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.

     

Defining the Assessment and Treatment Competencies to Deliver Low-Intensity Cognitive Behavior Therapy: A Multi-Center Validation Study

Despite the vastly increased dissemination of the low-intensity (LI) version of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) for the treatment of anxiety and depression, no valid and reliable indices of the LI-CBT clinical competencies currently exist. This research therefore sought to develop and evaluate two measures: the low-intensity assessment competency scale (LIAC) and the low-intensity treatment competency scale (LITC). Inductive and deductive methods were used to construct the competency scales and detailed rating manuals were prepared. Two studies were then completed. The first study used a quantitative, fully-crossed design and the second a multi-center, quantitative longitudinal design. In study one, novice, qualified, and expert LI-CBT practitioners rated an LI-CBT assessment session (using the LIAC) and an LI-CBT treatment session (using the LITC). Study two used the LIAC and LITC across four training sites to analyze the competencies of LI-CBT practitioners over time, across raters, and in relation to the actor/patients’ feedback concerning helpfulness, the alliance, and willingness to return. Both the LIAC and LITC were found to be single factor scales with good internal, test-retest reliability and reasonable inter-rater reliability. Both measures were sensitive to measuring change in clinical competence. The LIAC had good concurrent, criterion, discriminant, and predictive validity, while the LITC had good concurrent, criterion, and predictive validity, but limited discriminant validity. A score of 18 accurately delineated a minimum level of competence in LI-CBT assessment and treatment practice, with incompetent practice associated with patient disengagement. These observational ratings scales can contribute to the clinical governance of the burgeoning use of LI-CBT interventions for anxiety and depression in routine services and also in the methods of controlled studies.     

Moratorium and reconciliation in a post-missionary era

The moratorium on Western missionary labour and financial resources has been a matter of lively interest over the past five decades. Postcolonial theologians and missiologists have blamed Western missionaries for introducing Christianity without paying attention to existing cultures of local people. Despite this, the work of Western missionaries has undeniably contributed to evangelization and the advancing of Western civilization in Africa. In this context, this paper considers Colin Morris’s views on the moratorium to prevent sending missionaries and financial resources from the West. Based on an examination of his views, it analyzes two elements that shape the discourse on the moratorium in the post-missionary era: the impact of the moratorium on Christian mission and the need for reconciliation and partnership between the churches in the global North and the global South. This paper concludes that we must promote the interdependence and mutuality of churches in the global North and the global South if the Christian imperative of making disciples of all nations is to be fulfilled.     

Purely Theoretical Explanations

Philosophia - This paper introduces a new kind of explanation that we describe as ‘purely theoretical’. We first present an example, E, of what we take to be a case of purely...     

Splitting the affective atom: Divergence of valence and approach-avoidance motivation during a dynamic emotional experience

Current Psychology - Valence and approach-avoidance motivation are two distinct but closely related components of affect. However, little is known about how these two processes evolve and covary in...     

Expanding Treatment Options for Children With Selective Mutism: Rationale,Principles, and Procedures for an Intensive Group Behavioral Treatment

Children with selective mutism (SM) experience significant challenges in a variety of social situations, leading to difficulties with academics, peers, and family functioning. Despite the extensive evidence base for cognitive-behavioral interventions for youth anxiety, the literature has seen relatively limited advancement in specialized treatment methods for SM. In addition, geographic disparities in SM treatment expertise and the roughly 6-month duration of some of the supported SM treatment protocols can further restrict the accessibility and acceptability of quality SM care. Intensive group behavioral treatment (IGBT) for SM was developed to expand the portfolio of evidence-based SM treatment options by offering brief, but high-dose, expert SM intervention in a group format for youth ages 3–10 years that can be completed in 1 week. In this article, we outline IGBT for SM program, which has already received initial support in a waitlist-controlled trial. Our presentation is organized around the five main components of the treatment model: (1) individual “lead-in” sessions, (2) camp (i.e., all-day group sessions for children held in a simulated classroom setting, with an emphasis on graduated exposures and structured reinforcement), (3) parent training, (4) school outreach, and (5) booster treatment, as needed. We conclude with a discussion of clinical considerations and future directions for further IGBT refinement and evaluation.     

Understanding fish cognition: a review and appraisal of current practices

Animal Cognition - With over 30,000 recognized species, fishes exhibit an extraordinary variety of morphological, behavioural, and life-history traits. The field of fish cognition has grown...     

Expectation of outgroup behaviour: can you trust the outgroup?

Outgroups are usually viewed with suspicion and expected to discriminate against the ingroup. The present study demonstrated that ingroup members attributed past discriminatory behaviour committed by individuals of unknown group membership more to outgroup members than to either ingroup members or members of a neutral group. In contrast, past egalitarian behaviour was attributed less to outgroup members than to members of a neutral group. Ingroup members also expected more discrimination from a future outgroup allocator than from a future neutral group allocator. Finally, the study showed that ingroup members' own behaviour in allocating money became more biased in favour of ingroup members vis-á-vis outgroup members when the future allocator was from an outgroup rather than from a neutral group and when they had witnessed the discriminatory behaviour of an allocator in the past.     

Blind justice: Fairness to groups and the do-no-harm principle

People are reluctant to harm some people in order to help others, even when the harm is less than the forgone help (the harm resulting from not acting). The present studies use hypothetical scenarios to argue that these judgments go against what the subjects themselves would take to be the best overall outcome. When the outcomes in question are income gains and losses for two groups of farmers, subjects judge the harm they would not impose through their action to be smaller than the harm they would impose through inaction. Some subjects refuse to reduce cure rates for one group of AIDS patients in order to increase cure rates more for another group, even when group membership was unknowable to anyone, so that, from each patient's point of view, the change would increase the probability of cure. Likewise, they resisted a vaccine that reduced overall mortality in one group but increased deaths from side effects in another group, even when, again, group membership was unknowable. Some people apply a do-no-harm principle to groups without apparent understanding of how such a principle might be justified in terms of its consequences. The capacity for such judgments makes them vulnerable to learning principles that have no justification at all.