scholarly journals Validación de la versión española de la Escala de Reflexión en futbolistas de élite jóvenes

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-24
Author(s):  
José L. Chamorro ◽  
Rubén Moreno ◽  
Carlos García Martí
Keyword(s):  
American Psychological Association ◽  
American Psychological ◽  
Behavioural Regulation

Objetivo. Validar la versión española de la Escala de Reflexión del instrumento Reflective Learnning Continuum en futbolistas jóvenes de élite. Método. Estudio de validación. La versión original fue traducida y adaptada siguiendo el protocolo de la American Psychological Association. Una vez traducida, se administró a 478 jugadores jóvenes de élite junto con el Behavioural Regulation in Sport Questionnaire, con el objetivo de evaluar sus propiedades psicométricas; además, se llevaron a cabo el análisis de consistencia interna, el análisis factorial confirmatorio y el análisis de correlaciones bivariadas con variables teóricamente relacionadas. Resultados. En el análisis de contenido, la versión española de la Escala de Reflexión aplicada mostró evidencias en los aspectos cultural y lingüístico con la versión original. Además, el análisis factorial confirmatorio mostró un ajuste aceptable a los datos: χ²(df) = 28.61 (88), p < 0.001, RMSEA (90% CI) = 0.07 (0.06-0.08), CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.99. Los análisis de consistencia interna, así como la relación con la motivación, apoyaron la versión validada. Conclusión. Los resultados proporcionan evidencia en favor de las propiedades psicométricas de la validación al español de la Escala de Reflexión.

Fool’s Gold: Psychologists Using Disingenuous Reasoning to Mislead Legislatures into Granting Psychologists Prescriptive Authority

2003 ◽  
Vol 29 (4) ◽  
pp. 489-524
Author(s):  
Brent Pollitt
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Nurse Practitioners ◽  
Primary Care Physicians ◽  
American Psychological Association ◽  
The United States ◽  
Psychotropic Medications ◽  
American Psychological ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
Prescriptive Authority

Mental illness is a serious problem in the United States. Based on “current epidemiological estimates, at least one in five people has a diagnosable mental disorder during the course of a year.” Fortunately, many of these disorders respond positively to psychotropic medications. While psychiatrists write some of the prescriptions for psychotropic medications, primary care physicians write more of them. State legislatures, seeking to expand patient access to pharmacological treatment, granted physician assistants and nurse practitioners prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications. Over the past decade other groups have gained some form of prescriptive authority. Currently, psychologists comprise the primary group seeking prescriptive authority for psychotropic medications.The American Society for the Advancement of Pharmacotherapy (“ASAP”), a division of the American Psychological Association (“APA”), spearheads the drive for psychologists to gain prescriptive authority. The American Psychological Association offers five main reasons why legislatures should grant psychologists this privilege: 1) psychologists’ education and clinical training better qualify them to diagnose and treat mental illness in comparison with primary care physicians; 2) the Department of Defense Psychopharmacology Demonstration Project (“PDP”) demonstrated non-physician psychologists can prescribe psychotropic medications safely; 3) the recommended post-doctoral training requirements adequately prepare psychologists to prescribe safely psychotropic medications; 4) this privilege will increase availability of mental healthcare services, especially in rural areas; and 5) this privilege will result in an overall reduction in medical expenses, because patients will visit only one healthcare provider instead of two–one for psychotherapy and one for medication.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document