The tension between research and practice: Assumptions of the experimental paradigm

1979 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 267-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis Saleebey
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Paradigm ◽  
Research And Practice

Virtual imaging trials: an emerging experimental paradigm in imaging research and practice

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ehsan Samei ◽  
Ehsan Abadi ◽  
Anuj Kapadia ◽  
Joseph Y. Lo ◽  
Maciej Mazurowski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Experimental Paradigm ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Virtual Imaging ◽  
Imaging Research

Not at Imminent Risk

Crisis ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (6) ◽  
pp. 459-463
Author(s):  
Kate Monaghan ◽  
Martin Harris
Keyword(s):  
Early Intervention ◽  
Suicidal Ideation ◽  
Intervention Strategies ◽  
Group Method ◽  
Narrative Approach ◽  
Complex Issue ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Client Group ◽  
Types Of Information ◽  
Imminent Risk

Abstract. Background: Suicide is a pervasive and complex issue that can challenge counselors through the course of their careers. Research and practice focus heavily on crisis management and imminent risk rather than early intervention strategies. Early intervention strategies can assist counselors working with clients who have suicidal ideation, but are not at imminent risk, or with clients whose risk factors identify them as having a stronger trajectory for suicidal ideation. Aims: This systematic literature review examines the current literature on working with clients with suicidal ideation who are not at imminent risk, to ascertain the types of information and strategies available to counselors working with this client group. Method: An initial 622 articles were identified for analysis and from these 24 were included in the final review, which was synthesized using a narrative approach. Results: Results indicate that research into early intervention strategies is extremely limited. Conclusion: It was possible to describe emergent themes and practice guidelines to assist counselors working with clients with suicidal ideation but not at imminent risk.

Determinants of Interrater Reliability of Job Analysis: A Meta-analysis

2002 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 52-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga F. Voskuijl ◽  
Tjarda van Sliedregt
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Job Analysis ◽  
Job Descriptions ◽  
Job Description ◽  
Research And Practice ◽  
Descriptive Information ◽  
Interrater Reliability Coefficients ◽  
Reliability Coefficients

Summary: This paper presents a meta-analysis of published job analysis interrater reliability data in order to predict the expected levels of interrater reliability within specific combinations of moderators, such as rater source, experience of the rater, and type of job descriptive information. The overall mean interrater reliability of 91 reliability coefficients reported in the literature was .59. The results of experienced professionals (job analysts) showed the highest reliability coefficients (.76). The method of data collection (job contact versus job description) only affected the results of experienced job analysts. For this group higher interrater reliability coefficients were obtained for analyses based on job contact (.87) than for those based on job descriptions (.71). For other rater categories (e.g., students, organization members) neither the method of data collection nor training had a significant effect on the interrater reliability. Analyses based on scales with defined levels resulted in significantly higher interrater reliability coefficients than analyses based on scales with undefined levels. Behavior and job worth dimensions were rated more reliable (.62 and .60, respectively) than attributes and tasks (.49 and .29, respectively). Furthermore, the results indicated that if nonprofessional raters are used (e.g., incumbents or students), at least two to four raters are required to obtain a reliability coefficient of .80. These findings have implications for research and practice.

The Multiple Faces of Risk-Taking

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Florian Schmitz ◽  
Karsten Manske ◽  
Franzis Preckel ◽  
Oliver Wilhelm
Keyword(s):  
Risk Taking ◽  
Basic Research ◽  
Formal Models ◽  
Experimental Paradigm ◽  
Nomological Network ◽  
Balloon Analogue Risk Task ◽  
Parameter Recovery ◽  
Task Specificity ◽  
Available Information ◽  
Criterion Variables

Abstract. The Balloon-Analogue Risk Task (BART; Lejuez et al., 2002 ) is one of the most popular behavioral tasks suggested to assess risk-taking in the laboratory. Previous research has shown that the conventionally computed score is predictive, but neglects available information in the data. We suggest a number of alternative scores that are motivated by theories of risk-taking and that exploit more of the available data. These scores can be grouped around (1) risk-taking, (2) task performance, (3) impulsive decision making, and (4) reinforcement sequence modulation. Their theoretical rationale is detailed and their validity is tested within the nomological network of risk-taking, deviance, and scholastic achievement. Two multivariate studies were conducted with youths (n = 435) and with adolescents/young adults (n = 316). Additionally, we tested formal models suggested for the BART that decompose observed behavior into a set of meaningful parameters. A simulation study with parameter recovery was conducted, and the data from the two studies were reanalyzed using the models. Most scores were reliable and differentially predictive of criterion variables and may be used in basic research. However, task specificity and the generally moderate validity do not warrant use of the experimental paradigm for diagnostic purposes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document