Ali January, M.A., & David Meyerson, M.A, Felice Reddy, M.A, Anna Docherty, M. A.

.

Supervisory competence (Falender et al, 2004; Barnett, Doll, Younggren, & Rubin, 2007)

Perceptions of strong and weak supervisors (Martino, 2001; Lowry, 2001)

More than 50% of supervisees surveyed reported experiencing at least one unethical behavior on the part of a clinical supervisor (Ladany, 2002)

HOWEVER, when it comes to faculty members in clinical psychology, the literature is quite sparse

IntroductionIntroduction

Better understand ethical dilemmas faced by students in faculty relationships and students’ reactions to these ethical violations

Gain some knowledge about the types of professional competence issues students’ perceive in clinical psychology faculty and the impact on their well being

Examine the relation of climate to ethical violations and problems of professional competence

Reasons for this StudyReasons for this Study

We asked about the number of faculty with specific problem behaviorsDrug and alcohol problemsBeing unavailable, unhelpful feedback etc.

We also asked about the impact of and sympathy for broad categories of problemsSkill BasedRelationalPersonal Ethical

In this SurveyIn this Survey

Clinical Clinical Program Climate Program Climate ScaleScale• Originally 26 itemsOriginally 26 items• Principal Components Analysis, Principal Components Analysis,

extracted one factorextracted one factor• One item removed because low One item removed because low

correlation with factorcorrelation with factor• Final scale has 25 items (all items load Final scale has 25 items (all items load

above .380 on factor); single factor above .380 on factor); single factor explains 48% of varianceexplains 48% of variance

• Cronbach’s Cronbach’s = .952 = .952

Clinical Clinical Program Climate Program Climate ScaleScalePlease respond to the following items while thinking

about the clinical psychology graduate program at your university:

“Students feel that faculty are ‘on their side.’”

“I feel wanted and needed in my program.”

“Attendance is good; students stay away only for urgent and good reasons.”

“Most people in my program are kind.”

“Faculty treat students as persons.”

In which ways do clinical In which ways do clinical faculty demonstrate faculty demonstrate problems with professional problems with professional functioning?functioning?

PROBLEM Average SD NLack interpersonal skills 1.73 2.02 339

Lack self-awareness 1.64 2.03 336Provide Unhelpful/Inconsistent feedback

1.55 1.59 348

Are consistently unavailable 1.46 1.73 348

Are unnecessarily punitive or critical 1.19 1.46 349

Lack statistical skills 1.14 1.85 330Have fatigue or burnout 1.03 1.65 339Are consistently unreliable .98 1.35 345

Have Poor judgment .75 1.25 330Have Axis I issues (depression, eating disorders,

.71 1.70 307

Have a Personality disorder .64 1.18 308

Have Violated ethnical standards .59 1.31 329

Have anger management problems .33 .69 328

Lack intellectual reasoning .26 .73 324Have alcohol abuse/dependence problems

.16 .54 306

Have drug abuse/dependence problems

.09 .32 308

PROBLEM Average SD N

Lack interpersonal skills1.73 2.02 339

Lack self-awareness1.64 2.03 336

Provide Unhelpful/Inconsistent feedback

1.55 1.59 348

PROBLEM Average SD N

Lack intellectual reasoning.26 .73 324

Have alcohol abuse/dependence problems

.16 .54 306

Have drug abuse/dependence problems

.09 .32 308

HypothesesHypotheses

Hypothesis 1Hypothesis 1Most students will be able to identify a faculty memberwith competence problems. (n = 300)

269

31

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

# o

f stu

dent

s

At least oneidentified

None identified

HypothesesHypotheses

Hypothesis 2Hypothesis 2

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Skill-based Relationship-based

Personal Ethical Violation

Competency Problems

Sym

path

y(M

, 95%

CI)

Students’ sympathies for faculty with competency problems (n = 311)

Wilks’ Lambda = .045; F(4,307) = 1620.07, p = .000

HypothesesHypotheses

Hypothesis 3Hypothesis 3

Relation of program climate to sympathy for different categories of faculty professional problems

Skill Based r= 0.123, p= 0.03

Relation Based r=0.316, p <.001

Personal problems r= 0.251, p <.001

Ethical Violation r= 0.272, p <.001

HypothesesHypotheses

Hypothesis 4Hypothesis 4

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Skill-based Relationship-based

Personal Ethical Violation

Competency Problems

Neg

ativ

e Em

otio

nal

Impa

ct (

M, 9

5%CI

)

Students’ negative emotional impact in response to faculty competency problems (n = 288)

Wilks’ Lambda = .044; F(4,284) = 1542.48, p = .000

HypothesesHypotheses

Ethical ViolationsEthical Violations

31.3 % of students identified at least one or more faculty members who had committed an ethical violation

Hypothesis 5Hypothesis 5

154

10

109

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

# o

f stu

dent

s

Yes No Not Sure

If you have not witnessed an ethical violation, would you tell someone if you did? (n = 273)

Hypothesis 5Hypothesis 5When you found out about the ethical violation, did you tell someone? (n = 75)

Inappropriate sexual relationships Confidentiality violations Mishandling data Forging Evaluations Plagiarism/Ghost Writing

Types of Ethical Types of Ethical ViolationsViolations

Discuss managing faculty competence issues

Students’ awareness of rights and support to speak up

ConclusionsConclusions

25

Self-report, cross-sectional data

Some issues of non-independent sampling (students replying from the same program)

Some students abandoned survey

Not all CUDCP programs represented

Opportunity for nested analyses

May want to gather faculty ratings to compare against student perceptions

Limitations & Future Limitations & Future DirectionsDirections