Thesis (Ed.D.)--Teachers College, Columbia University, 1962. / Typescript; issued also on microfilm. Sponsor: Ernest G. Osborne. Dissertation Committee: Paul E. Eiserer, Paul Vahanian. Includes tables. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 96-102).

‘Psychosocial problems’ are psychological problems that are regarded as resulting from the interaction between the adaptive capacities of individuals and the demands of their physical and social environments. Many different factors have been theoretically proposed, and empirically established, as predictors of a range of psychosocial problems in adolescents. However, a problem exists in that this literature appears to lack an integrative framework that has validity across the range of problems that are observed. The purpose of the current research is to propose and test a model that draws together three clusters of factors that are useful in predicting the incidence of adolescent psychosocial problems. These are family structural background factors, family functioning variables and control beliefs. Data were collected from 155 adolescent males aged between 12 and 19 by a single concurrent and retrospective self-report questionnaire. This included data about the respondent (age, involvements with mental health or juvenile justice agencies) and family structural background factors (days per week worked by mother/father, occupational status for mother/father, residential mobility, number of persons in the family home). The questionnaire also incorporated the Parental Bonding Instrument (Parker, Tupling & Brown, 1979) to quantify the levels of perceived parental care and overprotection, and an adaptation of the Parental Discipline Style Scale (Shaw & Scott, 1991), to assess punitive, love withdrawing and inductive discipline practices. In addition, the (Low) Self-control Scale (Grasmick, Tittle, Bursick & Arneklev, 1993) and the Locus of Control of Behaviour Scale (Craig, Franklin, & Andrews, 1984) were used to collect data concerning adolescents’ perceived behavioural self-control and locus of control. Finally, selected sub-scales of the Child Behavior Checklist Youth Self-Report (Achenbach, 1991b) were used to collect data on the incidence of social withdrawal, somatisation, anxiety and depression, aggression and delinquency among the respondents, and in aggregated form, the incidence of ‘total problems’ and internalising and externalising behaviours. Results indicated family structural background factors, family functioning variables and control beliefs possess limited predicted validity and that the usefulness of the proposed model varies between specific psychosocial problems. Family functioning variables were generally stronger predictors than family structural background factors, particularly for internalising behaviours. Of these, levels of parental care and overprotection were generally the strongest predictors. Perceived self-control and locus of control were also generally strong predictors, but were particularly powerful with respect to externalising behaviours. The strength of predictive relationships was observed to vary between specific internalising and externalising behaviours, suggesting that individual difference variables not assessed in the current research were differentially influential. Finally, the parental and individual characteristics that predicted maximal levels of adjustment (defined in terms of minimal levels of internalising and externalising behaviours) were explored and the correlates of various parenting style typologies (Parker et al., 1979) were investigated. These results strongly confirmed the importance of family functioning and control beliefs with respect to the prediction of internalising, externalising and well-adjusted behaviours. In all analyses, substantial proportions of the variance in the incidence of problem behaviours remain unexplained. The findings are examined in relation to previous research focused on (familial) social control and (individual) self-control with respect to psychosocial problems in adolescents. In addition, methodological considerations are discussed and the implications of the findings for clinical and community interventions to address problem behaviours, and for further study, are explored.

This portfolio explored issues that are relevant to the judgements routinely made by clinical psychologists. The first chapter provides a theoretical overview of relevant issues. In this chapter, firstly, the debate over the relative merits of ‘clinical’ and ‘statistical’ approaches to clinical judgement (Meehl, 1954) is reviewed. It is noted that, although much of the empirical evidence supports the greater accuracy of statistical approaches to making judgements (where appropriate methods exist), they are rarely routinely used, and clinical approaches to making judgements continue to dominate in the majority of clinical settings. Secondly, common sources of errors in clinical judgement are reviewed. These include the misuse of cognitive heuristics, the presence of clinicians’ biases, the limitations to human information-processing capacities and the over-reliance on clinical interviews. Finally, some of the basic strategies that can be useful to clinicians in improving the accuracy of clinical judgement are described. These include undertaking advanced level training programs, using quality instruments and procedures, being wary of over-reliance on theories, adhering to the scientist-practitioner approach and being selective in the distribution of professional efforts and time. In the subsequent chapters these strategies are explored further through four clinical case studies. These cases were collected during the university placement program and they have been selected to illustrate some of the approaches as clinician may use in attempting to optimise the accuracy of judgements necessary in the context of clinical psychological practice. The final chapter provides a brief overview and discussion of these cases in relation to the issues identified in Chapter One,

Virtual group therapy offers multiple unique advantages to improving access to mental health care for Canadian youth and families. However, virtual environments may hinder the development of the type of relationships within groups that promote positive treatment outcomes. The present study explores the extent to, and ways in which, service providers working in the youth and family mental health sector in Eastern Ontario adapt to the unique characteristics of virtual environments in order to communicate effectively and develop therapeutic relationships. Secondary quantitative and qualitative data were analyzed using a mixed-methods design. Survey responses (n = 58) and interview recordings (n =12) collected from service providers involved in the delivery of virtual groups for youth and families in response to COVID-19 were analyzed using a concurrent triangulation design. Descriptive statistics indicate service providers achieved moderate satisfaction regarding their ability to communicate and develop relationships within virtual groups, and that this ability was perceived as approximating in-person processes. Thematic analysis suggests that while virtual group environments involve unique challenges and and elevated complexity, facilitators adapt to virtual delivery by both employing diverse strategies and accepting certain limitations. The present study suggests that the unique challenges and complexities involved in virtual group-based therapy need not deter the implementation of virtual groups as a means of better addressing the mental health needs of Canadian youth and families.