Federal Funds to Train Clinical Psychologists for Work with Underserved Populations: The Bureau of Health Professions Graduate Psychology Education Grants Program

This paper describes the Bureau of Health Professions (BHPr) Graduate Psychology Education program (GPE), which supports projects that train health service psychologists for work with underserved populations. BHPr history and funding criteria are discussed, as are those of BHPr's parent organization, the Health Resources Service Administration. BHPr objectives and methods for support of clinical psychology training parallel those that BHPr has used to support training in other heath professions. The paper also describes three psychology internship training programs in academic medical settings that competed successfully for BHPr GPE funding in 2002. The three training projects differ significantly in training rotation sites, target populations with which trainees work, and the other health care professions that partner with psychology in interdisciplinary training—but they are similar in that each project provides an example of a program that effectively satisfied BHPr criteria for expanding psychology's scope of practice with underserved populations.     

What Happens to Mental Health Court Noncompleters?

Mental health court (MHC) research consistently finds that defendants who successfully complete and graduate from the court are less likely to recidivate than those who do not. However, research has not assessed what happens to these noncompleters once they are sent back to traditional court. Using follow-up data on six years of noncompleters from pre-adjudication MHC, we examine what happens to these defendants in traditional court. Findings suggest that 63.7% of defendants' charges were dismissed, 21.0% received probation, and 15.3% were sentenced to incarceration. We examine the time to disposition and differences in defendant characteristics and disposition outcome as well as the relationship between disposition and subsequent recidivism. Results suggest that more severe punishments in traditional court are associated with recidivism. Logistic regression analysis shows that defendants whose charges were dismissed in traditional court were less likely to recidivate than those who were sentenced to probation or incarceration. Our findings highlight the need for future MHC evaluations to consider traditional court outcomes and support trends towards post-adjudication courts. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Thirdhand smoke beliefs and behaviors among healthcare professionals

Thirdhand smoke (THS) refers to tobacco smoke contaminants and by-products that remain in the environment after a cigarette is extinguished. The purpose of this study was to assess beliefs and behaviors regarding THS among healthcare professionals, and to examine associations among smoking attitudes/beliefs, provider demographics, and THS beliefs and behaviors. Healthcare professionals (N = 204) at a comprehensive cancer center and affiliated general hospital in a northeastern urban area completed online questionnaires. About one third of the respondents had heard of THS before completing the survey, and more than two thirds of the sample believed that THS issues do not receive enough attention. Being female, likelihood of discussing THS with others, endorsing the belief that smoking affects the quality of parenting, and support for government action towards smoking bans were significantly associated with providers’ belief that THS is harmful. Endorsing the belief that smoking affects the quality of parenting and belief that THS is harmful were significantly associated with the likelihood of discussing THS with others. Findings shed light on THS beliefs and behaviors of healthcare providers (a group of individuals that could be trained to educate and advise patients about THS) and inform recommendations for new tobacco policies and clinical guidelines for best practices in tobacco control and prevention.     

Modeling Attitudes Toward Science: Development and Validation of the Credibility of Science Scale

We present the Credibility of Science Scale (CoSS), an efficient 6-item scale demonstrating excellent reliability and validity. CoSS scores exhibit criterion validity in predicting beliefs across a host of contemporary science topics, over and above previously documented predictors (Study 2). Further, we present evidence for the convergent and discriminant validity of the instrument, which correlates as expected with several variables previously implicated in scientific belief (e.g., political ideology, religious identity, conspiracist thinking; Study 2) and also with measures of cognitive ability (Study 3). Finally, we discuss possible uses of the CoSS as a tool for understanding science-related beliefs, behavior, and communication.