Sponsored by the HealthcareTrainingInstitute.org providing Quality Education since 1979
Add to Shopping Cart

Enhancing Your Therapy with Gestalt Approaches
6 CEUs Cultural Diversity & Ethical Boundaries: Freedom from Stereotypes

Section 27
A Century of Gestalt Psychology in Visual Perception

CEU Answer Booklet | Table of Contents | Gestalt
Counselor CEUs, Psychologist CEs, Social Worker CEUs, MFT CEUs


The Flip Book below is from The National Institute of Health 

Hint:
1. Use + and – at top of page to increase or decrease size
2. Click and drag on page to move text to be more visible , if needed
3. Click speaker at top of page to add or delete sound
4. If message below indicates "A plugin is needed to display this content." CLICK HERE
Questions? Email: [email protected]

- Wagemans, Johan; James H. Elder; Michael Kubovy; Stephen E. Palmer; Mary A. Peterson; Manish Singh; and Rüdiger von der Heydt, A Century of Gestalt Psychology in Visual Perception I. Perceptual Grouping and Figure-Ground Organization. National Institute of Health, November 2012, p1-89.


The article above contains foundational information. Articles below contain optional updates.

 
Others who bought this Gestalt Course
also bought…

Scroll DownScroll UpCourse Listing Bottom Cap

CEU Answer Booklet for this course | Gestalt
Forward to Section 28
Back to Section 26
Table of Contents
Top

The article above contains foundational information. Articles below contain optional updates.
Work and well-being in TGNC adults: The moderating effect of workplace protections. - September 13, 2018
The present study used a psychology of working theory (PWT) framework to test the direct and indirect relations of perceived social status and transgender and gender nonconforming (TGNC) marginalization (i.e., victimization, nonaffirmation of gender identity, negative expectations for the future) with work volition, overqualification, and vocational and emotional well-being outcomes (i.e., job satisfaction, meaningful work, satisfaction with life, depression) in a sample of 175 TGNC working adults. This study also tested the moderating effect of one form of structural marginalization (lack of legal protections from employment discrimination) on the overall pattern of results. Participants were recruited using online social media and discussion forums and completed the study survey online. For the full sample, perceived social status and nonaffirmation of gender identity were associated with vocational and emotional well-being outcomes through the mediating role of work volition, and for some paths, overqualification. Significant differences emerged in the overall pattern of results for those without protections, suggesting that protections from discrimination buffer the adverse links of some forms of TGNC marginalization with work volition and vocational outcomes. Implications of study findings for research, counseling, and advocacy are provided. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
The development and psychometric evaluation of the Trans Discrimination Scale: TDS-21. - July 23, 2018
[Correction Notice: An Erratum for this article was reported in Vol 66(1) of Journal of Counseling Psychology (see record 2018-66276-001). In the article “The development and psychometric evaluation of the Trans Discrimination Scale: TDS-21” by Laurel B. Watson, Luke R. Allen, Mirella J. Flores, Christine Serpe, and Michelle Farrell (Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2018, Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1037/cou0000301), there were two errors in the Methods section of the article. In Study 1, Participants paragraph of The development and psychometric evaluation of the Trans Discrimination Scale: TDS-21 for the Methods section, the gender listed at birth was incorrect in the following sentence, The majority of participants in this study identified as trans women and along a trans feminine spectrum, were assigned male at birth, White, had attained some college but no degree, and were employed full time. The correct gender assigned at birth was predominantly female. In addition, the gender coding procedures was incorrectly described. Specifically, those who identified as FAAB and AFAB were actually coded as trans men or along a transmasculine spectrum, whereas those who identified as MAAB and AMAB were coded as trans women and along a trans feminine perspective. In Study 3, Participants paragraph of The development and psychometric evaluation of the Trans Discrimination Scale: TDS-21 for the Methods section, the gender identity listed in the following sentence was incorrect, The majority of participants identified as trans women and along the trans feminine spectrum, were assigned female at birth, White, had attained some college but no degree, and were students. Rather, participants primarily identified as non-binary trans.] To date, researchers assessing the role of discrimination in trans peoples’ lives have relied upon measures that were developed and normed on LGB populations, culled specific items from large-scale survey data, or used more generalized measures of discrimination that do not specifically assess the unique forms of discrimination that trans people may encounter. Thus, the purpose of this three-part study was to develop and provide psychometric support for a measure of trans peoples’ discrimination. In Study 1, a five-factor model emerged, which included: Microaggressions and Harassment, Restricted Career and Work Opportunities, Maltreatment in Health Care Settings, Harassment by Law Enforcement, and Bullying and Harassment in Educational Settings. Internal consistency estimates for subscale and total scale scores ranged from acceptable to excellent. Results from Study 2 revealed that a bifactor model provided the best fit to the data, revealing that the scale is essentially unidimensional. In addition, convergent and concurrent validity was supported, demonstrating significant positive correlations with another measure of trans discrimination, internalized transphobia, nondisclosure, negative expectations for the future, psychological distress, and perceived stress. In Study 3, results revealed excellent test–retest reliability up to a three-week period. Collectively, results suggested that the Transgender Discrimination Scale-21 (TDS-21) is a psychometrically sound measure that may be used to advance research on the role of discrimination in trans peoples’ lives. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
“The Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Trans Discrimination Scale: TDS-21”: Correction to Watson et al. (2018). - January 03, 2019
Reports an error in "The Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Trans Discrimination Scale: TDS-21" by Laurel B. Watson, Luke R. Allen, Mirella J. Flores, Christine Serpe and Michelle Farrell (Journal of Counseling Psychology, Advanced Online Publication, Jul 23, 2018, np). In the article “The Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Trans Discrimination Scale: TDS-21” by Laurel B. Watson, Luke R. Allen, Mirella J. Flores, Christine Serpe, and Michelle Farrell (Journal of Counseling Psychology, 2018, Advance online publication. http://dx.doi.org/10 .1037/cou0000301), there were two errors in the Methods section of the article. In Study 1, Participants paragraph of The Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Trans Discrimination Scale: TDS-21 for the Methods section, the gender listed at birth was incorrect in the following sentence, The majority of participants in this study identified as trans women and along a trans feminine spectrum, were assigned male at birth, White, had attained some college but no degree, and were employed full time. The correct gender assigned at birth was predominantly female. In addition, the gender coding procedures was incorrectly described. Specifically, those who identified as FAAB and AFAB were actually coded as trans men or along a transmasculine spectrum, whereas those who identified as MAAB and AMAB were coded as trans women and along a trans feminine perspective. In Study 3, Participants paragraph of The Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Trans Discrimination Scale: TDS-21 for the Methods section, the gender identity listed in the following sentence was incorrect, The majority of participants identified as trans women and along the trans feminine spectrum, were assigned female at birth, White, had attained some college but no degree, and were students. Rather, participants primarily identified as non-binary trans. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2018-35350-001.) To date, researchers assessing the role of discrimination in trans peoples’ lives have relied upon measures that were developed and normed on LGB populations, culled specific items from large-scale survey data, or used more generalized measures of discrimination that do not specifically assess the unique forms of discrimination that trans people may encounter. Thus, the purpose of this three-part study was to develop and provide psychometric support for a measure of trans peoples’ discrimination. In Study 1, a five-factor model emerged, which included: Microaggressions and Harassment, Restricted Career and Work Opportunities, Maltreatment in Health Care Settings, Harassment by Law Enforcement, and Bullying and Harassment in Educational Settings. Internal consistency estimates for subscale and total scale scores ranged from acceptable to excellent. Results from Study 2 revealed that a bifactor model provided the best fit to the data, revealing that the scale is essentially unidimensional. In addition, convergent and concurrent validity was supported, demonstrating significant positive correlations with another measure of trans discrimination, internalized transphobia, nondisclosure, negative expectations for the future, psychological distress, and perceived stress. In Study 3, results revealed excellent test–retest reliability up to a three-week period. Collectively, results suggested that the Transgender Discrimination Scale-21 (TDS-21) is a psychometrically sound measure that may be used to advance research on the role of discrimination in trans peoples’ lives. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
Testing intersectionality of race/ethnicity × gender in a social–cognitive career theory model with science identity. - October 04, 2018
Using social–cognitive career theory, we identified the experiential sources of learning that contribute to research self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and science identity for culturally diverse undergraduate students in science, technology, engineering, and math (i.e., STEM) majors. We examined group differences by race/ethnicity and gender to investigate potential cultural variations in a model to explain students’ research career intentions. Using a sample of 688 undergraduate students, we ran a series of path models testing the relationships between the experiential sources, research self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and science identity to research career intentions. Findings were largely consistent with our hypotheses in that research self-efficacy and outcome expectancies were directly and positively associated with research career intentions and the associations of the experiential sources to intentions were mediated via self-efficacy. Science identity contributed significant though modest variance to research career intentions indirectly via its positive association with outcome expectations. Science identity also partially mediated the efficacy-outcome expectancies path. The experiential sources of learning were associated in expected directions to research self-efficacy with 3 of the sources emerging as significantly correlated with science identity. An unexpected direct relationship from vicarious learning to intentions was observed. In testing for group differences by race/ethnicity and gender in subsamples of Black/African American and Latino/a students, we found that the hypothesized model incorporating science identity was supported, and most paths did not vary significantly across four Race/Ethnicity × Gender groups, except for 3 paths. Research and practice implications of the findings for supporting research career intentions of culturally diverse undergraduate students are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
Construction and validation of the Multicultural Orientation Inventory—Group Version. - July 12, 2018
Given the continued racial/ethnic diversification of the United States, it is not uncommon for therapy groups to consist of members with diverse racial/ethnic backgrounds and various cultural identities. Scholars have underscored how this cultural diversity can directly impact many processes and outcomes of group-based interventions (Chen, Kakkad, & Balzano, 2008). However, there is presently a paucity of empirical research testing the relationship between cultural processes of therapy groups and members’ outcomes. Moreover, no psychometrically sound measure of the cultural process that unfolds in group therapy currently exists. As such, this study sought to adapt the Multicultural Orientation Inventory to develop and validate the Multicultural Orientation Inventory—Group Version (MCO-G), a measure assessing the cultural humility, cultural comfort, and cultural missed opportunities in therapy groups. Data for this validation study consisted of 208 members of 49 therapy groups across 10 university counseling centers. Confirmatory factor analyses supported a 3-factor structure of the MCO-G Inventory, wherein the 3 factors corresponded with the underlying constructs of cultural humility, cultural comfort, and cultural missed opportunities. This study provides initial evidence for the estimated internal and convergent validity of the MCO-G, as measured by clients’ perceptions of a higher-order group therapeutic factor and improvement in therapy. Results provide initial support for the psychometric properties of the MCO-G. Moreover, groups’ cultural humility and cultural missed opportunities were related to members’ improvement in therapy. Clinical implications and future research are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)

CEU Continuing Education for
Social Work CEUs, Psychology CEUs, Counselor CEUs, MFT CEUs

 


OnlineCEUcredit.com Login


Forget your Password Reset it!