind this dichotomy: (a) model reports available to psychologists in training are written at a level that is very difficult to understand; (b) psychological terms are not commonly defined; (c) the amount of time it takes to write easily understood reports is substantial; and (d) psychologists are confused about how to address multiple audiences. Methods to address each issue are discussed.
Three formats of psychological reports were studied. It was found that teachers comprehended better reports that organize information by functional domain, that describe strengths and problems in clear behavioral terms, that describe the child's learning style fully, and that state specific and elaborated program recommendations. Teachers preferred these reports over shorter reports that did not have the above features. They especially liked reports that explicitly respond to the referral questions.
Three studies of educators' comprehension of psychological reports are described. Subjects were 42 school administrators in Study I, 49 elementary school teachers in Study II, and 77 secondary school teachers in Study III. Five formats of reports were compared using methodology similar to that of Wiener (1985) and Wiener and Kohler (1986). It was found that all three groups of educators preferred reports in which both the child description and the recommendations were elaborated with explanations and examples and the structure of the report was highly salient. Elementary teachers and principals comprehended the reports they preferred better than a shorter form containing equivalent information. The results were interpreted in terms of a schema theory of reading comprehension.
暂无摘要（点击查看原文获取完整内容）
暂无摘要（点击查看原文获取完整内容）
Background: The 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic is a public health emergency of international concern and poses a challenge to psychological resilience. Research data are needed to develop evidence-driven strategies to reduce adverse psychological impacts and psychiatric symptoms during the epidemic. The aim of this study was to survey the general public in China to better understand their levels of psychological impact, anxiety, depression, and stress during the initial stage of the COVID-19 outbreak. The data will be used for future reference. Methods: From 31 January to 2 February 2020, we conducted an online survey using snowball sampling techniques. The online survey collected information on demographic data, physical symptoms in the past 14 days, contact history with COVID-19, knowledge and concerns about COVID-19, precautionary measures against COVID-19, and additional information required with respect to COVID-19. Psychological impact was assessed by the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R), and mental health status was assessed by the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Results: This study included 1210 respondents from 194 cities in China. In total, 53.8% of respondents rated the psychological impact of the outbreak as moderate or severe; 16.5% reported moderate to severe depressive symptoms; 28.8% reported moderate to severe anxiety symptoms; and 8.1% reported moderate to severe stress levels. Most respondents spent 20–24 h per day at home (84.7%); were worried about their family members contracting COVID-19 (75.2%); and were satisfied with the amount of health information available (75.1%). Female gender, student status, specific physical symptoms (e.g., myalgia, dizziness, coryza), and poor self-rated health status were significantly associated with a greater psychological impact of the outbreak and higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Specific up-to-date and accurate health information (e.g., treatment, local outbreak situation) and particular precautionary measures (e.g., hand hygiene, wearing a mask) were associated with a lower psychological impact of the outbreak and lower levels of stress, anxiety, and depression (p < 0.05). Conclusions: During the initial phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in China, more than half of the respondents rated the psychological impact as moderate-to-severe, and about one-third reported moderate-to-severe anxiety. Our findings identify factors associated with a lower level of psychological impact and better mental health status that can be used to formulate psychological interventions to improve the mental health of vulnerable groups during the COVID-19 epidemic.
1. Orientation to Psychological Report Writing. 2. The Psychological Report: Practical Focus. 3. Pitfalls in Reporting. 4. Responsibility and Effectiveness. 5. Content of the Psychological Report. 6. Conceptualizing the Psychological Report. 7. A Workshop on Psychological Report Writing: How to Write Reports and How Not To. 8. Computer-Generated Psychological Reports. 9. Psychological Reports and the Psychotherapeutic Process. 10. Psychological Reports in School Settings. 11. Forensic Psychological Evaluations. Appendix A: A Guide to Checking the Report. Appendix B: Recommended Readings. References.
Research on the impact of job insecurity for temporary employees has been largely exploratory and atheoretical in nature. This paper addresses this issue by considering the role of job insecurity on job satisfaction, organizational commitment, life satisfaction, and self‐rated performance among permanent employees ( N = 396) as compared with temporary ones ( N = 148). Hypotheses are formulated using the tradition of transactional versus relational psychological contract types. Psychological contract theory assumes (1) that job insecurity effects are due to a violation of the relational psychological contract, and (2) that permanents as compared with temporaries engage more in relational psychological contracting. As a result, job insecurity is expected to be problematic in terms of outcomes for permanents, but not for temporaries. Results validate the assumptions made in psychological contract theory. Furthermore, job insecurity proved problematic for permanents but not for temporaries when job satisfaction and organizational commitment are concerned. No such differential effects are observed for life satisfaction and self‐rated performance. Implications for future research are discussed.
BACKGROUND: The psychological autopsy method offers the most direct technique currently available for examining the relationship between particular antecedents and suicide. This systematic review aimed to examine the results of studies of suicide that used a psychological autopsy method. METHOD: A computer aided search of MEDLINE, BIDS ISI and PSYCHLIT, supplemented by reports known to the reviewers and reports identified from the reference lists of other retrieved reports. Two investigators systematically and independently examined all reports. Median proportions were determined and population attributable fractions were calculated, where possible, in cases of suicide and controls. RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-four reports were identified, of which 76 met the criteria for inclusion; 54 were case series and 22 were case-control studies. The median proportion of cases with mental disorder was 91% (95 % CI 81-98%) in the case series. In the case-control studies the figure was 90% (88-95%) in the cases and 27% (14-48%) in the controls. Co-morbid mental disorder and substance abuse also preceded suicide in more cases (38%, 19-57%) than controls (6%, 0-13%). The population attributable fraction for mental disorder ranged from 47-74% in the seven studies in which it could be calculated. The effects of particular disorders and sociological variables have been insufficiently studied to draw clear conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that mental disorder was the most strongly associated variable of those that have been studied. Further studies should focus on specific disorders and psychosocial factors. Suicide prevention strategies may be most effective if focused on the treatment of mental disorders.
BACKGROUND: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are used to evaluate social and psychological interventions and inform policy decisions about them. Accurate, complete, and transparent reports of social and psychological intervention RCTs are essential for understanding their design, conduct, results, and the implications of the findings. However, the reporting of RCTs of social and psychological interventions remains suboptimal. The CONSORT Statement has improved the reporting of RCTs in biomedicine. A similar high-quality guideline is needed for the behavioural and social sciences. Our objective was to develop an official extension of the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials 2010 Statement (CONSORT 2010) for reporting RCTs of social and psychological interventions: CONSORT-SPI 2018. METHODS: We followed best practices in developing the reporting guideline extension. First, we conducted a systematic review of existing reporting guidelines. We then conducted an online Delphi process including 384 international participants. In March 2014, we held a 3-day consensus meeting of 31 experts to determine the content of a checklist specifically targeting social and psychological intervention RCTs. Experts discussed previous research and methodological issues of particular relevance to social and psychological intervention RCTs. They then voted on proposed modifications or extensions of items from CONSORT 2010. RESULTS: The CONSORT-SPI 2018 checklist extends 9 of the 25 items from CONSORT 2010: background and objectives, trial design, participants, interventions, statistical methods, participant flow, baseline data, outcomes and estimation, and funding. In addition, participants added a new item related to stakeholder involvement, and they modified aspects of the flow diagram related to participant recruitment and retention. CONCLUSIONS: Authors should use CONSORT-SPI 2018 to improve reporting of their social and psychological intervention RCTs. Journals should revise editorial policies and procedures to require use of reporting guidelines by authors and peer reviewers to produce manuscripts that allow readers to appraise study quality, evaluate the applicability of findings to their contexts, and replicate effective interventions.
Psychological quality of life (QOL), health-related QOL (HRQOL), and life satisfaction outcomes and their associated risk factors are reviewed for the large cohort of survivors and siblings in the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study (CCSS). This review includes previously published manuscripts that used CCSS data focused on psychological outcome measures, including the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-18), the Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 (SF-36), the Cantril Ladder of Life, and other self-report questionnaires. Comparisons and contrasts are made between siblings and survivors, and to normative data when available, in light of demographic/health information and abstracted data from the medical record. These studies demonstrate that a significant proportion of survivors report more symptoms of global distress and poorer physical, but not emotional, domains of HRQOL. Other than brain tumor survivors, most survivors report both good present and expected future life satisfaction. Risk factors for psychological distress and poor HRQOL are female sex, lower educational attainment, unmarried status, annual household income less than $20,000, unemployment, lack of health insurance, presence of a major medical condition, and treatment with cranial radiation and/or surgery. Cranial irradiation impacted neurocognitive outcomes, especially in brain tumor survivors. Psychological distress also predicted poor health behaviors, including smoking, alcohol use, fatigue, and altered sleep. Psychological distress and pain predicted use of complementary and alternative medicine. Overall, most survivors are psychologically healthy and report satisfaction with their lives. However, certain groups of childhood cancer survivors are at high risk for psychological distress, neurocognitive dysfunction, and poor HRQOL, especially in physical domains. These findings suggest targeting interventions for groups at highest risk for adverse outcomes and examining the positive growth that remains despite the trauma of childhood cancer.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: The relationship between nightmare prevalence, nightmare distress, and self-reported psychological disturbance was assessed prospectively. DESIGN: Differences in self-reported psychological disturbance as a function of nightmare prevalence was investigated by MANCOVA's with non-nightmare dreams as the covariate as well as Pearson correlations. The relative contribution of nightmare prevalence and distress to the prediction of psychological disturbance was investigated through multiple regression analyses. SETTING: N/A. PARTICIPANTS: 116 participants (mean age = 20 years) completed self-report indices of depression, anxiety, dissociation, psychosis-proneness, and a psychiatric symptom checklist and kept a nightmare log for 21 consecutive nights. INTERVENTIONS: N/A. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Frequent nightmares were associated with higher levels of psychological disturbance. Individuals who reported 3 or more nightmares across the 3 weeks reported more dissociation, psychosis-proneness and psychiatric symptoms than participants reporting 2 nightmares or less. However, nightmare prevalence and distress were not significantly correlated and differentially predicted to different types of waking psychological disturbance. Multiple regressions further indicated that nightmare distress accounted for much of the unique explanatory variance in predicting clinical states associated with high negative affect (anxiety and depression). Last, there was no evidence for a specific relationship between nightmares and psychosis-proneness. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that it is not the incidence of nightmares which is associated with poorer waking psychological functioning, especially anxiety and depression states, but the reported distress associated with the nightmare experience which is the critical variable in predicting higher psychological disturbance.
Construct Validity in Psychological TestsVALIDATION of psychological tests has not yet been adequately concep tua1ized, as the APA Committee on Psychological Tests learned when it undertook to specify what qualities should be investigated before a test is published.In order to make coherent recommendations the Committee found it necessary to distinguish four types of validity, established by different types of research and requiring different interpre tation.The chief innovation in the Committee's report was the term constmct validity.*This idea was first formulated hy a subcommittee {Meehl and R. C. Cballman) studying how proposed recommendations would apply to projective techniques, and later modified and clarified by the entire Committee {Bordin, Challman, Conrad, Humphreys, Super, and the present writers).The statements agreed upon by tbe Committee (and by committees of two other associations) were published in the Technical Recommendations ( 59).The present interpretation of construct validity is not "official" and deals with some areas in which the Committee would probably not be unanimous.The present writers are solely responsible for this attempt to explain the concept and elaborate its implications.Identification of construct validity was not an isolated development.Writers on validity during the preceding decade had shown a great deal of dissatisfaction with conventional notions of validity, and intro dnced new terms and ideas, hut the resulting aggregation of types of * Referred to in a preliminary report ( 58) as cougruent validity.
As efforts to end systemic racism gain momentum across various contexts, it is critical to consider antiracist steps needed to improve psychological science. Current scientific practices may serve to maintain white supremacy with significant and impactful consequences. Extant research practices reinforce norms of homogeneity within BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color) populations, segregate theories, and methods derived from BIPOC groups, apply disparate standards to the evaluation of research on white versus BIPOC populations, and discourage BIPOC scholars from pursuing research careers. Perhaps consequently, disparities persist on a range of psychologically relevant outcomes (e.g., mental and physical health). This article presents examples of how epistemic oppression exists within psychological science, including in how science is conducted, reported, reviewed, and disseminated. This article offers a needed contribution by providing specific concrete recommendations for different stakeholders, including those involved in the production, reporting, and gatekeeping of science as well as consumers of science. Additionally, a discussion of accountability steps are offered to ensure that psychological science moves beyond talk and toward action, with possible strategies to measure outcomes, stimulate progress, promote dialogue and action, challenge inequity, and upend the influence of white supremacy in psychological science. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Effect sizes are underappreciated and often misinterpreted—the most common mistakes being to describe them in ways that are uninformative (e.g., using arbitrary standards) or misleading (e.g., squaring effect-size rs). We propose that effect sizes can be usefully evaluated by comparing them with well-understood benchmarks or by considering them in terms of concrete consequences. In that light, we conclude that when reliably estimated (a critical consideration), an effect-size r of .05 indicates an effect that is very small for the explanation of single events but potentially consequential in the not-very-long run, an effect-size r of .10 indicates an effect that is still small at the level of single events but potentially more ultimately consequential, an effect-size r of .20 indicates a medium effect that is of some explanatory and practical use even in the short run and therefore even more important, and an effect-size r of .30 indicates a large effect that is potentially powerful in both the short and the long run. A very large effect size ( r = .40 or greater) in the context of psychological research is likely to be a gross overestimate that will rarely be found in a large sample or in a replication. Our goal is to help advance the treatment of effect sizes so that rather than being numbers that are ignored, reported without interpretation, or interpreted superficially or incorrectly, they become aspects of research reports that can better inform the application and theoretical development of psychological research.
Part 1: Understanding and Assessing Trauma and PTSD. J.P. Wilson, T.M. Keane, Introduction. J.P. Wilson, PTSD and Complex PTSD: Symptoms, Syndromes and Diagnoses. R.A. Bryant, Assessing Acute Stress Disorders. Part 2: Standardized Psychometric Measures, Clinical Protocols, Epidemiological Methods and Projective Techniques for Trauma and PTSD. F.H. Norris, J. Hamblen, Standardized Self-Report Measures of Civilian Trauma for PTSD. D.S. Weiss, Structured Clinical Interview Techniques for PTSD. M. Steinberg, Systematic Assessment of Posttraumatic Dissociation: The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV: Dissociative Disorders. C.R. Marmar, T.J. Metzler, C. Otte, The Peritraumatic Dissociative Experiences Questionnaire. D.S. Weiss, The Impact of Events Scale - Revised. T. Luxenberg, P. Levin, The Role of the Rorschach in the Assessment and Treatment of Trauma. W.E. Schlenger, B.K. Jordan, J.M. Caddell, L. Ebert, J.A. Fairbank, Epidemiologic Methods for Assessing Trauma and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. T.M. Keane, A.E. Street, J. Stafford, The Assessment of Military Related PTSD. Part 3: Assessing the Psychobiology of PTSD. S.P. Orr, L.J. Metzger, M.W. Miller, D.G. Kaloupek, Psychophysiological Assessment of PTSD. J.A. Knight, C.T. Taft, Assessing Neuropsychological Concomitants of Trauma and Posttraumatic Stress Disorder. J. Kaufman, D. Aikens, J. Krystal, Neuroimaging Studies in PTSD. Matthew J. Friedman, Psychobiological Laboratory Assessment of PTSD. Part 4: Assessing Trauma, Loss and PTSD in Medical Settings. T.C. Buckley, B.L. Green, P.P. Schnurr, Trauma, PTSD and Physical Health: Clinical Issues. L.M. Najavits, Assessment of Trauma, PTSD and Substance Use Disorder: A Practical Guide. B. Raphael, N. Martinek, S. Wooding, Assessing Traumatic Bereavement. Part 5: Assessing Trauma and PTSD in Gender, Culture and Psychosocial Development. K.O. Nader, Assessing Traumatic Experiences in Children. J. Briere, Psychological Assessment of Child Abuse Effects in Adults. R. Kimerling, A. Prins, D. Westrup, T. Lee, Gender Issues in the Assessment of PTSD. Part 6: Assessing Traumatic Injury in Litigation: PTSD and Law. J.P. Wilson, T.A. Moran, Forensic/Clinical Assessment of Psychological Trauma and PTSD in Legal Settings.