Quality Improvement, Professional Competence, and the American Psychological Association’s Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct

Chapter
First Online:

Abstract

The American Psychological Association’s Ethical Principles and Code of Conduct (APA, 2010) are foundational partly because they prove the ethical and legal definition of how psychologists ought to behave and conduct themselves professionally. Failure to abide by the enforceable standards advanced by the APA may result in a wide range of negative consequences ranging from harm, to the client as well as potentially embarrassing and consequential disciplinary hearings, to the loss of one’s professional license. Due to these implications, for these ethical standards to be useful to both the mental health professionals and consumers of mental health services, it is important that they are clear, effective, and continue to meet the need of the diverse stakeholders that they are designed to serve (Gaumnitz & Lere, 2004).

Keywords

American Psychological Association Ethics Quality of care Code of conduct 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. American Psychological Association. (2010). Ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  2. Antonuccio, D. (2008). Treating depressed children with antidepressants: More harm than benefit? Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 15(2), 92–97.Google Scholar
  3. Arkowitz, H., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2006). Psychotherapy on trial. Scientific American Mind, 2, 42–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker, T. B., McFall, R. M., & Shoham, V. (2008). Current status and future prospects of clinical psychology: Toward a scientifically principled approach to mental and behavioral health care. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 9(2), 67–103.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Baron, S. (2009). Evaluating the patient journey approach to ensure health care is centered on patients. Nursing Times, 105(22), 20–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Berwick, D. M., & Hackbarth, A. D. (2012). Eliminating waste in US health care. Jama, 307(14), 1513–1516.Google Scholar
  7. Bobbitt, B. L., Cate, R. A., Beardsley, S. D., Azocar, F., & McCulloch, J. (2012). Quality improvement and outcomes in the future of professional psychology: Opportunities and Challenges. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 43(6), 551–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2011, March 15). Health-related quality of life. Retrieved from Center for Diseases Control and Prevention: http://www.cdc.gov/hrqol/hrqol14_measure.htm
  9. Chambless, D., Baker, M., Baucom, D., Beutler, L., Calhoun, K., Crits-Chrstoph, P., …, Woody, S. R. (1998). Update on empirically validated therapies, II. The Clinical Psychologist, 51(1), 3–16.Google Scholar
  10. Chambless, D. L., & Hollon, S. (1998). Defining empirically supported therapies. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66, 7–18.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Cronbach, L. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116–134.Google Scholar
  12. Dawes, R. M., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. E. (1989). Clinical versus actuarial judgment. Science, 243, 1668–1674.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Ferris, T. G., Dougherty, D., Blumenthal, D., & Perrin, J. M. (2001). A report card on quality improvement for children’s health care. Pediatrics, 107(1), 143–155.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Fischhoff, B. (1975). Hindsight does not equal foresight: The effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 1, 288–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Garb, H. N. (1989). Clinical judgment, clinical, training, and professional experience. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 387–396.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Gaumnitz, B. R., & Lere, J. C. (2004). Codes of Ethics with Impact. The CPA Journal, 74(5), 64.Google Scholar
  17. Gilbert, J. E., Howell, D., King, S., Sawka, C. H., Angus, H., & Dudegeon, D. (2012). Quality improvement in cancer symptom assessment and control: The Provincial Palliative Care Integration Project (PPCIP). Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 43(4), 663–678.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Ichikawa, J. J., & Steup, M. (2012). The analysis of knowledge. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.Google Scholar
  19. Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the twenty-first century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  20. James, B. C., & Savitz, L. A. (2011). How intermountain trimmed health care costs through robust quality improvement efforts. Health Affairs, 30(6), 1185–1191.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Jha, A. K., Perlin, J. B., Kizer, K., & Dudley, R. A. (2003). Effect of the transformation of the veterans affairs health care system on the quality of care. The New England Journal of Medicine, 348(22), 2218–2227.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Lilienfeld, S. (2007). Psychological treatments that cause harm. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 53–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Luborskey, L., Rosenthal, R., Diguer, L., Andrusyna, T. P., Berman, J. S., Levitt, J. T., et al. (2002). The Dodo bird verdict is alive and well-mostly. Clinical Psychology Science and Practice, 9(1), 2–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McFall, R. M. (1991). Manifesto for a science of clinical psychology. The clinical psychologist, 44(6), 75–88.Google Scholar
  25. O’Donohue, W., & Henderson, D. (1999). Epistemic and ethical duties and clinical decision-making. Behaviour Change, 16(1), 10–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. O’Donohue, W., Cummings, N., Cucciarre, M., Cummings, J., & Runyan, C. (2006). Integrated behavioral healthcare: A guide for effective action. New York: Prometheus.Google Scholar
  27. O’Donohue, W (2013) Clinical Psychology and the Philosophy of Science New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  28. Pautasso, M. (2010). Worsening file-drawer problem in the abstracts of natural, medical and social science databases. Scientometrics, 85(1), 193–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 638–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ruscio, J. (2007). The clinician as subject: Practitioners are prone to the same judgment errors as everyone else. In S. O. Lilienfeld & W. T. O’Donohue (Eds.), The great ideas of clinical science: 17 Principles that every mental health professional should understand (pp. 29–47). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Siev, J., & Chambless, D. L. (2007). Specificity of treatment effects: Cognitive therapy and relaxation for generalized anxiety and panic disorders. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 75(4), 513–522.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Suarez, J. G. (1992). Three experts on quality management: Philip B. Crosby, W. Edwards Deming, Joseph M. Juran. Arlington, VA: Total Quality Leadership Office.Google Scholar
  33. United States Department of Health and Human Services. (2011). Report to Congress: National strategy for quality improvement in health care. Washington, DC, Online publication.Google Scholar
  34. Walton, M. (1986). The Deming Management method. New York: Penguin Group.Google Scholar
  35. Walton, M. (1988). The Deming management method. Penguin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychology and CounselingUniversity of Central ArkansasConwayUSA
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyUniversity of NevadaRenoUSA

Personalised recommendations