Rebecca E Lubin, Gerald M Rosen, E Marie Parsons, Dylan A Gould, Michael W Otto
{"title":"警告:心理健康专业证书和公众对临床护理的偏好。","authors":"Rebecca E Lubin, Gerald M Rosen, E Marie Parsons, Dylan A Gould, Michael W Otto","doi":"10.1037/amp0001219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Appropriate training and continuing education for mental health professionals are designed to ensure that clinicians provide effective and ethical care. Mental health consumers may depend upon these credentials to judge the level of a professional's competence, but whether these activities and credentials provide a valid indicator of knowledge and skills is subject to debate. The present study was designed to examine preferences for mental health clinicians among potential consumers and factors that may inform these preferences, specifically comparing preferences for doctoral-level mental health clinicians and masters-level clinicians with and without specialty certification for treating anxiety symptoms. Cross-sectional assessment with self-report surveys (clinician preferences, prior mental health diagnosis and treatment, demographic characteristics, generalized anxiety symptoms, mental health literacy, and mental health stigma) was administered in two samples: a college student sample (<i>N</i> = 224; 71.9% female; <i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 19.1, <i>SD</i> = 1.5) and a sample of adults with chronic pain (<i>N</i> = 116; 74.1% female; <i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 43.8, <i>SD</i> = 13.8). The present study found that across both samples, therapists with a specialty certification were preferred over those without such credentials within each profession, and that certification status trumped professional standing such that certified masters-level clinicians were rated more highly than noncertified PhD-level clinicians. These findings are indicative of a schism between how the field of clinical psychology conceptualizes itself and how it is seen by its consumers. Implications of our findings for mental health consumers, clinicians, and professional organizations are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":12,"journal":{"name":"ACS Chemical Health & Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Caveat emptor: Mental health specialty certifications and the public's preferences for clinical care.\",\"authors\":\"Rebecca E Lubin, Gerald M Rosen, E Marie Parsons, Dylan A Gould, Michael W Otto\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/amp0001219\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Appropriate training and continuing education for mental health professionals are designed to ensure that clinicians provide effective and ethical care. Mental health consumers may depend upon these credentials to judge the level of a professional's competence, but whether these activities and credentials provide a valid indicator of knowledge and skills is subject to debate. The present study was designed to examine preferences for mental health clinicians among potential consumers and factors that may inform these preferences, specifically comparing preferences for doctoral-level mental health clinicians and masters-level clinicians with and without specialty certification for treating anxiety symptoms. Cross-sectional assessment with self-report surveys (clinician preferences, prior mental health diagnosis and treatment, demographic characteristics, generalized anxiety symptoms, mental health literacy, and mental health stigma) was administered in two samples: a college student sample (<i>N</i> = 224; 71.9% female; <i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 19.1, <i>SD</i> = 1.5) and a sample of adults with chronic pain (<i>N</i> = 116; 74.1% female; <i>M</i><sub>age</sub> = 43.8, <i>SD</i> = 13.8). The present study found that across both samples, therapists with a specialty certification were preferred over those without such credentials within each profession, and that certification status trumped professional standing such that certified masters-level clinicians were rated more highly than noncertified PhD-level clinicians. These findings are indicative of a schism between how the field of clinical psychology conceptualizes itself and how it is seen by its consumers. Implications of our findings for mental health consumers, clinicians, and professional organizations are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Chemical Health & Safety\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Chemical Health & Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001219\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Chemical Health & Safety","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0001219","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Caveat emptor: Mental health specialty certifications and the public's preferences for clinical care.
Appropriate training and continuing education for mental health professionals are designed to ensure that clinicians provide effective and ethical care. Mental health consumers may depend upon these credentials to judge the level of a professional's competence, but whether these activities and credentials provide a valid indicator of knowledge and skills is subject to debate. The present study was designed to examine preferences for mental health clinicians among potential consumers and factors that may inform these preferences, specifically comparing preferences for doctoral-level mental health clinicians and masters-level clinicians with and without specialty certification for treating anxiety symptoms. Cross-sectional assessment with self-report surveys (clinician preferences, prior mental health diagnosis and treatment, demographic characteristics, generalized anxiety symptoms, mental health literacy, and mental health stigma) was administered in two samples: a college student sample (N = 224; 71.9% female; Mage = 19.1, SD = 1.5) and a sample of adults with chronic pain (N = 116; 74.1% female; Mage = 43.8, SD = 13.8). The present study found that across both samples, therapists with a specialty certification were preferred over those without such credentials within each profession, and that certification status trumped professional standing such that certified masters-level clinicians were rated more highly than noncertified PhD-level clinicians. These findings are indicative of a schism between how the field of clinical psychology conceptualizes itself and how it is seen by its consumers. Implications of our findings for mental health consumers, clinicians, and professional organizations are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Chemical Health and Safety focuses on news, information, and ideas relating to issues and advances in chemical health and safety. The Journal of Chemical Health and Safety covers up-to-the minute, in-depth views of safety issues ranging from OSHA and EPA regulations to the safe handling of hazardous waste, from the latest innovations in effective chemical hygiene practices to the courts'' most recent rulings on safety-related lawsuits. The Journal of Chemical Health and Safety presents real-world information that health, safety and environmental professionals and others responsible for the safety of their workplaces can put to use right away, identifying potential and developing safety concerns before they do real harm.