家庭批评评估中的种族问题

IF 1 4区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology Pub Date : 2022-04-01 DOI:10.1521/jscp.2022.41.2.155
D. Chambless, Kelly M. Allred, Ortal Nakash, Eliora Porter, Rachel A. Schwartz, Moriah J. Brier
{"title":"家庭批评评估中的种族问题","authors":"D. Chambless, Kelly M. Allred, Ortal Nakash, Eliora Porter, Rachel A. Schwartz, Moriah J. Brier","doi":"10.1521/jscp.2022.41.2.155","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Two findings in the Expressed Emotion (EE) literature fail to hold for Black psychiatric patients: EE (predominantly criticism) fails to predict treatment outcome, and measures of EE fail to correlate with patients' perceptions of relatives' criticism. To understand these findings, we tested whether non-Black coders of observable criticism (a) rate Black relatives higher in criticism than White relatives, or (b) are generally less accurate when rating Black relatives. Method: Familial dyads [31 Black; 87 White] participated in video recorded problem-solving interactions. Each interaction was reliably coded for observed criticism by two-four non-Black coders; participants rated perceived criticism (the criterion measure) post-interaction. Results: Coders were less accurate in rating criticism from Black than White relatives. Discussion: These data suggest patients' ratings of perceived criticism might be the measure of choice for identification of Black families who should be engaged in the treatment process to help reduce criticism-associated treatment failure","PeriodicalId":48202,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Race Matters in Assessment of Familial Criticism\",\"authors\":\"D. Chambless, Kelly M. Allred, Ortal Nakash, Eliora Porter, Rachel A. Schwartz, Moriah J. Brier\",\"doi\":\"10.1521/jscp.2022.41.2.155\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Two findings in the Expressed Emotion (EE) literature fail to hold for Black psychiatric patients: EE (predominantly criticism) fails to predict treatment outcome, and measures of EE fail to correlate with patients' perceptions of relatives' criticism. To understand these findings, we tested whether non-Black coders of observable criticism (a) rate Black relatives higher in criticism than White relatives, or (b) are generally less accurate when rating Black relatives. Method: Familial dyads [31 Black; 87 White] participated in video recorded problem-solving interactions. Each interaction was reliably coded for observed criticism by two-four non-Black coders; participants rated perceived criticism (the criterion measure) post-interaction. Results: Coders were less accurate in rating criticism from Black than White relatives. Discussion: These data suggest patients' ratings of perceived criticism might be the measure of choice for identification of Black families who should be engaged in the treatment process to help reduce criticism-associated treatment failure\",\"PeriodicalId\":48202,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2022.41.2.155\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2022.41.2.155","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引言:情感表达(EE)文献中的两个发现在黑人精神病患者中不成立:情感表达(主要是批评)不能预测治疗结果,情感表达的测量不能与患者对亲属批评的感知相关。为了理解这些发现,我们测试了非黑人编码器在可观察到的批评中是否(a)对黑人亲属的评价高于白人亲属,或者(b)在评价黑人亲属时通常不太准确。方法:家族二联体[31 Black;[87] White]参与了视频记录的解决问题的互动。每个交互作用被可靠地编码,以供2 - 4名非黑人编码员观察批评;参与者在互动后对感知到的批评(标准测量)进行打分。结果:编码员对黑人亲属的评价准确率低于白人亲属。讨论:这些数据表明,患者对感知到的批评的评分可能是识别黑人家庭的选择措施,这些家庭应该参与治疗过程,以帮助减少与批评相关的治疗失败
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Race Matters in Assessment of Familial Criticism
Introduction: Two findings in the Expressed Emotion (EE) literature fail to hold for Black psychiatric patients: EE (predominantly criticism) fails to predict treatment outcome, and measures of EE fail to correlate with patients' perceptions of relatives' criticism. To understand these findings, we tested whether non-Black coders of observable criticism (a) rate Black relatives higher in criticism than White relatives, or (b) are generally less accurate when rating Black relatives. Method: Familial dyads [31 Black; 87 White] participated in video recorded problem-solving interactions. Each interaction was reliably coded for observed criticism by two-four non-Black coders; participants rated perceived criticism (the criterion measure) post-interaction. Results: Coders were less accurate in rating criticism from Black than White relatives. Discussion: These data suggest patients' ratings of perceived criticism might be the measure of choice for identification of Black families who should be engaged in the treatment process to help reduce criticism-associated treatment failure
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: This journal is devoted to the application of theory and research from social psychology toward the better understanding of human adaptation and adjustment, including both the alleviation of psychological problems and distress (e.g., psychopathology) and the enhancement of psychological well-being among the psychologically healthy. Topics of interest include (but are not limited to) traditionally defined psychopathology (e.g., depression), common emotional and behavioral problems in living (e.g., conflicts in close relationships), the enhancement of subjective well-being, and the processes of psychological change in everyday life (e.g., self-regulation) and professional settings (e.g., psychotherapy and counseling). Articles reporting the results of theory-driven empirical research are given priority, but theoretical articles, review articles, clinical case studies, and essays on professional issues are also welcome. Articles describing the development of new scales (personality or otherwise) or the revision of existing scales are not appropriate for this journal.
期刊最新文献
A Person × Environment approach to Borderline Personality Disorder features in young people: The role of life events, parental support, and self-esteem Filial piety as a beneficial factor for posttraumatic adjustment in the context of adverse childhood experiences among Taiwanese young adults Characterizing the mental health concerns of significant others of those with Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) and how BPD impacts them Conveying depression: Is a reduced relative preference for happiness a way depressed people convince themselves of their depressed identity? Gender differences in college drinkers: A test of the precarious manhood hypothesis on drinking motivation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1