Tag Archives: Psychology

Following up with Q&A from the APAGS Webinar on the EPPP

This blog post is a part of the series, “CARED Perspectives,” developed by the APAGS Committee for the Advancement of Racial and Ethnic Diversity. This series will discuss current events and how these events relate to graduate students in psychology. If you are interested in contributing to the CARED Perspectives series, please contact Aleesha Young.

Student leaders in APAGS are interested in understanding and quashing the apparent score discrepancies on the national licensing exam for psychologists. In October 2019, APAGS hosted the webinar EPPP Outcomes and Test Taking Strategies for Graduates of Color. As a follow up to the webinar, we asked the co-hosts and panelists to voluntarily answer questions we received during and after the air date. One panelist, a co-host, and two APA staff members responded to our requests. What follows are are Q&As, edited only for clarity, and divided into sections about the test, studying for it, and pass rate data.  

Questions About the Test

Where do we find the ASPPB’s test/practice materials? 

Eddy Ameen (EA), APAGS staff liaison: We suggest starting out at www.asppb.org to read all about the test. Some test/practice materials are available from ASPPB, whereas there are also independent test preparation companies that advertise online. Please note that APA does not list, endorse, or evaluate any test prep company. Neither does ASPPB. ASPPB states you must be approved by your jurisdiction’s licensing board to take the test before getting access to its study materials. 

What are the costs of taking the EPPP?

Brian A. Sharpless (BAS), licensed psychologist, research, panelist:  This will partially depend on which jurisdiction you take it in, but it will be at least $600 for the EPPP Part 1, plus $87.50 in test center fees. 

EA: For the EPPP Part 2, a skills-based exam, which will be administered in some jurisdictions starting November 1, 2020, the fees are as follows: $100.00 for initial beta testers, $300 through Dec. 31, 2020, and beginning January 2022, it will be $450.00 per administration. 

Are there scholarships or grants to provide financial support towards obtaining study material?

Continue reading →

Positioning Your Research as a Graduate Student to Address Social Injustices

By Kevin Wagner and Gabriel Velez

Social injustices involve power relations and unequal access to privileges based on domination and subordination (Miller, 1999; Prilleltensky & Gonick, 1996). Examples abound across the globe, and given their prevalence and impact on human suffering, conducting research to address social injustices are particularly important. As a graduate student, it can feel like there are so many problems in the world and there’s nothing we can do about it. A first step in this journey is recognizing the problems we are most passionate about, identifying our role and resources to address the problem, and then acting in our roles as emerging psychologists. This article is how to do that as grad researchers in psychology by offering an overview of the dissemination and implementation (D&I) literature as a guide to position research to address social injustices. It emerges from our own reflecting, asking ourselves, how can we position our research as graduate students to address social injustices? Below we draw from the D&I literature to outline four guidelines to position research as a graduate student to address social injustices.

Tenet One: Planning Your Research

Bartholomew & Mullen (2011) assert that effective research is guided by theory and empirical evidence. Planning your research to address social injustices means selecting appropriate theories and understanding what empirical evidence provides a strong foundation; design research based on theory to provide sound structure to your investigation. One common framework from the D&I literature to develop change programs is intervention mapping, which includes six core steps: 1) describing the problem (e.g., a phenomenon related to social injustices), 2) developing metrics to measure change (how will you measure the impact of your research, program, or intervention on addressing social injustices?), 3) implementing theory-based intervention to promote change, 4) organizing materials to produce the program cogently, 5) implementing the program with fidelity and with support from others, and 6) creating an evaluation plan to assess the effectiveness of the program (Bartholomew & Mullen, 2011).

Tenet Two: Conducting Your Research

Whether qualitative, quantitative, or mixed-methods, a critical component of research with a social-justice focus is attentiveness to positionality, diversity, and validity. The many facets require more space than we have here, but we believe it is important to highlight that the research process itself must reflect and be forthright about the social justice orientation of the researcher (Morrow, 2005; Ponterotto, Mathew, & Raughley, 2013). Specifically, best practices to consider for reflection include, 1) cultural competence of the researchers, 2) research focus, 3) selection of research design, 4) composition of research team, 5) power dynamics with participants, and 6) data collection and analysis (Fassinger & Morrow, 2013).

Tenet Three: Disseminating Your Research

Disseminating your research is necessary to share your message and involves spreading information to targeted audiences using determined strategies (Tabak, Khoong, Chambers, Brownson, 2012). In the context of social injustice, it is vital to have your research accessible to relevant stakeholders that can utilize it, such as policy makers, clinicians, advocates, educators, and community members. Of course, sharing your research to non-academic audiences means you will need to communicate academic findings as if you were not an academic. This is difficult, especially when we don’t usually get trained to write that way, so this may involve some self-learning through reading instructional blog posts, finding exemplar writers in your area, and examining APA policy statements. You should also anticipate and plan to address potential barriers, such as costs, time, relationships, and partnerships needed to disseminate your research.

Tenet Four: Implementing Your Research

Once you have conducted your research and generated knowledge, implementation entails applying it to make a difference (Tabak et al., 2012). There are always barriers to doing this. Considerations include: how can the research inform actual policy and practice; what are barriers within applied connects; is the local political and social climate going to be supportive; will a community be receptive to or want to participate in a community-based intervention (Klein & Sorra, 1996)? Observing the organization, conducting surveys, and making connections with desired organizations – that is, studying and caring about the local context – can help you successfully implement the research.

Conclusion:

Social injustices are rife but can be studied and addressed through a psychological lens. As graduate students we were simultaneously in a position of vulnerability (e.g., advisors, programs, student debt) and privilege (e.g., highly educated; access to university/professional resources). Therefore, in many ways graduate student researchers are in a unique position to be keenly aware of injustices and have the resources to make a real difference. Some of these resources can be found in relevant professional and community organizations, such as APAGS subcommittees (e.g., Science, Committee for the Advancement of Racial and Ethnic Diversity, Committee on Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity, Advocacy Coordinating Team). Having an overall guiding framework can help provide structure and clarity in how to draw on these supports. Therefore, we have offered a brief overview of the D&I literature as a first step for other graduate students interested in delving further into questions of social justice and integrating them into their own work and development. With this goal in mind, we end with a list of some resources for further exploration.

Further Resources for Exploration:

  1. Journals/Volumes
  2. Articles for General Reflection
  3. Organizations

References:

Bartholomew, L. K., & Mullen, P. D. (2011). Five Roles for Using Theory and Evidence in the Design and Testing of Behavior Change Interventions. Journal of Public Health Dentistry, 71, S20-S33.

Fassinger, R., & Morrow, S. L. (2013). Toward Best Practices in Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed-Method Research: A Social Justice Perspective. Journal for Social Action in Counseling & Psychology, 5(2), 69-83.

Klein, K. J., & Sorra, J. S. (1996). The Challenge of Innovation Implementation. The Academy of Management Review, 21(4), 1055-1080.

Miller, D. (1999). Principles of Social Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Morrow, S. L. (2005). Quality and Trustworthiness in Qualitative Research in Counseling Psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(2), 250-260.

Ponterotto, J. G., Mathew, J. T., & Raughley, B. (2013). The Value of Mixed Methods Designs to Social Justice Research in Counseling and Psychology. Journal for Social Action in Counseling & Psychology, 5(2), 42-68.

Prilleltensky, I., & Gonick, L. (1996). Polities Change, Oppression Remains: On the Psychology and Politics of Oppression. Political Psychology, 17(1), 127-148.

Tabak, R. G., Khoong, E. C., Chambers, D. A., & Brownson, R. C. (2012). Bridging Research and Practice: Models for Dissemination and Implementation Research. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 43(3), 337-350.

About the Authors:

Kevin Wagner is a second year Ph.D. student in counseling psychology at the University of Texas at Austin (Email).

Gabriel Velez is a fifth year Ph.D. candidate in Comparative Human Development at the University of Chicago (Email).

Where Science Meets Policy Part 3: Writing About Your Science for Non-scientific Audiences

Melanie Arenson & Mary Fernandes

It is critical that researchers translate their scientific findings to non-scientist consumers (seriously, we’ve written 2 blog posts about it – find out about engaging with stakeholders here and how to write academic papers for a broader range of stakeholders here). However, many researchers (including us graduate students!) feel uncertain about exactly how or where to write about our science. While graduate students typically get exposure to creating posters, giving talks, and writing scientific articles, very few of us are ever taught how to write for other mediums. Below are a few tips and tricks.

Writing for a non-scientific audience.

  • Adjust your lexicon. Sometimes this is easier said than done. Many of us have been talking about our work in scientific circles for so long that jargon is second-nature for us. Break the habit.  Write about your findings in your typical scientific manner and then go back and ask yourself, “but what does this mean?” — then replace whatever you wrote with that answer. Wherever possible, write in lay terms or connect back to phenomena that people know and understand.
  • Write a story. This sounds abstract, but it is really important. People are good at processing stories — they’re not as good at conceptualizing facts and figures and understanding why they matter. The story will change depending upon the science that you are talking about, but it should flow from beginning to middle to end.
  • Write short. Ideally, people should be able to get the gist your scientific findings and the story you are going to tell them within the first 3 sentences. Get to the point as quickly as possible. For longer pieces (e.g. a blogpost), you can definitely expand, but the first few sentences should be a punch that conveys the big takeaways.
  • Wherever possible, include accessible infographics. What these look like can change from discipline to discipline, but you want the graphic to be accessible, easy to understand without explanation, and to summarize the most important take-home point and/or summarize large amounts of information.

Now, share it!

  • Social Media: If you’ve written something just a few sentences long, tweet it, share it on Facebook, or find a great photograph to represent it on Instagram. Then, interact with anyone who comments on or likes it. Encourage people to share your work, and make sure you’ve provided links back to the original scientific article.
  • Link to longer pieces: If what you’ve written is longer than just a few sentences (e.g. you wrote a blogpost, or have talked about your research in a news article), provide the link to the longer story, but make sure you’ve got a 1-3 sentence summary of your results and why they matter. As a tip, if you’ve followed the tricks listed above, you’ve probably already written those 1-3 sentences.
  • Blog posts: There are a number of science-relevant blogs (in fact, you’re reading one of them!). These blogs can vary from area to area, but they are a fantastic way to disseminate your research.
  • Email and listservs: We know this can feel strange, but you should be sharing your work with your colleagues. This means blasting it out on listservs and sending it to your department. First, people in your field are probably already interested in your work. Second, they also have connections, and may want to forward your work to other people who might also be interested. Whenever possible, include links to both the scientific article and the more accessible format.

Help! The media has asked about my work.
First of all, congratulations! You’ve been contacted by the media, because they want to know more about the really cool science that you are doing.
Many scientists feel nervous about talking to the media. They worry their work will get misrepresented, or feel uncomfortable describing themselves as the expert. Below are a few tricks (some of them may feel familiar).

  • Adjust your lexicon. Before providing information to the news source, do some background research on them to see what their writing style is usually like, and who you think their target audience is. Then, adjust your language accordingly.
  • Tell a story. It’ll be a short story, but it should still be a story. Whenever possible, connect back to why your results matter. Contextualize it within the broader picture.
  • Talk short. Your answers shouldn’t be lengthy. Make sure you already know how you want to talk about your work and what the key takeaways are (think back to those 1-3 sentences you’ve been using for social media and the beginning of blog posts).
  • Plan your responses. Think about what questions you might be asked and plan out how you would respond. Pay special attention to anything you think might be taken out of context; aim not only to be understood, but also to avoid being misunderstood. Be as precise in your language as you can be, without sliding into scientific jargon.
  • Build a relationship. Whenever possible, build rapport with the media author that contacted you. You want to be in a place where you would feel comfortable contacting them if you think they’ve accidentally misrepresented your work.
  • Remember, you are the expert. This one can be really difficult, but you are the expert in your work. Take pride in that, feel confident in that.

Further resources.
Don’t just take our word for it! Tons of people have written about communicating scientific findings to non-scientists. Below are a few of our favorites:

Keep following the series for more ways to translate your science! Up next, we’ll discuss how to write a policy brief.

APAGS Charts its Next Five Years

It is with great excitement that I share the new 2019-2023 Strategic Plan for the American Psychological Association of Graduate Students. Over the past year, APAGS leaders have been working together to brainstorm, gather information, and articulate a five-year Strategic Plan to inform how APAGS can better serve graduate students around the nation and the world. Take a moment to read through the main pillars and objectives of the Strategic Plan that was unanimously approved by the APAGS Committee in December.

You may be aware that APA has also completed the development of its strategic plan. APAGS leaders anticipate that the APAGS strategic plan will align well with the larger APA plan.

Feel free to share your thoughts on the plan, as well as ideas you have about how APAGS can continue to use this living document to inform how we focus our time, utilize our resources, and support the next generation of psychology professionals.

Continue reading →

Graduate Student Researchers Win Big!

The results are in: 15 exceptional graduate student projects have been selected from the pool of highly-competitive applications for the Psychological Science Research Grant (PSRG). This $1,000 grant, sponsored yearly by APAGS, is used to fund innovative research projects in psychological science. All APA graduate student affiliates are eligible, resulting in a diverse pool of applications from schools across the country who are studying a variety of topics in psychology and neuroscience. Given the importance of diversity-focused research, additional funding was specifically reserved for those studies that substantially address issues of diversity as defined by the APA’s 2017 Multicultural Guidelines.

Below is a brief review of the 2018 winners and their projects:

  • Mónica Acevedo-Molina (University of Arizona) will be studying the influence of bilingualism on memory in Hispanic individuals. Mónica aims to understand how bilingualism impacts the specificity of autobiographic memory in Hispanics, as well as the influence of inhibition on that specificity.
  • Brooke Bartlett (University of Houston) will be studying the role of distress tolerance in the relationship between trauma cue reactivity and posttraumatic stress disorder symptom severity. Specifically, Brooke aims to understand whether distress tolerance moderates that relationship, above and beyond the impact of important factors such as the amount of trauma a person has experienced, as well as any other mental health conditions they may be battling.
  • Alexis Blessing (The University of Texas at San Antonio) will be studying ways to reduce the public stigma associated with media depictions of service members and veterans. Specifically, Alexis believes that self-compassion may buffer negative responses to stigmatizing media accounts of violent acts by veterans with PTSD.
  • Brittney Evans (Drexel University) will be studying the feasibility and acceptability of a remote parent coaching intervention for parents of children who are overweight or obese. The goal of this intervention is to increase the use of adaptive parenting techniques and decrease the use of ineffective parenting practices in order to improve child behaviors during mealtimes.
  • Maya Godbole (City University of New York, CUNY) will be studying the effect of sex discrimination policies on women’s expectation of bias and performance in organizations. Specifically, Maya aims to understand whether the inclusion of language that explicitly acknowledges subtle forms of sexism in policy documents influences women’s participation in organizations as well as their performance expectations.
  • Taylor Hendershott (Washington University in St. Louis) will be developing a brief tool for assessing people’s spatial navigation strategy use and ability. This type of task will allow for the targeted assessment of cognitive functions and will be useful for academics and clinicians working to understand and measure the cognitive impairment associated with neurodegenerative diseases.
  • Tiffany Jenzer (University at Buffalo, SUNY) will be studying the relationship between emotion regulation strategies and alcohol use. Specifically, Tiffany aims to understand how the ability to choose between a variety of emotion regulation strategies, as well as the ability to pick a strategy that appropriately fits the situation impact alcohol use.
  • Parisa Kaliush (University of Utah) will be studying the intergenerational effects of mothers with a history of childhood maltreatment. Specifically, Parisa aims to understand whether maternal parasympathetic activity during pregnancy explains the relationship between their history of childhood maltreatment and their newborn’s emotional reactivity and attention.
  • Nathan Kearns (University of North Texas) will be studying the role of traumatic stress and alcohol on driving behaviors. Specifically, Nathan will be investigating both the independent and additive effects of trauma-related stress and acute alcohol intoxication on driving-related risk-taking.
  • Lilian Yanqing Li (University of California, Irvine) will be studying novel strategies for addressing emotion regulation deficits in people with schizophrenia and schizotypy. Lilian aims to understand if third-person self-talk is an effective strategy for regulating negative emotions, without requiring additional cognitive control.
  • Albert Ly (Loma Linda University) will be studying diabetes treatment adherence among a diverse sample of adults. Albert aims to understand the role culture and U.S. generational status play in disease-related distress and treatment adherence.
  • Melissa McWilliams (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) will be evaluating the impact of integrated text message coaching as an added supplement to behavioral parent training. In particular, Melissa will be studying whether text message coaching improves parenting practices, as well as parental engagement in and attitude about the parent training curriculum.
  • Tommy Ho-Yee Ng (Temple University) will be studying the nature of reward processing for children of parents with unipolar depression and bipolar disorder. Tommy aims to understand how reward processing may be deficient in these children compared to healthy controls, as well as if children of parents with bipolar disorder can be differentiated from children of parents with unipolar depression based on their reward processing.
  • Fallon Ringer (Florida State University) will be studying the role of suicide-related internet use in suicide risk. Fallon aims to understand if suicide-related internet use is associated with greater suicidal ideation, intent, and prior suicidal behaviors, as well as fearlessness about death.
  • Selime Salim (Miami University) will be studying the relationship between sexual victimization and suicidality among bisexual women. In particular, Selime aims to understand the role stigma, internalized sexism, and social reactions to sexual assault disclosure play in that relationship.

Congratulations to all of the winners!

Want your name to be featured next year? Be sure to apply! Applications are due in early December for the 2019 PSRG. Remember: grant writing has many benefits, including being a wonderful way to think critically about your research ideas, have valuable discussions with your mentor(s), and boost your resume. Worried you don’t know how to write a grant? Check out this great post by the Association for Psychological Science with tips and tricks.

The APAGS Science Committee would like to acknowledge and thank the following reviewers for their help and support  in reviewing applications this year: Alyssa DeVito, Rachel Sweenie, Laura Werner, Megan Williams, Amy Wing-Lam Chong, Steven Hobaica, Amanda Sanchez, Kyle Simon, Elyssa Berney, Juan Pantoja-Patino, Taymy Caso, and Elizabeth Louis.

 

Written by:
Melanie Arenson, B.S., Member, APAGS Science Committee
Renee Cloutier, M.S., Chair, APAGS Science Committee