This study assessed several ethical issues and judgments facing graduate teaching assistants. Psychology GTAs judged the ethics of a number of teaching-related behaviors and rated how frequently they practiced those behaviors. Judgments of how ethical GTAs believed various behaviors to be, and the frequency with which they engaged in them, varied somewhat based on age, gender, training, and other factors. Moreover, several discrepancies were found between ethical judgments and practice. For example, most GTAs judged it unethical to teach without adequate (...) preparation and to ignore unethical behavior of faculty, but most reported practicing these behaviors at least on occasion. These data highlight the risk for unethical behavior among GTAs and the lack of preparation for dealing with that risk. (shrink)

O’Donohue has identified 37 criticisms of the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct (Ethics Code), although many of his criticisms go far beyond what is found written in the APA Ethics Code, to include the process of adjudicating ethics complaints by the American Psychological Association Ethics Committee, and the process by which the Ethics Code was developed. The authors claim that a major shortcoming of O’Donohue’s article is that he adopted an unrealistically expansive role for (...) the Ethics Code that was not clearly linked to furthering the goals of the ethics code revision. (shrink)

We analyzed a sample of 356 forms containing information that Colorado law legally requires both licensed and unlicensed therapists to disclose to clients. The majority of forms contained the legally mandated information; fewer forms contained ethically desirable information. The average readability grade level was 15.74, corresponding to upper-level college, and 63.9% of the forms reached the highest (most difficult) readability grade of 17 +. Therapists are obeying the law, but do not appear to be taking advantage of the opportunity to (...) provide their clients useful information in an accessible way. (shrink)

In 1988, Colorado instituted a new regulatory system that was opposed by psychologists and social workers. We surveyed 306 psychotherapists about their attitudes regarding this system, which included profession-specific licensing boards and an omnibus board to handle grievances. Social workers and psychologists, members of more established professions, opposed creating an omnibus licensing board and favored the return of profession-specific grievance functions. Members of the newer professions and unlicensed psychotherapists were not as opposed to omnibus boards. All groups agreed in their (...) positive ratings of the performance of the Colorado grievance structure. These results are discussed in terms of "capture" theory, which postulates that professions capture governmental regulation and use it for their own interests. (shrink)

This study explored psychologists' perceptions of confidentiality violations. One hundred ninety-five psychologists answered questionnaires about a vignette regarding a male therapist accused of violating the confidentiality of a female client. The vignette varied on the following variables: Confidential information was conveyed to either an insurance company or another client, the therapist's account of the violation included either an excuse or a justification, and scapegoating was included or not included in the account. The insurance condition and excuse condition produced more lenient (...) judgments of the violation. However, excuses elicited more negative judgments of the therapist. Scapegoating generally elicited more negative judgments. Differences in the recipient of confidential information and the accounts given for violations have an impact on psychologists' perceptions of confidentiality violations. (shrink)

ABSTRACT The authors argue that individual psychologists have an obligation to understand, review, and comment on upcoming revisions of the Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct. Psychologists may want to consider several factors as they review and prepare comments on these revisions. Among other things, commenting psychologists should consider the purposes of ethics codes and how the writing of a code can meet or balance these often-conflicting purposes; the overarching ethical theory or theories that should form the basis (...) of the APA Ethics Code; and the extent to which individual standards are useful and comprehensive, and avoid unnecessary harm to both the public and psychologists. The authors provide examples from the current and recent APA Ethics Codes to illustrate the types of decisions that psychologists must make when evaluating revisions to the APA Ethics Code. (shrink)