Some ethical concerns about counselling research

The whole approach of counselling researchers to ethics may be assumed to have been improving in recent years, especially with the BACP research guidelines (Bond, 2004 Bond, T. 2004. Ethical guidelines for researching counselling and psychotherapy. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 4(2): 4–9. [Taylor & Francis Online] [Google Scholar]), with its focus on trustworthiness and on the researcher engaging with ethical issues. In this paper we share our concerns about the background to ethical decision making for researchers today followed by our specific concerns for counselling researchers namely: why do counselling research at all?; research that hurts participants; the impact of research on the therapeutic process; restrictive notions around what is data; the politics of funding and informed consent revisited.     

Proportionality, Just War Theory and Weapons Innovation

Just wars are supposed to be proportional responses to aggression: the costs of war must not greatly exceed the benefits. This proportionality principle raises a corresponding ‘interpretation problem’: what are the costs and benefits of war, how are they to be determined, and a ‘measurement problem’: how are costs and benefits to be balanced? And it raises a problem about scope: how far into the future do the states of affairs to be measured stretch? It is argued here that weapons innovation always introduces costs, and that these costs cannot be determined in advance of going to war. Three examples, the atomic bomb, the AK-47 and the ancient Greek catapult, are given as examples. It is therefore argued that the proportionality principle is inapplicable prospectively. Some replies to the argument are discussed and rejected. Some more general defences of the proportionality principle are considered and also rejected. Finally, the significance of the argument for Just War Theory as a whole is discussed.     

Piercing the Veil: Ethical Issues in Ethnographic Research

It is not unusual for researchers in ethnography (and sometimes Institutional Review Boards) to assume that research of “public” behavior is morally unproblematic. I examine an historical case of ethnographic research and the sustained moral outrage to the research expressed by the subjects of that research. I suggest that the moral outrage was legitimate and articulate some of the ethical issues underlying that outrage. I argue that morally problematic Ethnographic research of public behavior can derive from research practice that includes a tendency to collapse the distinction between harm and moral wrong, a failure to take account of recent work on ethical issues in privacy; failure to appreciate the deception involved in ethnographers’ failure to reveal their role as researchers to subjects and finally a failure to appropriately weigh the moral significance of issues of invasion of privacy and inflicted insight in both the research process and subsequent publication of research.

Scientific Self-Regulation—So Good, How Can it Fail?

To be a functional alternative to government regulation, self-regulation of science must be credible to both scientists and the public, accountable, ethical, and effective. According to some, serious problems continue in research ethics in the United States despite a rich history of proposed self-regulatory standards and oversight devices. Successful efforts at self-regulation in stem cell research contrast with unsuccessful efforts in research ethics, particularly conflicts of interest. Part of the cause for a lack of success in self-regulation is fragmented, disconnected oversight, and failure to embody genuine scientific and public consensus. To be accountable, credible and effective, self-regulation must be inclusive and multidisciplinary, publicly engaged, sufficiently disinterested, operationally integrated with institutional goals, and must implement a genuine consensus among scientists and the public. The mechanisms of self-regulation must be sufficiently broad in their oversight, and interconnected with other institutional forces and actors, that they do not create fragmented solutions.

心理治疗的消极后果

心理治疗消极后果是指由于心理治疗本身直接导致的来访者病情恶化。消极后果表现形式多样,对其测量应全面而仔细确证。消极后果的影响因素众多,包括来访者中有人格病理诊断、人际功能障碍、他评病情严重、对治疗期望不正确和动机低下;治疗师缺乏共情、对来访者出现负性反移情、低估来访者病情和错误使用治疗技术;潜在有害疗法。对其预防包括治疗前对治疗师和疗法进行规范和治疗中采用聚焦来访者的研究减少消极后果发生率。最后提出目前研究中存在测量、研究单位选择和伦理等难题,未来研究应全面呈现研究数据、采用RCT研究确定消极后果发生率、用交互作用研究模式寻找消极后果影响因素以及对中介变量的研究探询消极后果发生机制。     

Publication trends in individual DSM personality disorders: 1971–2015

Growth in personality disorder research has been documented by previous authors up to 1995. The aim of the present study was to extend this by examining publications rates for individual DSM personality disorders over the period 1971–2005, and making projections to 2015 based on these data. It was found that personality disorder research has grown in absolute terms, and as a proportion of overall psychopathology research. Research output is dominated by borderline personality disorder, with strong publication rates in other conditions such as antisocial and schizotypal personality disorders. In contrast, several personality disorders such as schizoid and paranoid personality disorder have failed to attract research interest. Based on current projections, there is expected to be no research output in 2015 for schizoid personality disorder. It was found that the rate of publications for personality disorders was not influenced by the publication of the last three revisions of the DSM diagnostic criteria. Several potential explanations such as the difficulty in conducting certain types of personality disorder research, and the validity of the current DSM diagnostic taxonomy are discussed.     

Some aspects of the psychoanalytic psychology of physicians

An earlier publication ( Halpert, 1994 ) dealt with patients' magical expectations of physicians. In this presentation, aspects of physicians' expectations of themselves as doctors will be explored. This exploration will include material from the history of medicine, a series of interviews with non-patients and the analyses of two physicians. One element in the psychology of physicians not previously appreciated that can be drawn out of this material is the role and importance of knowledge and knowing and their relation to illness, death, rescue fantasies and reality in the psychology of physians.     

On understanding projective identification in the treatment of psychotic states of mind: The publishing cohort of H. Rosenfeld, H. Segal and W. Bion (1946–1957)

A publishing cohort of Kleinian analysts – Rosenfeld, Segal and Bion – implemented Klein's (1946) notions of projective identification and the 'paranoid ' and 'schizoid ' positions in the understanding of a group of psychotic disorders. The author differentiates Klein's (1946) Notes on some schizoid mechanisms paper from its revised version of 1952, maintaining that it was Rosenfeld's clinical work during this period that helped to centralize Klein's redefinition of projective identification. The stage was set for Segal 's contribution in terms of 'symbolic equations,' where the psychotic's attack on the breast left him incarcerated in internal torment and persecution, where things-in-themselves were confused with what they symbolically represented. Segal in turn linked psychotic to normal, paranoid–schizoid to depressive positions, where by means of projective identification and symbolic imagination, the patient could arouse feelings in the analyst related to sadness, guilt and loss. Bion assumed that psychotic pathology reflected disordered thinking, when the severely disturbed used language as a mode of action. The psychotic was profoundly confused between the use of thought and action in the natural world – where thought was required, he preferred action and vice versa. Bion also drew upon projective identification in a new, broader way, so that analysis could now become more of an intersubjective, bi-directional field of projective and communicational influence between patient and analyst. The paper concludes with the impact of the work of Rosenfeld, Segal and Bion and variations on the technique of analyzing psychotic states in terms of the patient's early history, transference and countertransference.     

Youth Action Research for Prevention: A Multi-level Intervention Designed to Increase Efficacy and Empowerment Among Urban Youth

Youth Action Research for Prevention (YARP), a federally funded research and demonstration intervention, utilizes youth empowerment as the cornerstone of a multi-level intervention designed to reduce and/or delay onset of drug and sex risk, while increasing individual and collective efficacy and educational expectations. The intervention, located in Hartford Connecticut, served 114 African-Caribbean and Latino high school youth in a community education setting and a matched comparison group of 202 youth from 2001 to 2004. The strategy used in YARP begins with individuals, forges group identity and cohesion, trains youth as a group to use research to understand their community better (formative community ethnography), and then engages them in using the research for social action at multiple levels in community settings (policy, school-based, parental etc.) Engagement in community activism has, in turn, an effect on individual and collective efficacy and individual behavioral change. This approach is unique insofar as it differs from multilevel interventions that create approaches to attack multiple levels simultaneously. We describe the YARP intervention and employ qualitative and quantitative data from the quasi-experimental evaluation study design to assess the way in which the YARP approach empowered individual youth and groups of youth (youth networks) to engage in social action in their schools, communities and at the policy level, which in turn affected their attitudes and behaviors.