scholarly journals Towards causal explanations of language mechanisms behind emotion development

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Adrienne Robles Manalili
Keyword(s):  
Inclusive Education ◽  
Ecological Validity ◽  
American Psychological Association ◽  
Research Literature ◽  
Social Emotional ◽  
American Psychological ◽  
Causal Explanations ◽  
Emotion Development ◽  
Evidential Value ◽  
Language Difficulties

There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that language difficulties co-occur with social,emotional, and behavioural (SEB) difficulties in children (see St Clair et al., 2011; Levickis et al., 2018).However, the research literature has not yet uncovered the direct causal mechanisms behind this cooccurrence.To illustrate this, I will begin with an overview of key emotion theories that the existingco-occurrence studies have missed. I will then examine relevant language and emotion developmentresearch on the basis of (1) theoretical framework, (2) methodological rigour, (3) ecological validity ofprocedures, and (4) evidential value to real-world educational and clinical contexts. Finally, I willconclude with my reflection on the causality between language difficulties and SEB difficulties inchildren. To respect the preference of the communities I represent, I will use identity-first andemancipatory language (American Psychological Association, 2019; Bottema-Beutel et al., 2020; TheAlliance for Inclusive Education, 2021) wherever applicable throughout this paper.

scholarly journals Ableist Ideologies Stifle Neurodiversity and Hinder Inclusive Education

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie Adrienne Robles Manalili
Keyword(s):  
Special Education ◽  
Inclusive Education ◽  
First Language ◽  
American Psychological Association ◽  
The Philippines ◽  
Inclusive Practices ◽  
American Psychological ◽  
Professional Context

This paper makes the case that ableist ideologies hinder trends towards inclusion, as evidenced by keyliterature and legislations on inclusive education. I also discuss the issues, challenges, and dilemmasgenerated by these ableist ideologies in my professional context as an autistic speech-languagetherapist from the Philippines. I conclude with my reflection on how practitioners can help change thetrajectory towards emancipatory inclusive practices that are informed by the neurodiversity paradigm.To respect the preference of the communities I represent, this paper uses identity-first language(American Psychological Association, 2019; Bottema-Beutel et al., 2020; The Alliance for InclusiveEducation, 2021) when writing about pupils or learners who are traditionally identified by theeducation sector as needing “special education”.

scholarly journals Preprint - The prevalence of marginal significance in psychology over time

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anton Olsson-Collentine ◽  
Marcel A. L. M. van Assen ◽  
Chris Hubertus Joseph Hartgerink
Keyword(s):  
Social Psychology ◽  
General Trend ◽  
American Psychological Association ◽  
Regular Expressions ◽  
American Psychological ◽  
P Values ◽  
Evidential Value ◽  
Increasing Trend ◽  
Individual Interpretation ◽  
Over Time

We examined the proportion of p-values (.05<𝑝≤.1) reported as marginally significant in 44,200 articles across 9 psychology disciplines, published in 70 journals belonging to the American Psychological Association (APA) between 1985 and 2016. Using regular expressions we extracted 42,504 p-values between .05 and .1. Almost 40% of p-values between .05 and .1 were reported as marginally significant, though there were considerable differences between disciplines. The practice is most common in organizational psychology (45.4%) and the least common in clinical psychology (30.1%). Contrary to what was reported by Pritschet, Powell, and Horne (2016), we found no evidence of an increasing trend in any discipline; in all disciplines the percentage of p-values reported as marginally significant was decreasing or constant over time. The 'Journal of Personality and Social Psychology' (JPSP), also examined by Pritschet et al., was an exception to the general trend and showed an increase over time. The degree to which reporting results as marginally significant is problematic depends largely on individual interpretation. Due to the low evidential value of p-values between .05 and .1 we recommend against reporting these results as marginally significant.

scholarly journals The Prevalence of Marginally Significant Results in Psychology Over Time

2019 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 576-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anton Olsson-Collentine ◽  
Marcel A. L. M. van Assen ◽  
Chris H. J. Hartgerink
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Psychology ◽  
American Psychological Association ◽  
Organizational Psychology ◽  
Regular Expressions ◽  
American Psychological ◽  
P Values ◽  
Evidential Value ◽  
Increasing Trend ◽  
Over Time

We examined the percentage of p values (.05 < p ≤ .10) reported as marginally significant in 44,200 articles, across nine psychology disciplines, published in 70 journals belonging to the American Psychological Association between 1985 and 2016. Using regular expressions, we extracted 42,504 p values between .05 and .10. Almost 40% of p values in this range were reported as marginally significant, although there were considerable differences between disciplines. The practice is most common in organizational psychology (45.4%) and least common in clinical psychology (30.1%). Contrary to what was reported by previous researchers, our results showed no evidence of an increasing trend in any discipline; in all disciplines, the percentage of p values reported as marginally significant was decreasing or constant over time. We recommend against reporting these results as marginally significant because of the low evidential value of p values between .05 and .10.

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