psychology - Western State Hospital Internship Program

August 08 2017

Friday Factoids: Psychology Got Talent! (Or, the art of recognizing and valuing true productivity while promoting self-care in others.)

If you would like to become more productive while at the same time having more free time for yourself, you need to etch the ratio 52:17 into your mind. According to an article in the BBC health Column, the ratio 52:17 represents the average time spent working and relaxing for top earning performing employees. That is, for every fifty-two minutes they spent working on the job, they had seventeen minutes of relaxation, self-care time. The article also outlines that the top ten percent of valuable performers at companies do not necessarily spend more time working than other low performing workers, instead they have periods of deep intensive work followed by short resting periods.

After reading this article I thought about work, productivity and more importantly effectiveness. I realized that there was a significant difference between all three. It felt like an epiphany. Living our lives in an industrialized culture, it is usually ingrained that hard work lasting for long hours was productivity, and the less sleep you got meant you were being a good producer. I have seen many people brag about how many long hours they worked and how little sleep they got. They took pride in their work ethic without paying much attention to the actual results of that work. Who could blame them? If they came in early to work, left late, and looked busy for the ten or twelve hours they were at work, they would most certainly be considered for a promotion, a raise, awards, or perhaps coveted privilege employee of the month parking spots. Not hating the game, just highlighting some players. However, large high volume producing companies like Google, Apple and Starbucks have already aimed to shift that old pods, fully equipped gyms, yoga classes and literally free lunches to staff? A happy worker is a productive worker. Simple deductive reasoning, but not everyone is on board just yet.

Unfortunately this specific article, completely contradicts the mindset behind that type of thinking. It said that most managers and supervisors could not even tell the difference between employees who worked 80 hours a week from those who just pretended to. It also cited one study done from the Illinois Institute of Technology which said that scientist who spent 25 hours in the workplace were no more productive than those who were in the workplace for just 5 hours. This showed that there was a clear distinction between work and productivity output. There is not a direct correlation between each of the two.

In the field of Psychology shouldn’t the concept of caring for our employees be greater emphasized? After all we are in the ‘taking care of people business’. If we are unable to extend care to ourselves and those around us, how on earth are we to offer those services to others in need? Can you teach others to fish without having a fishing rod (and not using the rod as a whip).

“Sometimes the most important thing in a whole day is the rest we take between two deep breaths. ” – Etty Hillesum

Reference:

http://www.bbc.com/capitalstory/20170613-why-you-should-manage-your-energy-not-your-time

Dianne Rapsey-Vanburen, MA
WKPIC Doctoral Intern

November 11 2015

Friday Factoids: Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy a Paradigm Shift in Mental Health?

In 1938, Albert Hoffman synthesized lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). After accidentally ingesting it in 1943 he deemed it the “medicine of the soul.” Psychedelic drugs carry a stigma and it is easy to have very different views about them. Some have long claimed that, when taken responsibly and with the proper supervision, psychedelics like LSD and psilocybin are safe to consume. These drugs were researched extensively in the 1950s and 1960s, but funding stalled when the substances were classified as dangerous and lacking medical value. The Controlled Substance Act of 1970 classified psilocybin, LCD, and MDMA as Schedule 1 substances, which is defined as having “no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse.” Interestingly, approximately 0.005% of emergency department visits in the US involve LSD or psilocybin according to the US Department of Health and Human Services.

A growing body of evidence is beginning to show that psychedelics have therapeutic potential beyond what pharmaceutically made prescription drugs can do. A recent article published in the Journal of Psychopharmacology highlights the potential of LSD, psilocybin, and MDMA for treating a wide range of mental illnesses. Several other studies have shown positive results can come from short courses or single sessions of psychedelic-assisted psychotherapy. A study conducted for cigarette smoking at Johns Hopkins had a very high success rate with 80% of people was abstinent after six months after using psilocybin. A pilot study found a strong affect with alcoholism as well. In 2014, Swiss researchers studied the therapeutic benefits of LSD-assisted therapy in reducing anxiety in 12 patients who had been diagnosed with life-threatening illnesses. One year later, nearly all patients showed sustained reductions in anxiety with no adverse reactions. Lastly, one pilot study on 19 participants with drug-resistant PTSD showed a “significant and sustained-reduction in PTSD symptoms” in 83% of those given MDMA-assisted therapy.

The data suggest it’s the nature of the subjective experience that one has while under the effects of the substances that make psychedelics affective. Gasser P, Kirchner K, & Passie T (2015) study found the following:

Evaluations of subjective experiences suggest facilitated access to emotions, confrontation of previously unknown anxieties, worries, resources and intense emotional peak experiences. The experiences created led to a restructuring of the person’s emotional trust, situational understanding, habits and worldview.

Johansen and Krebs (2015) wrote:

Psychedelics are not known to harm the brain or other body organs or to cause addiction or compulsive use; serious adverse events involving psychedelics are extremely rare. Overall, it is difficult to see how prohibition of psychedelics can be justified as a public health measure.
Continued research into psychedelic drugs may one day offer new ways to treat mental illness and addiction. The emerging paradigm shift of psychedelics in a therapeutic setting may open new doors.

References:

Gregoire, C. (2015, September 16). Psychedelics Could Trigger A ‘Paradigm Shift’ In Mental Health Care. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/psychedelics-mental-health-care_55f2e754e4b077ca094eb4f0

Johansen, P. and Krebs, T. (2015). Psychedelics Not Linked to Mental Health Problems or Suicidal Behavior: A Population Study. Journal of Psychopharmacology. 1-10. doi: 10.1177/0269881114568039

Gasser P, Kirchner K, & Passie T (2015). LSD-assisted psychotherapy for anxiety associated with a life-threatening disease: a qualitative study of acute and sustained subjective effects. Journal of Psychopharmacology, 29 (1), 57-68

Rivas, A. (2015, March 15). Psychedelics May Improve Mental Health Disorder, But We’ll Have to Support the Research to Find Out. Medical Daily. Retrieved from http://www.medicaldaily.com/psychedelics-may-improve-mental-health-disorders-well-have-support-research-find-out-325780

Jonathan Torres, M.S.
WKPIC Doctoral Intern

October 10 2014

Summary of Giving Courts the Information Necessary to Implement Limited Guardianships: Are We There Yet?

Purpose
Gibson (2011) provided a retrospective analysis of adult guardianship cases in two Kentucky counties. The goal of the analysis was to determine if the information provided to the courts during these cases was comprehensive, if least restrictive intervention alternatives were considered, and if the limited guardianship option was utilized. Gibson (2011) concluded with recommendations for improvements in these areas of guardianship cases with particular attention to the role social workers could play.

Background
The article reported an estimate from 2006 that 1.5 million people were under private or public guardianships. However, the article also noted that the US Government Accountability Office stated that neither state governments nor federal governments keep track of how many elderly individuals have guardians or the incidences of abuse of those individuals with guardians. While Gibson (2011) highlighted many intended benefits of guardianships such as protecting people from abuse, neglect, and exploitation, the article also highlighted potential pitfalls of guardianships and the current system.

Autonomy appeared to be the biggest concern once an individual was determined to need a guardian. Gibson (2011) discussed a case from 1966, Lake v. Cameron, which highlighted the importance of the least restrictive intervention. In the case, a 60-year-old woman was reported to wander the streets and was involuntarily hospitalized. She was diagnosed with dementia, but not deemed to be a danger to herself or others. The court found that the woman could not be indefinitely hospitalized without considering less restrictive forms of treatment. Gibson (2011) mentioned a previous study of guardianship cases noting that 94% of petitions were granted and only 13% of those granted were limited guardianships. Gibson (2011) also cited a review of court practices that concluded that reports with more thorough testimony were more likely to result in limited guardianships being awarded.

Methodology
The article examined 40 randomly selected disability cases of 813 disability cases in two Kentucky counties from a three-year period (2004, 2005, 2006). The study used a modified Guardianship Evaluation Recording Instrument (GERI Mod) to examine information for the cases and collected demographics, social workers’ reports, psychologists’ reports, physicians’ reports, and the audio recording of court testimony, if available. The analysis looked at over 300 items and determined whether the item was present or not. The items looked at information that included, but was not limited to, clinical examination procedures, medical history, cognitive symptoms, functional abilities, social functioning, consideration of least restrictive interventions, diagnoses, and final recommendations.

Results
Gibson (2011) found that 97% of the guardianship cases examined were granted, 82% of those were awarded full guardianships and 18% were limited guardianships (partially disabled in Kentucky). The study utilized seventeen of the items that were consistent with Kentucky law as well as current best practice and provided a score of adherence to these seventeen items. Gibson (2011) found that psychologists scored a mean of 11.98 with a standard deviation of 3.21, social workers scored a mean of 11.45 with a standard deviation of 1.62, and physicians scored a mean of 8.35 with a standard deviation of 2.65. Based on these findings, Gibson (2011) determined that there was a significant difference between the adherence score of the physicians and the other two disciplines. Although the mean score of psychologists was slightly higher than that of the social workers, the smaller standard deviation indicates that the social workers were more consistently adhering to the items. Gibson (2011) determined that medical history, effect of medications on behaviors, adaptive behaviors, and strengths were frequently lacking from the reports of psychologists, social workers, and physicians alike.

Discussion
Gibson concluded with a discussion of how social workers could be useful in providing more information to courts in guardianship cases. The suggestion was to have a court visitor, a social worker who would come in to ensure that all areas were being address properly, that the least restrictive alternative was being considered, and that clients were empowered to seek clarification and ask questions. Even though social workers provided similar amounts of information in the cases examined for this article, Gibson (2011) expressed that social workers are uniquely primed for this role, given that they have a history of advocacy, are familiar with other professional disciplines, and have the opportunity to educate clients and their families. Gibson (2011) concluded that more thorough information from social workers and other professionals would better help the courts make decisions about guardianships and may prepare a court to award limited guardianships when the individual is still capable of maintaining some of their basic rights and autonomy.

Reference
Gibson, L. (2011). Giving courts the information necessary to implement limited guardianships: Are we there yet?. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 54(8) 803-818. doi: 10.1080/01634372.2011.604668

Brittany Best, BA
WKPIC Doctoral Intern

September 09 2014

Alert for Psychology Internship Applicants: Beware of Scams Claiming to Help You Match!

Reprinted with permission of Dr. Keilin:

Each year, the APPIC Board receives feedback about the increasing number of enterprising individuals who have established businesses that focus on assisting applicants in obtaining an internship. Furthermore, the APPIC Board has heard comments and complaints about the claims that some of these individuals are making, the ways in which certain individuals are advertising their businesses and recruiting students, and the rates being charged to students (e.g., $100 or more per hour) for these services.

While there may in fact be some legitimate and helpful services that are being offered, the Board remains very concerned about the potential for exploitation — i.e., that some of these businesses may be taking advantage of the imbalance between applicants and positions by exploiting students’ fears and worries about not getting matched.

We encourage students to be cautious and informed consumers when it comes to decisions about using any of these services. Please know that there are a number of no-cost and low-cost ways of obtaining advice and information about the internship application process, such as the workbook published by APAGS (as well as books written by other authors), the free information available on the APPIC and NMS web sites, discussion lists sponsored by APPIC, APAGS, and others, and the support and advice provided by the faculty of many doctoral programs.

Jason Williams, Psy.D.
Chair, APPIC Board of Directors

Greg Keilin, Ph.D.
APPIC Match Coordinator

********

To add to what Dr. Keilin and Dr. Williams have to say, WKPIC wants you, our prospective applicants, to know that you are enough, in and of yourself, for our application process. Services such as these are absolutely not necessary for you to be competitive in applying for our site. We are interested in the quality of your educational and clinical experiences, and in you, the person and potential intern. “Glossy” applications or photos–not needed. We look forward to the chance to meet you, and for you to meet us.

As you will hear from us many times over, the issues in our system’s current Match system relate to many variables, but though these issues affect you, they are not because of you, or deficiencies in your application or interviewing. There are simply not enough slots to meet your needs, and APA, training programs, and internship sites are working hard to correct this problem. Feel free to read through some of our Match posts, where interns have shared their experiences in surviving this stressful period. If you have a story of your own, email it to me, and we’ll talk about posting it here. We support you, and your fellow interns, current and past, support you, too.

Susan R. Vaught, Ph.D.
WKPIC Training Director

July 07 2014

Friday Factoids: The Power of (and Potential Problems with) Humor

Do psychologists have a sense of humor? Was Johnny Carson the “King of late night television?” Of course! I rest my case.

Seriously though, humor in the work place has been a tremendous outlet for stress reduction. We all have read how laughter improves mood or increases satisfaction. While all of this has been supported in current literature, one has to be careful that the humor is not in “poor taste.” Scott (2014) mentioned that “approximately 70% of individuals surveyed said that workplace jokes concentrated on making fun of co-workers based on elements such as age, sexual orientation and weight.” Remember, what may be funny to you can be perceived by others as inappropriate.

I close with appropriate office humor taken verbatim from Burton (2014):

1. Two psychotherapists pass each other in the hallway. The first says to the second, “Hello!” The second smiles back nervously and half nods his head. When he is comfortably out of earshot, he mumbles, “God, I wonder what that was all about?”

2. Receptionist to psychologist: “Doctor, there’s a patient here who thinks he’s invisible.”
“Tell him I can’t see him right now.”

3. There are three guys going through an exit interview at a mental hospital. The doctor says he can release them if they can answer the simple mathematical problem: What is 8 times 5?

The first patient says, “139.”

The second one says, “Wednesday.”

The third says, “What a stupid question. It’s obvious: The answer is 40.”

The doctor is delighted. He gives the guy his release. As the man is leaving, the doctor asks how he came up with the correct answer so quickly.

“It was easy, Doc. I just divided Wednesday into 139.”

4. A Stanford research group advertised for participants in a study of obsessive-compulsive disorder. They were looking for therapy clients who had been diagnosed with this disorder. The response was gratifying; they got 3,000 responses about three days after the ad came out. All from the same person.

References:

Burton, N. (2014). The Very Best Psychology Jokes: Top 21 psychology, psychotherapy, and psychiatry jokes. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/hide-and-seek/201405/the-very-best-psychology-jokes

Psychology humor—clinical (n.d.) Retrieved from http://users.erols.com/geary/psychology/clinical.htm

Scott, E. (2014). Workplace Humor: How to reduce stress with inoffensive office humor. Retrieved from http://stress.about.com/od/workplacestress/a/officehumor.htm

David J. Wright, MA., MSW
WKPIC Doctoral Intern

1 2 Next page

Innovative Psychology Internship Program in Western Kentucky. See what we are all about!

Teaching Excellence

Tag Archives: psychology

Friday Factoids: Psychology Got Talent! (Or, the art of recognizing and valuing true productivity while promoting self-care in others.)

Friday Factoids: Psychedelic-Assisted Therapy a Paradigm Shift in Mental Health?

Summary of Giving Courts the Information Necessary to Implement Limited Guardianships: Are We There Yet?

Alert for Psychology Internship Applicants: Beware of Scams Claiming to Help You Match!

Friday Factoids: The Power of (and Potential Problems with) Humor

Phone: 270-889-2741

Phone: 270-889-2811