AGAINST RECORDING SESSIONS FOR SUPERVISION.

The American Psychological Association's (APA) 2014 injunction that supervisors must listen to recorded sessions of their supervisees' work is based on a rich and thorough body of research, and yet it entails a narrative of psychotherapy as a discipline of Science. If psychotherapy is understood as an endeavor also of the Humanities, recording sessions may be anathematic to supervision and training. Developing ideas from Greenberg's (2015) theory of "controlling fiction," the writer presents a narrative of psychotherapy in which it is not wise to review recorded sessions in supervision.

[Frequently Asked Questions About the Seventh Edition APA Citation].

The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association is an academic writing format reference manual commonly used in the field of social sciences. The current, seventh edition of this manual was published in October 2019. The two main issues spotlighted in this edition are the increasingly common citation of online material and the use of inclusive and bias-free language in academic writing. APA (American Psychological Association) style guidelines are widely used in nursing academia, in papers written for N3 and N4 nursing clinical ladder qualification, and in papers submitted to nursing journals. The lengthy and detailed content of the APA publication manual frequently overwhelms and confuses clinical nurses and students, and Taiwan Nursing Association members regularly submit APA-style-related questions to the Association. Thus, this article was written to address the origin and evolution of APA formatting guidelines and their importance in academic writing, highlight the major changes in the seventh edition, answer common questions about the APA citation format, and share APA online resources. It is hoped that the information in this article assists readers to improve the quality of their academic writing.

Positive Psychology: A Personal History.

As president of the American Psychological Association in 1998, I organized researchers and practitioners to work on building well-being, not just on the traditional task of reducing ill-being. Substantial research then found that well-being causes many external benefits, including better physical and mental health. Among the applications of Positive Psychology are national psychological accounts of well-being, Positive Psychotherapy, the classification of strengths and virtues, Comprehensive Soldier Fitness, and Positive Education. Positive Psychology has spread beyond psychology into neuroscience, health, psychiatry, theology, and even to the humanities. Positive Psychology has many critics, and I comment on the strongest criticisms. I conclude with the hope that the building of well-being will become a cornerstone of morality, politics, and religion.

Effect of preoperative anxiety on postoperative pain on patients undergoing elective surgery: Prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Anxiety is a feeling of tension, apprehension, nervousness, fear, discomfort, and high autonomic activity with varying degrees of intensity resulting from anticipation of danger. Post-operative pain is associated with the emotional status, behavioural response, and high anxiety index of patients.This study aimed to assess the effect of preoperative anxiety on Postoperative Pain in Patients Undergoing Elective Surgery. METHODS: An institutional-based prospective cohort study was conducted on patients scheduled for elective surgeries from November 1, 2019, to October 30, 2020, in Dilla University Referral Hospital. Data was collected by pretested questionnaires and analysed by SPSS version 20. Categorical data were analysed by chi-square while Continuous data were analysed by student t-test and Mann Whitney U for parametric and nonparametric data respectively with a P-value of <0.05 was considered as statistically significant. RESULT: As our finding revealed patients with high preoperative anxiety experienced significantly increased postoperative pain at 2 h, 4 h, 6 h, and 12 h with the P-value of 0.012, 0.01, 0.001, and 0.002 respectively and total tramadol consumption in a patient with high preoperative anxiety level is 156.5 ± 23.4 while in low anxiety 147.1 ± 39. with a p-value of 0.036. CONCLUSION: High preoperative anxiety increased the immediate postoperative pain score and 24 h tramadol consumption. It would be better to decrease preoperative anxiety levels to reduce postoperative pain and 24 h analgesic consumption.

Women Publishing in American Psychological Association Journals: A Gender Analysis of Six Decades.

Despite recent advances, gender inequality persists in many scientific fields, and Psychology is not alien to this phenomenon. This study presents the evolution of gender composition in American Psychological Association publications in the past six decades, from 1963 to 2016. Longitudinal analysis revealed an important change: women rose from a tiny 12% to 14% in the 1960s to almost gender parity in the last decade (2010s). The pattern of collaboration (coauthorship) shows that women tend to be slightly overrepresented as first author and underrepresented as the last or senior author. In the last two decades, women outnumber men as "new" American Psychological Association authors (authors who publish for the first time in an American Psychological Association journal). These features and the fact that men's publications tend to encompass a much wider range of years suggest that age may play a role in the gender composition of American Psychological Association contributors.

Professional Society Ethics Group exchanges experience.

KIE: A brief report is given of the October 1984 semiannual meeting of the Professional Society Ethics Group, which comprises 26 societies affiliated with the American Association for the Advancement of Science. At the meeting, a representative of the American College of Physicians (ACP) discussed a new ACP Ethics Manual written by an ad hoc committee of the ACP to address major ethical issues encountered by physicians in daily practice, and a representative of the American Psychological Association (APA) described the investigative and adjudication procedures used by the APA for handling ethics complaints.^ieng

The Hoffman report, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the defense of the nation: A personal view.

I was asked by the Central Intelligence Agency in the spring of 2002 about how the research on learned helplessness could help captured Americans resist and evade torture and interrogation. There was no discussion of how learned helplessness could be used with detainees nor any mention of the interrogation of detainees. James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen later created a program of "enhanced interrogation" of detainees and it was incorrectly reported that they based it on the theory of learned helplessness. I played no role at all in these developments, and I am grieved that scientific research created to relieve helplessness and depression might have been used for brutal interrogations. The unfounded attacks on me and others, however, may have been intended to discourage young psychologists from working with the Department of Defense, and I urge American Psychological Association not to waver in its long-standing commitment to serve the nation.

The American Psychological Association's Hoffman report allegations of my association with the "CIA torture" program.

Until now, I have not responded to the undocumented and untrue portrayal of me in the Hoffman report, or the newspaper and email accounts of my alleged role in "torture." I have waited several years because I believed that the American Psychological Association leadership would completely disavow the Hoffman report and find a way to restore my reputation as well as that of the other former American Psychological Association presidents and the small number of its senior staff who were also falsely accused. Although this has not yet happened, I remain optimistic that it will. Here I present the facts as they relate to me.

American psychologists, the Central Intelligence Agency, and enhanced interrogation.

In two commissioned articles, Health Psychology Open clarifies once and for all the role of two prominent American psychologists in the Central Intelligence Agency program of enhanced interrogation post 9/11. The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Committee Study of the Central Intelligence Agency's Detention and Interrogation Program and the Hoffman Report produced more questions than answers. In these historically significant articles, Martin Seligman and Joseph Matarazzo assert the truth about their actions and the lessons learned.

Errors in the 2017 APA Clinical Practice Guideline for the Treatment of PTSD: What the Data Actually Says.

The American Psychological Association (APA) Practice Guidelines for the Treatment of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) concluded that there was strong evidence for cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), cognitive processing therapy (CPT), cognitive therapy (CT), and exposure therapy yet weak evidence for eye movement desensitization and reprocessing (EMDR). This is despite the findings from an associated systematic review which concluded that EMDR leads to loss of PTSD diagnosis and symptom reduction. Depression symptoms were also found to improve more with EMDR than control conditions. In that review, EMDR was marked down on strength of evidence (SOE) for symptom reduction for PTSD. However, there were several problems with the conclusions of that review. Firstly, in assessing the evidence in one of the studies, the reviewers chose an incorrect measure that skewed the data. We recalculated a meta-analysis with a more appropriate measure and found the SOE improved. The resulting effect size for EMDR on PTSD symptom reduction compared to a control condition was large for studies that meet the APA inclusion criteria (SMD = 1.28) and the heterogeneity was low (I2= 43%). Secondly, even if the original measure was chosen, we highlight inconsistencies with the way SOE was assessed for EMDR, CT, and CPT. Thirdly, we highlight two papers that were omitted from the analysis. One of these was omitted without any apparent reason. It found EMDR superior to a placebo control. The other study was published in 2015 and should have been part of APA guidelines since they were published in 2017. The inclusion of either study would have resulted in an improvement in SOE. Including both studies results in standard mean difference and confidence intervals that were better for EMDR than for CPT or CT. Therefore, the SOE should have been rated as moderate and EMDR assessed as at least equivalent to these CBT approaches in the APA guidelines. This would bring the APA guidelines in line with other recent practice guidelines from other countries. Less critical but also important, were several inaccuracies in assessing the risk of bias and the failure to consider studies supporting strong gains of EMDR at follow-up.

Project HELP: a Remotely Delivered Behavioral Intervention for Weight Regain after Bariatric Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Weight regain following bariatric surgery is common and potentially compromises the health benefits initially attained after surgery. Poor compliance to dietary and physical activity prescriptions is believed to be largely responsible for weight regain. Patients may benefit from developing specialized psychological skills necessary to engage in positive health behaviors over the long term. Unfortunately, patients often face challenges to physically returning to the bariatric surgery program for support in developing and maintaining these behaviors. Remotely delivered interventions, in contrast, can be conveniently delivered to the patient and have been found efficacious for a number of health problems, including obesity. To date, they have received little attention with bariatric surgery patients. The study aimed to evaluate a newly developed, remote acceptance-based behavioral intervention for postoperative weight regain. METHODS: Patients at least 1.5 years out from surgery who experienced postoperative weight regain were recruited to receive the 10-week intervention. Participants were assessed at baseline, mid-treatment, post-treatment, and at 3-month follow-up. RESULTS: Support for the intervention's feasibility and acceptability was achieved, with 70 % retention among those who started the program and a high mean rating (4.7 out of 5.0) of program satisfaction among study completers. On average, weight regain was reversed with a mean weight loss of 5.1 ± 5.5 % throughout the intervention. This weight loss was maintained at 3-month follow-up. Significant improvements in eating-related and acceptance-based variables also were observed. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study provides initial support for the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of a remotely delivered acceptance-based behavioral intervention for postoperative weight regain.

Deception in psychology: moral costs and benefits of unsought self-knowledge.

Is it ethically permissible to use deception in psychological experiments? We argue that, provided some requirements are satisfied, it is possible to use deceptive methods without producing significant harm to research participants and without any significant violation of their autonomy. We also argue that methodological deception is at least at the moment the only effective means by which one can acquire morally significant information about certain behavioral tendencies. Individuals in general, and research participants in particular, gain self-knowledge which can help them improve their autonomous decision-making. The community gains collective self-knowledge that, once shared, can play a role in shaping education, informing policies and in general creating a more efficient and just society.

On wearing two hats: role conflict in serving as both psychotherapist and expert witness.

OBJECTIVE: This article explores the clinical, legal, and ethical problems that typically occur when a psychotherapist serves as both a treating clinician and forensic evaluator (or expert witness) in the same case. METHOD: The professional literature, ethics codes, opinion surveys, and the changing economic and institutional contexts of psychotherapy are reviewed in order to identify obstacles to widespread recognition of this straightforward ethical issue. The processes of psychotherapy and forensic evaluation are then analyzed so as to reveal fundamental incompatibilities between the psychotherapist's clinical and legal functions. RESULTS: Attempting to treat and evaluate the same person typically creates an irreconcilable role conflict. This role conflict manifests itself in different conceptions of truth and causation, different forms of alliance, different types of assessment, and different ethical guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: Although circumstances sometimes compel a practitioner to assume the dual role of treater and evaluator, the problems that surround this practice argue for its avoidance whenever possible.

Process and procedures for dealing with misconduct: a necessity or a nightmare?

After a scientific and professional association has developed a code of ethics, it must develop a set of procedures to investigate, adjudicate, and enforce the code's provisions. The author, who is a scientist and an attorney, describes and discusses the fundamental legal principles that must be adhered to so that complaints against members can be adjudicated fairly, objectively, and with little legal risk to the association. The paper defines the concept of due process as it applies to private, non-profit associations and provides an example of how one professional and scientific association actually goes about adjudicating claims of misconduct against its members. It also informs associations about the liability risks that may confront them when they enforce a code of ethics, offers suggestions of how to manage those risks successfully, and concludes by cataloguing some of the financial burdens enforcement entails.

The institutional review board as a mirror of scientific and ethical standards.

Decisions by institutional review boards (IRBs) are presumed to reflect the norms and standards of the scientific community. Such criteria have shifted as changes have occurred in experimental interventions and protocols, codes of federal regulatory agencies, norms among investigators, and expectations of participants. The tension created by shifting norms and standards raises two questions: (a) Should IRBs evaluate the scientific (e.g., design) features of the proposed research, and (b) should consistent standards be expected even in areas that are in constant flux (e.g., AIDS research)? We discuss these questions and propose a mechanism to keep IRBs abreast of emergent issues and sensitized not only to the costs of doing research but also to the costs of not doing it.

Early interactions between animal psychologists and animal activists and the founding of the APA Committee on Precautions in Animal Experimentation.

The current conflict between animal psychologists and animal rights activists often is presented as a recent and unique phenomenon. Although its scope may be unprecedented, the fundamental issues are longstanding. Early criticisms of animal psychologists are viewed in the context of the broader Victorian antivivisectionist movement and are seen as similar to those of the present time. Various attitudes toward animals and research were expressed by individuals such as Charles Darwin, George John Romanes, William James, and John Dewey. Media attacks on animal research were directed at psychologists such as G. Stanley Hall, John B. Watson, Ivan P. Pavlov, and Edward L. Thorndike. The American Psychological Association Committee on Precautions in Animal Experimentation was founded in 1925 at the instigation of Walter B. Cannon, with Robert M. Yerkes as the first chair.

Scientific rewards and conflicts of ethical choices in human subjects research.

The primary responsibility of the American Psychological Association's (APA) Committee on Standards in Research (CSR) is to advise the APA on issues and standards related to the protection of human participants in psychological research. A related goal is to enhance the use of good ethical practices by APA members. The purpose of this article is to foster the view of research ethics not as an affront to the integrity of sound research, but as opportunities for scientific rewards, including increased understanding of the meaning of data, enhanced recruitment, and the inclusion of more representative samples. Three ethical practices are discussed as examples of this general premise: respect for confidentiality, use of debriefing, and assurance that participants are noncoerced volunteers. The Committee's intent is to promote consideration of these issues, not to promulgate specific guidelines or procedures.

Shading the truth in seeking informed consent for research purposes.

I want to argue for two propositions. First, I suggest that what some researchers may take to be a simple trade-off between minor violations of the truth for the sake of access to far greater truths represents a profound miscalculation with far-reaching and cumulative reverberations. Second, I submit that today's research environment, as demanding, competitive, and sometimes bewildering as it is, offers genuine scope for what Murdoch calls truth-seeking, for imaging and questioning, and for relating to facts through both truth and truthfulness; but that, in so doing, it presents hard choices with respect to methods, and, in turn, to personal integrity--not only in particular research projects but also with respect to that fragile research environment in its own right.

Ethical and legal duties in conducting research on violence: lessons from the MacArthur Risk Assessment Study.

This article addresses the ethical and legal duties that must be confronted in any study of the risk of interpersonal violence in the community. Ongoing research--the MacArthur Risk Assessment Study--on the markers of violence among released mental patients is taken as illustrative. Methods by which the researchers are discharging their legal and ethical duties are described and justified. Strategies center around the duty to protect research subjects from their own violence, and the duties to protect research staff and third parties from subjects' violence. By airing these rarely discussed issues, the authors hope to initiate a professional dialogue on crucial ethical and legal aspects of the research process.