The Evolving Position of the American Psychiatric Association on Firearm Policy (1993–2014)

Before the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, the American Psychiatric Association's position on gun policy reflected the strong gun control perspective championed by the nation's public health establishment. After Heller declared that an individual's right to bear arms is constitutionally protected, the APA refocused its attention on the specific aspects of firearm policy that implicate the interests and rights of persons with mental illness. Psychiatrists are mindful of the need to curtail firearm access by persons with mental disorders that elevate the risk of suicide or violence to others, but they are also opposed to stigmatization, discrimination, and unfair treatment of individuals based on mental illness. Although civil commitment is an acceptable basis for prohibiting access to firearms, other adjudications of conduct indicative of elevated risk should also be included. Every state should provide a fair and reasonable process for restoring firearm rights after a suitable waiting period based on individualized assessment of whether the person remains at an elevated risk. However, restricting firearm rights of persons solely on the basis of a diagnosis of a mental disorder or voluntary treatment, whether in-patient or outpatient, discourages treatment and would be counterproductive. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. (original adopted by the American Psychiatric Association 2014).     

Resource Document on Access to Firearms by People with Mental Disorders

The American Psychiatric Association, (“APA”), with more than 36,000 members at present, is the Nation's leading organization of physicians who specialize in psychiatry. APA provides for education and advocacy and develops policy through Position Statements. It promotes enhanced knowledge of particular topics relevant to psychiatric practice and patient care through Resource Documents. Since 1993, the APA has developed various positions and resource materials related to firearms and mental illness, incorporating evolving themes as new issues emerge. This paper reflects the APA's 2014 Resource Document on “Access to Firearms by People with Mental Disorders.” This article is derived from work done on behalf of American Psychiatric Association and remains the property of APA. It has been altered only in response to the requirements of peer review. Copyright © 2015 American Psychiatric Association. Published with permission (original adopted by the American Psychiatric Association 2014).     

Clinical Validity of Prototype Personality Disorder Ratings in Adolescents

A growing body of research shows that personality pathology in adolescents is clinically distinctive and frequently stable into adulthood. A reliable and useful method for rating personality pathology in adolescent patients has the potential to enhance conceptualization, dissemination, and treatment effectiveness. The aim of this study is to examine the clinical validity of a prototype matching approach (derived from the Shedler Westen Assessment Procedure–Adolescent Version) for quantifying personality pathology in an adolescent inpatient sample. Sixty-six adolescent inpatients and their parents or legal guardians completed forms of the Child Behavior Checklist (CBCL) assessing emotional and behavioral problems. Clinical criterion variables including suicide history, substance use, and fights with peers were also assessed. Patients’ individual and group therapists on the inpatient unit completed personality prototype ratings. Prototype diagnoses demonstrated substantial reliability (median intraclass correlation coefficient =.75) across independent ratings from individual and group therapists. Personality prototype ratings correlated with the CBCL scales and clinical criterion variables in anticipated and meaningful ways. As seen in prior research with adult samples, prototype personality ratings show clinical validity across independent clinician raters previously unfamiliar with the approach, and they are meaningfully related to clinical symptoms, behavioral problems, and adaptive functioning.     

Characteristics of memories for traumatic and nontraumatic birth

Evidence for memory characteristic differences between trauma and other memories in non‐clinical samples is inconsistent. However, trauma is frequently confounded with the event recalled. This study compares trauma and nontrauma memories for the same event, childbirth, in a non‐clinical sample of 285 women 4–6 weeks after birth. None of the women met diagnostic criteria for post‐traumatic stress disorder. Traumatic birth, defined by the DSM‐5 event criterion, was reported by 100 women. The ratings of some memory characteristics did not differ between memories for traumatic and nontraumatic birth: All were rated highly coherent and central to women's lives, with moderate sensory memory. However, women who experienced traumatic births reported more involuntary recall, reliving, and negative/mixed emotions. Thus, trauma memories differed from nontrauma memories. In this non‐clinical sample, this is likely to be due to encoding during trauma rather than the distinctive memory profile for memories retrieved by those experiencing trauma symptoms.     

A new look at “the hard problem” of bilingual lexical access: evidence for language-switch costs with univalent stimuli

Considerable work has used language-switching tasks to investigate how bilinguals manage competition between languages. Language-switching costs have been argued to reflect persisting inhibition or persisting activation of a non-target language. However, these costs might instead reflect the use of bivalent stimuli (i.e. pictures or digits that can be responded to in either language). That is, language-switching costs may simply reflect a cost of selecting the task-appropriate response for a given item and so may not be reflective of bilingual lexical access [Finkbeiner, M., Almeida, J., Janssen, N., & Carramaza, A. (2006). Lexical selection in bilingual speech production does not involve language suppression. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(5), 1075–1089]. The present study addresses this concern by having Chinese/English bilinguals switch between languages in response to inherently univalent stimuli (English words and Chinese Characters) as well as lexically univalent, but orthographically bivalent, stimuli (English words and Chinese Pinyin). Speakers showed switch costs when naming both univalent and orthographically bivalent stimuli, showing that switch costs can be found even with inherently univalent stimuli.     

Ontology,Set Theory,and the Paraphrase Challenge

Journal of Philosophical Logic - In many ontological debates there is a familiar challenge. Consider a debate over X s. The “small” or anti-X side tries to show that they can paraphrase...     

Development and Evaluation of the Atheist Identity Concealment Scale (AICS)

Journal of Religion and Health - The Atheist Identity Concealment Scale (AICS) was developed as a tool to assess the degree to which atheists conceal their atheist identity from others. Drawing on...