for Journals by Title or ISSN
for Articles by Keywords
Similar Journals
Journal Cover
American Psychologist
Journal Prestige (SJR): 1.594
Citation Impact (citeScore): 4
Number of Followers: 235  
  Full-text available via subscription Subscription journal
ISSN (Print) 0003-066X - ISSN (Online) 1935-990X
Published by APA Homepage  [86 journals]
  • The insufficiency of the evidence used to categorically oppose spanking
           and its implications for families and psychological science: Comment on
           Gershoff et al. (2018).
    • Abstract: Gershoff et al. (2018) recently summarized the scientific evidence against disciplinary spanking, using epidemiological and psychological criteria for causal validity. Unfortunately, the evidence they cited would make most actions to correct serious problems appear to be harmful, whether implemented by parents (e.g., timeout) or professionals. The reason is that the type of evidence that Gershoff et al. consider adequate is insufficient for establishing a causal connection between any disciplinary response to persistent defiance and problem behaviors in children, whether that response is spanking or an effective alternative to spanking. Before opposing a widespread practice such as spanking, researchers need to document stronger causal evidence against it and identify an alternative demonstrated to be more effective. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 09 May 2019 04:00:00 GMT
  • Perceived parental acceptance−rejection mediates or moderates the
           relation between corporal punishment and psychological adjustment: Comment
           on Gershoff et al. (2018).
    • Abstract: Researchers and policymakers are engaged in an ongoing debate over the use of corporal punishment and how it potentially leads to short-term and long-term negative developmental consequences for children. In this comment on Gershoff et al. (2018), the authors provide evidence that children’s perceptions of parental acceptance−rejection often partially—or even fully—mediate or moderate the reported effects of corporal punishment. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 09 May 2019 04:00:00 GMT
  • There is still no evidence that physical punishment is effective or
           beneficial: Reply to Larzelere, Gunnoe, Ferguson, and Roberts (2019) and
           Rohner and Melendez-Rhodes (2019).
    • Abstract: The authors’ original article (Gershoff et al., 2018) summarized the extensive body of research demonstrating that parents’ use of physical punishment is ineffective and linked with risk of detrimental outcomes for children. In this Reply, the authors agree with several points raised in two commentaries on the article (Larzelere, Gunnoe, Ferguson, & Roberts, 2019; Rohner & Melendez-Rhodes, 2019)—that statistical rigor is needed before making conclusions and that potential contextual moderators need to be considered. However, neither commentary negated the scientific inferences and conclusions of the Gershoff et al. article or presented any convincing evidence that physical punishment is beneficial to children. The preponderance of evidence clearly indicates physical punishment is harmful, a finding that is increasingly being recognized by professional organizations, including the American Psychological Association. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 09 May 2019 04:00:00 GMT
  • Diversity and social justice' Comment on Leong, Pickren, and Vasquez
    • Abstract: This is a comment on Leong, Pickren, and Vasquez (2017). The current author contends that in using the American Psychological Association’s response to the Hoffman Report as one milestone in the organization’s evolution in the realm of culture, diversity, and social justice, Leong et al. perpetuated a number of mistruths from that flawed document while also highlighting the challenges involved when speaking about a culture different from their own. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 09 May 2019 04:00:00 GMT
  • Complexities in the history of diversity and social justice: Reply to
           Harvey (2019).
    • Abstract: The authors provide a reply to Harvey’s (2019) comment on the authors’ article regarding the American Psychological Association’s efforts to promote diversity and social justice (Leong et al., 2017). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 09 May 2019 04:00:00 GMT
  • Beatrice A. Wright (1917–2018).
    • Abstract: Presents an obituary for Beatrice A. Wright, who passed away on July 31, 2018. Wright was a pivotal figure whose research and advocacy changed the way psychologists and laypeople understand the experience of disability. A founder and leader of rehabilitation psychology, she demonstrated that physical, social, and psychological environments pose greater challenges for people with disabilities than the disabilities themselves. Wright championed the importance of human dignity for all persons regardless of the nature of their disabilities, arguing they should be partners with professionals when planning rehabilitation regimens. Both versions of her classic book, Physical Disability—A Psychological Approach (1960) and the revised and expanded Physical Disability—A Psychosocial Approach (1983), appear on American Psychological Association’s list of the 100 most influential psychology books of the 20th century. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 09 May 2019 04:00:00 GMT
  • Dorothy Hansen Eichorn (1924–2018).
    • Abstract: Presents an obituary for Dorothy Hansen Eichorn, who passed away on March 22, 2018. Eichorn was a noted developmental psychologist and organizational leader. She was involved in several notable studies in development, but the most significant was probably her role in the Berkeley Growth Study, which continued for five decades. Dorothy was active in several professional organizations, including the American Psychological Association (APA), where she served on its Board of Directors, as well as president of APA Division 7 (Developmental Psychology). She also served as president of the Western Psychological Association. But her most important organizational contribution came through the Society for Research in Child Development (SRCD). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 09 May 2019 04:00:00 GMT
  • Stanley Moldawsky (1925–2018).
    • Abstract: Presents an obituary for Stanley Moldawsky, who passed away on February 9, 2018. Moldawsky was a retired clinical psychologist and an adjunct visiting professor at the Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology (GSAPP) at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey. With several close colleagues, he was not only instrumental in establishing the GSAPP but was also tenacious in working to obtain state approval and an academic home for their collaborative aspiration. Combining his passionate love for practice with a deep appreciation for the contributions of education and science, Stan was truly one of professional psychology’s visionary pioneers, strongly believing in the importance of independent practice and professional autonomy. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 09 May 2019 04:00:00 GMT
  • James (Jim) Georgas (1934–2018).
    • Abstract: Presents an obituary for James (Jim) Georgas, who passed away in Athens, Greece, on April 20, 2018. Georgas worked tirelessly at the intersection of cross-cultural psychology and social psychology, and was considered one of the most accomplished cross-cultural social psychologists of his generation. Jim promoted his cross-cultural interests and Greek psychology through various professional positions that he held. These included President of the Hellenic Psychological Society (two terms, 1995–1997 and 1997–1999; honorary president, 1999– 2018) and Professor of Psychology at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (1983–2001). Jim’s contributions to the International Association for Cross-Cultural Psychology included service as Regional Representative for Europe (1986–1988, 1994–1996), Secretary General (1996–2000), and President (2006–2008). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 09 May 2019 04:00:00 GMT
  • Donald E. Polkinghorne (1936–2018).
    • Abstract: Presents an obituary for Donald E. Polkinghorne, who passed away on January 17, 2018. He was a gifted teacher and mentor, skilled psychotherapist. Don was hired as The Saybrook Institute’s academic dean in 1975 and became its first president the following year—and served in that position for a decade. Following 3 years as professor of counseling at California State University, Fullerton, he was professor of counseling psychology at the University of Southern California School of Education, from which he retired in 2005. From 2008 until the time of his death, he was a faculty member at Fielding Graduate Institute’s Media Psychology program. His Methodology for the Human Sciences: Systems of Inquiry (1983) sketched the basis for a distinctively human science fitted to the complexities and nuances of human existence. Narrative Knowing and the Human Sciences (1988) set the bar for scholarship in narrative psychology. Here and in his last book, Practice and the Human Sciences: The Case for a Judgment-Based Practice of Care (2004), Don explicated how expert psychotherapists use narratives to conceptualize their clients and rely on moment-to-moment intuitive judgments to guide their work. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 09 May 2019 04:00:00 GMT
  • Karen Jill Saywitz (1956–2018).
    • Abstract: Presents an obituary for Karen Jill Saywitz, who passed on March 17, 2018. Saywitz devoted her life to advancing children’s mental health and children’s “voice” in the legal system. She completed internship and postdoctoral fellowships at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), and became director of child and adolescent psychology at Harbor–UCLA. She returned to the main UCLA campus as professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences. In February 2018, her research, clinical service, and advocacy on behalf of abused children and their families was recognized by the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Society for Child and Family Policy and Practice (Division 37) with its highest honor, the Lifetime Advocacy Award. A month later, Karen lost her valiant fight against cancer. Through science, advocacy, and the translation of science into practice, Karen directly affected more child- and family-relevant laws, policies, and daily forensic practices than virtually anyone else in the field. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 09 May 2019 04:00:00 GMT
  • A readability analysis of online mental health resources.
    • Abstract: Analyzing the reading grade level of online mental health information is an important first step in ensuring that information is largely accessible by the general public, so as not to perpetuate existing health disparities across socioeconomic groups. The present study systematically examined grade-level readability of mental health information related to various psychiatric diagnoses, obtained from 6 highly utilized mental health websites, using a generalized estimating equations approach. Results suggest that, in general, the readability of mental health information is largely well above the 6th-to-8th grade level recommended by several national health organizations, including the CDC and NIH (Kutner, Greenberg, Jin, & Paulsen, 2006; National Institutes of Health, 2001, 2017), with reading-grade-level estimates from the model ranging from 5.62 to 17.9. Further efforts are required to ensure that writers of online health information do not exacerbate existing health disparities by ignoring these guidelines. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Mon, 08 Oct 2018 04:00:00 GMT
  • How psychosocial research can help the National Institute of Mental Health
           achieve its grand challenge to reduce the burden of mental illnesses and
           psychological disorders.
    • Abstract: The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) plays an enormous role in establishing the agenda for mental health research across the country (its 2016 appropriation was nearly $1.5 billion; NIMH, 2016a). As the primary funder of research that will lead to development of new assessments and interventions to identify and combat mental illness, the priorities set by NIMH have a major impact on the mental health of our nation and training of the next generation of clinical scientists. Joshua Gordon has recently begun his term as the new Director of NIMH and has been meeting with different organizations to understand how they can contribute to the grand challenge of reducing the burden of mental illness. As a group of clinical psychological scientists (most representing the Coalition for the Advancement and Application of Psychological Science), he asked what we saw as key gaps in our understanding of the burden of mental illnesses and psychological disorders that psychosocial research could help fill. In response, we first present data illustrating how funding trends have shifted toward biomedical research over the past 18 years and then consider the objectives NIMH has defined in its recent strategic plan (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, National Institutes of Health, & National Institute of Mental Health, 2015). We then note ways that advances in psychosocial research can help achieve these objectives. Critically, this involves integrating psychosocial and biomedical approaches to efficiently relieve the suffering of millions of Americans who struggle with mental illnesses and psychological disorders. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 04:00:00 GMT
  • Gender differences in reading and writing achievement: Evidence from the
           National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).
    • Abstract: A frequently observed research finding is that females outperform males on tasks of verbal and language abilities, but there is considerable variability in effect sizes from sample to sample. The gold standard for evaluating gender differences in cognitive ability is to recruit a large, demographically representative sample. We examined 3 decades of U.S. student achievement in reading and writing from the National Assessment of Educational Progress to determine the magnitude of gender differences (N = 3.9 million), and whether these were declining over time as claimed by Feingold (1988). Examination of effect sizes found a developmental progression from initially small gender differences in Grade 4 toward larger effects as students progress through schooling. Differences for reading were small-to-medium (d = −.32 by Grade 12), and medium-sized for writing (d = −.55 by Grade 12) and were stable over the historical time. Additionally, there were pronounced imbalances in gender ratios at the lower left and upper right tails of the ability spectrum. These results are interpreted in the context of Hyde’s (2005) gender similarities hypothesis, which holds that most psychological gender differences are only small or trivial in size. Language and verbal abilities represent one exception to the general rule of gender similarities, and we discuss the educational implications of these findings. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 04:00:00 GMT
  • Obtaining consensus in psychotherapy: What holds us back'
    • Abstract: Although the field of psychotherapy has been in existence for well over a century, it nonetheless continues to be preparadigmatic, lacking a consensus or scientific core. Instead, it is characterized by a large and increasing number of different schools of thought. In addition to the varying ways in which psychotherapy has been conceptualized, there also exists a long-standing gap between psychotherapy research and how it is conducted in actual clinical practice. Finally, there also exists a tendency to place great emphasis on what is new, often rediscovering or reinventing past contributions. This article describes each of these impediments to obtaining consensus and offers some suggestions for what might be done to address them. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Mon, 17 Sep 2018 04:00:00 GMT
  • Core competencies for the emerging specialty of pain psychology.
    • Abstract: The Institute of Medicine (IOM) has reported that approximately 100 million Americans experience chronic pain. The IOM report on pain and the subsequent National Pain Strategy (NPS) issued by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services have both noted the educational gaps regarding pain management and highlighted the pivotal role that psychology plays in the field of pain management. Fishman and colleagues (2013) emphasized the need for all providers involved in the study and practice of pain management to acquire a common fund of knowledge and proposed a comprehensive set of core competencies that would apply across multiple professions and specialty areas (e.g., anesthesiology, nursing, and psychology). These core competencies are meant to be tailored to allow each pain-related subspecialty to incorporate the factors and competencies unique to their discipline. To date, the terms pain psychology and pain psychologist are routinely used in public discourse to refer to psychologists practicing integrated, multimodal, and multidisciplinary pain care, but the field of psychology has not yet defined this emerging specialty. It is important for the discipline itself to define these terms and for psychologists to specify the competencies that would be expected of a clinician working as a pain psychologist. The current article represents an initial effort to define the core competencies necessary to fulfill the role of a pain psychologist working in the field of pain management. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 02 Aug 2018 04:00:00 GMT
  • Evaluating the effectiveness and implementation of evidence-based
           treatment: A multisite hybrid design.
    • Abstract: The gap between treatment development and efficacy testing to scaled up implementations of evidence-based treatment (EBT) is an estimated 20 years, and hybrid research designs aim to reduce the gap. One was used for a multisite study in cancer control, testing coprimary aims: (a) determine the feasibility and utility of a flexible EBT implementation strategy and (b) determine the clinical effectiveness of an EBT as implemented by newly trained providers. Therapists from 15 diverse sites implemented the biobehavioral intervention (BBI) for cancer patients (N = 158) as part of standard care. For implementation, therapists determined treatment format, number of sessions, and so forth and reported session-by-session fidelity. Patients completed fidelity and outcome assessments. Results showed therapists BBI implementation was done with fidelity, for example, session “dose” (59%), core content coverage (60–70%), and others. Patient reported fidelity was favorable and comparable to the BBI efficacy trial. Effectiveness data show the primary outcome, patients’ scores on the Profile of Mood States total mood disturbance, significantly improved (R² = 0.06, β = −0.24, p < .01) as did a secondary outcome, physical activity (R² = 0.02, β = 0.13, p < .05). This first use of a hybrid design in health psychology provided support for a novel strategy that allowed providers implementation flexibility. Still, the EBT was delivered with fidelity and in addition, therapists generated novel procedures to enhance setting-specific usage of BBI and its ultimate effectiveness with patients. This research is an example of translational research spanning theory and efficacy tests to dissemination and implementation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
      PubDate: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 04:00:00 GMT
School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences
Heriot-Watt University
Edinburgh, EH14 4AS, UK
Tel: +00 44 (0)131 4513762
Fax: +00 44 (0)131 4513327
Home (Search)
Subjects A-Z
Publishers A-Z
Your IP address:
About JournalTOCs
News (blog, publications)
JournalTOCs on Twitter   JournalTOCs on Facebook

JournalTOCs © 2009-