This study investigated psychologists* (N=94) ethical beliefs about continued professional practice in psychology when the practitioner is experiencing burnout or impairment. Participants completed a demographics questionnaire, an attitude survey, and the Maslach Burnout Inventory. Relationships among respondents' ethical beliefs, professional practices, and measured levels of burnout were examined, and these elements were found to correlate significantly. Results also suggest that psychologists perceive burnout to be a form of impairment.Psychologist impairment is a growing ethical concern. The Ethical Principles of Psychologists (American Psychological Association, 1992) state clearly that psychologists are expected to be aware that a number of factors may negatively influence their professional effectiveness. Psychologists may have to limit or suspend their professional activities and seek appropriate professional care or supervision of their work when these difficulties interfere with their ability to provide adequate services to their clients. Impairment may be caused by many reasons, including physical illness, substance abuse, or emotional or psychological factors, such as burnout. A psychologist who continues to provide professional services while impaired may be in potential violation of the Ethical Principles. This study examined psychologists' beliefs about burnout, the ethics of continuing to provide professional services, and possible relationships among psychologists' professional practices and measured levels of burnout. i Definition and Frequency of ImpairmentIndividuals engaged in professions that require continuous contact with people are prone to burnout (Maslach, 1978). The assumption of responsibility in relationships has been demonstrated to increase stress as well as the chances of developing negative physical symptoms (Kahn, 1978). According to Maslach and Pines (1977), "burnout is characterized by an emotional exhaustion in which the professional no longer has any JESSICA SKORUPA is a doctoral student in the Counseling Psychology Program at Loyola University of Chicago. She is a Counselor and Instructor at Moraine Valley Community College and a student member of the American Psychological Association. ALBERT A. AGRESTI received his PhD in counseling psychology from Ohio State University. He is a former member of the counseling psychology faculty at Boston College and is now an Associate Professor in the Department of Counseling and Educational Psychology at Loyola University of Chicago. His teaching and research interests include ethical and professional issues, and values in clinical training and professional practice. He is a member of several professional associations and serves as a member on the ethics committee of the Illinois Psychological Association.

No abstract

No abstract

The Category Test, a major part of the Halstead-Reitan Neuropsychological Battery, was first described in a 1943 article by Halstead and Settlage. This paper reviews the development of the test, the psychometric properties of the instrument, available administration and scoring methods, discusses various interpretative strategies, and the empirical support for the test's clinical validity. Recent developments are then reviewed, as well as what the authors see as the future potential for this instrument.

This article presents a rationale for the integration of training in neuropsychology into a counseling psychology curriculum. This rationale is discussed against the historical development of the counseling psychology specialty and the current practice of counseling psychologists. A means of integrating training in neuropsychology is proposed that allows this training to serve as a potential means of providing a unifying focus for various didactic and clinical components of the doctoral curriculum. Finally, attention is given to representative issues of professional identity as well as ethical considerations in neuropsychology training and practice.