Contribution of psychological reports to patient management.

Affleck, D. Craig; Strider, Fred D.

doi:10.1037/h0031978

Cited by 12 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The few qualitative studies that do exist are dated and have focused primarily on the recommendations section of the report (Borghese & Cole, 1994; Cornwall, 1990; D'Amato & Dean, 1987; Williams & Coleman, 1982). While existing studies suggest that teachers consider the recommendations section to be the most important component of a report (Brandt & Giebink, 1968; Farrell & Care, 2000, Pelco et al, 2009; Rucker, 1967), there is evidence that teachers also value information from other sections of reports (Affleck & Strider, 1971; Knoetze & Vermoter, 2007; Mussman, 1964; Salvagno & Teglasi, 1987; Teglasi, 1983). Likewise, professional guidelines suggest that the function of a report goes beyond the provision of individualised recommendations.…”

Section: A Review Of Existing Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers’ Use of Psycho-Educational Reports in Mainstream Classrooms

Lindelauf¹,

Jacobs²

2018

J. Psychol. Couns. Sch.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated how teachers who support children with learning difficulties utilise psychologists’ reports in their teaching practice. Previous research has examined teachers’ preferences for how reports should be written, rather than how they might be used. Semi-structured, qualitative interviews with 12 teachers (seven primary, four high school and one preschool teacher) were undertaken and followed up with member checks and interrater reliability. Findings suggested that while the teachers valued the recommendations section of the report, they were also interested in other sections, particularly information about the student's background. Simultaneously, teachers used information from reports selectively in relation to their own professional knowledge and in collaboration with other stakeholders. Implications for practice and further research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: A Review Of Existing Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Teachers’ Use of Psycho-Educational Reports in Mainstream Classrooms

Lindelauf¹,

Jacobs²

2018

J. Psychol. Couns. Sch.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, Meehl (1960) found that less than a fifth of psychotherapists surveyed endorsed the following item: "It greatly speeds therapy if the therapist has prior knowledge of the client's dynamics and content from such devices as the Rorschach and TAT" (p. 19). But Affleck and Strider (1971) found that in only one fifth of the cases did treating clinicians feel that psychological reports given them had no effect on subsequent treatment; over half said that they altered therapy or contributed to specific clinical decisions. Surveys of customer satisfaction will not and, we believe, cannot solve the issue.…”

Section: Clinical Practicementioning

confidence: 99%

The future of clinical assessment.

Korchin¹,

Schuldberg²

1981

American Psychologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past 20 years, there have been endless arguments over the virtues, limitations, and utility of clinical psychological testing, and alternative perspectives have evolved tied to differing views of personality and clinical intervention. Although investment in the testing role has declined for several reasons, clinical assessment remains an important focus of the clinician's work, and new developments in several areas suggest a revitalization of the field as well as a rapprochement among competing orientations to clinical intervention. Korchin and Schuldberg review emerging trends in the use of protective and objective personality tests, behavioral assessment, clinical interviewing, environmental assessment, and medical uses of psychological assessment. The authors believe that clinical assessment is vital in clinical service, research, and the training of clinical psychologists. -The Editors At the Boulder Conference of 1946, which launched the postwar history of clinical psychology, the field was defined by the trinity of testing, therapy, and research. In earlier years, testing had been the sole function of the practicing clinician. As the concept of a "psychiatric team" evolved, psychologists functioned more as coequals than as technicians, sharing psychotherapeutic responsibilities. However, their primary and unique (if no longer sole) contribution was psychodiagnostic testing. Even today, as clinicians spend proportionately more time in therapeutic activities, assessment remains an important (if less central) clinical function. Over these years, controversy has raged over the virtues, limitations, and utility of clinical psychological testing. Some of these issues will be recalled here in an attempt to visualize the role of assessment in the future of the field. Alternate and new approaches will be considered, as well as trends suggesting increasing need for better assessment methods as clinical psychology grows and diversifies.Stated broadly, "clinical assessment is the process by which clinicians gain understanding of the patient necessary for making informed decisions" (Korchin, 1976, p. 124). Clinical diagnosis, in the restricted sense, may be included, but more usually

show abstract

“…Limitations of psychological reports have been documented in a number of studies. Consumers of reports frequently indicate that reports do not contain enough basic data, that they contain jargon, and that they are unclear (Affleck & Strider, 1971;Lacks, Horton, & Owen, 1969;Moore, Boblitt, & Wildman, 1968;Tallent & Reiss, 1959a, 1959b. Several studies are representative of this literature, reviewed elsewhere (Ownby, 1987;Ownby & Wallbrown, 1986).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A study of the expository process model in mental health settings

Ownby¹

1990

J. Clin. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of authors have documented complaints made by consumers about psychological reports. Prominent among these complaints are that basic data are not included, that psychological terms whose meanings are not certain are used, and that the logic of the report is unclear. Ownby and Wallbrown (1986) have proposed a model for report writing that addresses these concerns by specifying the types of data and the mode of data presentation most likely to be viewed positively by readers of reports. In the present study, psychologists (N = 29) in several mental health settings rated statements based on the model as significantly more credible and persuasive than nonmodel equivalent statements.

show abstract

Contribution of psychological reports to patient management.

Cited by 12 publications

References 4 publications

Teachers’ Use of Psycho-Educational Reports in Mainstream Classrooms

Teachers’ Use of Psycho-Educational Reports in Mainstream Classrooms

The future of clinical assessment.

A study of the expository process model in mental health settings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About