Wednesday, August 6, 2014

Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales and SBI Scales for Early Childhood

Source - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanford%E2%80%93Binet_Intelligence_Scales

The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale is an individually administered intelligence test that was revised from the original Binet-Simon Scale by Lewis M. Terman, a psychologist at Stanford University. The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale is now in its Fifth Edition. It is a cognitive ability andintelligence test that is used to diagnose developmental or intellectual deficiencies in young children. The test measures five weighted factors and consists of both verbal and nonverbal subtests. The five factors being tested are knowledge, quantitative reasoning, visual-spatial processing, working memory, and fluid reasoning.
The development of the Stanford–Binet Intelligence Scales initiated the modern field of intelligence testing and was one of the first examples of an adaptive test. The test originated in France, then was revised in the United States. It was initially created by the French psychologist Alfred Binet, who---following the introduction of a law mandating universal education by the French government---undertook to develop a method of identifying "slow" children for their placement in special education programs (rather than removing them to asylums as "sick").[1] As Binet indicated, case studies might be more detailed and helpful, but the time required to test many people would be excessive. In 1916, at Stanford University, the psychologist Lewis Terman released a revised examination which became known as the "Stanford–Binet test".

The Modern Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale[edit]

Just as it was used when Binet first developed the IQ test, the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Fifth Edition (SB5) is still rooted in the schooling process to assess intelligence. It continuously and efficiently assesses all levels of ability in individuals with a broader range in age. It is also capable of measuring multiple dimensions of abilities (Ruf, 2003).
The SB5 can be administered to individuals two through eighty-five plus years of age. There are ten subsets included in this revision including both verbal and nonverbal domains. Five factors are also incorporated in this scale, which are directly related to Cattell-Horn-Carroll (CHC) hierarchical model of cognitive abilities. These factors include fluid reasoning, knowledge, quantitative reasoning, visual-spatial processing, and working memory (Bain & Allin, 2005). Many of the familiar picture absurdities, vocabulary, memory for sentences, and verbal absurdities still remain from the previous editions (Janzen, Obrzut, & Marusiak, 2003) however with more modern artwork and item content for the revised fifth edition.
For every verbal subtest that is used there is a nonverbal counterpart across all factors. These nonverbal tasks consist of making movement responses such as pointing or assembling manipulatives (Bain & Allin, 2005). These counterparts have been included in order to address the language-reduced assessments in multicultural societies. Depending on age and ability, administration can range from fifteen minutes to an hour and fifteen minutes.
The fifth edition incorporated a new scoring system, which can provide a wide range of information such as four intelligence score composites, five factor indices, and ten subtest scores. Additional scoring information includes percentile ranks, age equivalents, and a change-sensitive score (Janzen, Obrzut, & Marusiak, 2003). Extended IQ scores and gifted composite scores are available with the SB5 in order to optimize the assessment for gifted programs (Ruf, 2003). In order to reduce errors and increase diagnostic precision, scores are obtained electronically through the use of computers now.
The standardization sample for the SB5 included 4,800 participants varying in age, sex, race/ethnicity, geographic region, and socioeconomic level (Bain & Allin, 2005).

Reliability of the Modern Scale[edit]

Several reliability tests have been performed on the SB5 including split-half reliability, standard error of measurement, plotting of test information curves, test-retest stability, and inter-scorer agreement. On average, the IQ scores for this scale have been found to be quite stable across time (Janzen, Obrzut, & Marusiak, 2003). Internal consistency was tested by split-half reliability and was reported to be substantial and comparable to other cognitive batteries (Bain & Allin, 2005). The median interscorer correlation was found to be .90 on average (Janzen, Obrzut, & Marusiak, 2003). The SB5 has also been found to have great precision at advanced levels of performance meaning that the test is especially useful in testing children for giftedness (Bain & Allin, 2005). There have only been a small amount of practice effects and familiarity of testing procedures with retest reliability, however, these have proven to be insignificant. Readministration of the SB5 can occur in a six-month interval rather than one year due to the small mean differences in reliability (Bain & Allin, 2005).

Validity of the Modern Scale[edit]

Content validity has been found based on the professional judgments Roid received concerning fairness of items and item content as well as items concerning the assessment of giftedness (Bain & Allin, 2005). With an examination of age trends, construct validity was supported along with empirical justification of a more substantial gloading for the SB5 compared to previous editions. The potential for a variety of comparisons, especially for within or across factors and verbal/nonverbal domains, has been appreciated with the scores received from the SB5 (Bain & Allin, 2005).

Score classification[edit]

Main article: IQ classification
The test publisher includes suggested score classifications in the test manual.
Stanford-Binet Fifth Edition (SB5) classification[2]
IQ Range ("deviation IQ")IQ Classification
145–160Very gifted or highly advanced
130–144Gifted or very advanced
120–129Superior
110–119High average
90–109Average
80–89Low average
70–79Borderline impaired or delayed
55–69Mildly impaired or delayed
40–54Moderately impaired or delayed
The classifications of scores used in the Fifth Edition differ from those used in earlier versions of the test.


Below text came from the publisher of the modern day version of the test.

============================================================
Source - http://riverpub.com/products/sb5/details.html 
Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales (SB5), Fifth Edition
Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales
Author:
Gale H. Roid
Type:Cognitive ability assessment
Purpose:Individually administered assessment of intelligence and cognitive abilities
Measures:Fluid Reasoning, Knowledge, Quantitative Reasoning, Visual-Spatial Processing, Working Memory
Ages:2 to 85+ years
Times:Approximately 5 minutes per subtest
Scoring:SB5 ScoringPro Software
Restriction Level:HighExaminer Qualifications



Details

General Information
The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition(SB5) is a contemporary assessment with a rich tradition, which began in 1916 when Lewis Terman completed his American revision of the Binet-Simon Scale (1905, 1908). Through various editions, this assessment has become widely known and is acknowledged as the standard for intelligence measurement.
As a battery of cognitive tests, the SB5 advances the assessment of strengths and weaknesses in the cognitive processes of students who may be evaluated for learning disabilities. The SB5 supports early prediction of emerging learning disabilities in children as young as four years old. Author research has identified special predictive composite scores for identifying both Reading and Math disabilities. Information on these composites is available in the Interpretive Manual. As a battery of cognitive tests, the SB5 advances the assessment of strengths and weaknesses in the cognitive processes of students who may be evaluated for learning disabilities. The SB5 supports early prediction of emerging learning disabilities in children as young as four years old. Author research has identified special predictive composite scores for identifying both Reading and Math disabilities. Information on these composites is available in the Interpretive Manual
The SB5 provides comprehensive coverage of five factors of cognitive ability:
  • Fluid Reasoning
  • Knowledge
  • Quantitative Reasoning
  • Visual-Spatial Processing
  • Working Memory

Uses
The SB5 helps to diagnose a wide variety of developmental disabilities and exceptionalities and may also be useful in:
  • Clinical and neuropsychological assessment
  • Early childhood assessment
  • Psychoeducational evaluations for special education placements
  • Adult social security and workers? compensation evaluations
  • Providing information for interventions such as IFSPs, IEPs, career assessment, industrial selection, and adult neuropsychological treatment
  • Forensic contexts
  • Research on abilities and aptitudes

Administration
Testing begins in Item Book 1 with the routing subtests. The start points for two routing subtests in Item Book 1 are determined by age or estimated ability level. Nonverbal Fluid Reasoning routes to the appropriate difficulty level in Item Book 2 (Nonverbal), while Verbal Knowledge does so for Item Book 3 (Verbal). The remaining eight subtests (four nonverbal and four verbal) are then measured in Item Books 2 and 3.

Scoring
The SB5 can be scored by hand or scored with the SB5 ScoringProScoringPro is a Windows®-based software program that provides consistency in raw score conversion, an extended score report, a graphical report, and a brief, narrative summary report with guidelines and suggestions based on well-established principles of assessment. The report can be exported to a word-processing file for editing as necessary.

Interpretation
At the most granular level of the norm-referenced scores are the 10 subtest scores (scaled scores have a mean of 10, SD of 3, score range 1?19). These subtest scores combine to form four types of composite scores: factor index, domain, abbreviated, and full scale (each with scaled score means of 100, SD of 15, score range 40?160). Two subtests (one verbal, the other its nonverbal complement) combine to form each factor index. There are two domain scales: Nonverbal IQ (NVIQ) (combines the five nonverbal subtests) and Verbal IQ (VIQ) (combines the five verbal subtests). Two routing subtests combine to form the Abbreviated Battery IQ (ABIQ). Finally, the Full Scale IQ (FSIQ) combines all 10 subtests. The Change-Sensitive Scores (CSS) use item response theory scaling to convert the raw score totals on the composite scales described above into criterion-referenced levels of ability. These scales, as with the norm-referenced scores, have excellent measurement properties. Because the CSSs reference absolute levels of ability, they provide a way to compare changes in an individual?s scores over time.

Average scores range from the 2-year-old level (about 430) to the adult level (about 520). All of the SB5 items have been calibrated to this scale, and the difficulty of each item has a location along that scale. The scores are particularly useful for the evaluation of extreme performance levels. The SB5 also offers age-equivalent scores derived from CSSs, along with a CSS-based abbreviated battery score making use of raw scores from the Nonverbal Reasoning and Verbal Knowledge subtests. Finally, the Interpretive Manual describes a hand scoring procedure for deriving an Extended IQ (EXIQ) that allows for scores between both 10?39 and 161?225.

Technical Information
Normative data for the SB5 were gathered from 4,800 individuals between the ages of 2 and 85+ years. The normative sample closely matches the 2000 U.S. Census. Bias reviews were conducted on all items for the following variables: gender, ethnicity, culture, religion, region, and socioeconomic status. Additionally, the SB5 was co-normed with the Bender® Visual-Motor Gestalt Test, Second Edition (page 125), and the Test Observation Form (page 142). Reliabilities for the SB5 are very high. For the FSIQ, NVIQ, and VIQ, reliabilities range from .95 to .98 (average internal consistency composite reliability, across all age groups). Reliabilities for the Factor Indexes range from .90 to .92. For the 10 subtests, reliabilities range from .84 to .89. Concurrent and criterion validity data were obtained using the SB-IV,SB-LM, WJ III®, UNIT?, Bender-Gestalt II, WPPSI-R®,WAIS®-III, WIAT®-II, and WISC-III®.


===============
Source - http://riverpub.com/products/earlySB5/details.html
Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales for Early Childhood (Early SB5)
Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales for Early Childhood
Author:
Gale H. Roid
Type:Cognitive ability assessment for early childhood
Purpose:Individually administered assessment of intelligence and cognitive abilities
Measures:Fluid Reasoning, Knowledge, Quantitative Reasoning, Visual-Spatial Processing, Working Memory
Restriction Level:High
Ages:2 to 7-3 years (2 to 5-11 years for full battery; 6 to 7-3 years for abbreviated battery)
Times:Full Battery: 30-50 minutes; Abbreviated Battery: 15-20 minutes
Scoring:SB5 ScoringPro



THIS TEST INCLUDES CERTAIN MANIPULATIVES WITH SMALL PARTS THAT MAY PRESENT A CHOKING HAZARD FOR CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF EIGHT. DO NOT ALLOW THE CHILD TO PLACE ANY MANIPULATIVE IN THEIR MOUTH. A TRAINED ADULT EXAMINER MUST ALWAYS CLOSELY SUPERVISE THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE TEST AND USE OF MANIPULATIVES BY CHILDREN.


Details
Summary
Valid and reliable assessment of intellectual functioning is an important need in many assessment practices, and the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales for Early Childhood, Fifth Edition (Early SB5) provides a psychometrically superior, accessible, and cost-effective test of intelligence for use with young children.  The Early SB5 is a specialized version of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales, Fifth Edition (SB5) for use with young children ages 2.0 through 7.3 years.
 TOP
Administration
Administration time varies.  The estimated time is 30-50 minutes for the full battery and 15-20 minutes for the abbreviated battery.
The Early SB5, like the SB5, has 10 subtests.  Two routing subtests (Nonverbal Fluid Reasoning and Verbal Knowledge) cover the age range 2.0 through 7.3, while the remaining eight subtests offer scores in the preschool range, from 2.0 through 5.11.  As with the SB5, testing begins in Item Book 1 with the two routing subtests, which are retained in their entirety.  However, all remaining subtests into which the first two subtests route are contained in Item Book 2, with only the most difficult levels of items dropping across those subtests.  Dropping these more difficult items will generally have no impact on the scores of the young children typically assessed with the Early SB5.  However, because of the changes, assessment for intellectual giftedness would require use of only the two routing subtests or, better yet, the complete SB5.
 TOP
Technical Qualities
Standardization
The Early SB5 is a specialized version of the SB5, and thus shares its technical qualities.  A normative sample of 1,800 individuals was used in the age range addressed by the Early SB5 (ages 20. through 7).  The normative sample closely matches the 2000 U.S. Census (education level based on 1999 data). Bias reviews were conducted on all items for the following variables: gender, ethnicity, culture, religion, region, and socioeconomic status.  The Early SB5 was co-normed with the Bender® Visual-Motor Gestalt Test, Second Edition (beginning at age 4) and theeTest Observation Form (beginning at age 2).
Reliability and Validity
Reliabilities for the Early SB5 are very high for scores across its age range: FSIQ (.97-.98), NVIQ and VIQ (.94.96), factor indexes (.90-.92), and subtests (.81-.92).  Concurrent and criterion validity data were obtained using the SB IV, SM L-M, WJIII®, UNIT, Bender®-Gestalt II, WPPSI-R®, WAIT®-II, and WISC-III®.
Resources
Use of the Test Observation Checklist by Glen P. Alyward and Andrew D. Carson



Tuesday, August 5, 2014

Revisiting the Code of Ethics for Philippine Psychologists




As posted before, PRC Board of Psychology Chair Dr. Miriam P. Cue that the Code of Ethics for Philippine Psychologist we are posting here the text of the Code without the text of the Universal Declaration of the Ethical Principles for Psychologists which we posted previously.

In the TOS both the following subjects touches on ethical considerations, standards and principles: 

Psychological Assessment
Apply ethical considerations and standards in the various dimensions of psychological assessment.

Abnormal Psychology
Apply appropriate ethical principles and standards in diagnosing cases of abnormal behavior.

Attention to the following sections of the Code of Ethics should be considered:


I. RESOLVING ETHICAL ISSUES
A. Misuse of Psychologist’s Works
B. Conflicts between Ethics and Law, Regulations or other Governing legal Authority
C. Conflicts between Ethics and Organizational Demands
D. Informal Resolution of Ethical Violations
E. Reporting Ethical Violations
F. Cooperating with Ethics Committee
G. Improper Complaints
H. Unfair Discrimination Against Complainants and Respondents

III. HUMAN RELATIONS
A. Unfair Discrimination
B. Sexual Harassment
C. Other Harassment
D. Avoiding Harm
E. Multiple Relationships
F. Conflict of Interest
G. Third-Party Requests for Services
H. Exploitative Relationships
I. Cooperation with Other Professionals
J. Informed Consent
K. Psychological Services Delivered To or Through Organizations
L. Interruption of Psychological Services

IV. CONFIDENTIALITY
A. Maintaining Confidentiality
B. Limitations of Confidentiality
C. Recording
D. Minimizing Invasions of Privacy
E. Disclosures
F. Consultation
G. Use of Confidential Information for Other Purposes

VII. ASSESSMENT
A. Bases for Assessment
B. Informed Consent in Assessment
C. Assessment Tools
D. Obsolete and Outdated Test Results
E. Interpreting Assessment Results
F. Release of Test Data
G. Explaining Assessment Results
H. Test Security
J. Test Construction

VIII. THERAPY
A. Confidentiality
B. Informed Consent
C. Client’s Wellbeing
D. Relationships
E. Record Keeping
F. Competent Practice
G. Working with Young People
H. Referrals
I. Interruption
J. Termination



Main Content

A. GENERAL ETHICAL STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES
I. RESOLVING ETHICAL ISSUES
II. COMPETENCIES
III. HUMAN RELATIONS
IV. CONFIDENTIALITY
V. ADVERTISEMENTS AND PUBLIC STATEMENTS
VI. RECORDS AND FEES
B. ETHICAL STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES IN SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS
VII. ASSESSMENT
VIII. THERAPY
IX. EDUCATION AND TRAINING
X. RESEARCH


Specific Content and Outline

GENERAL ETHICAL STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES

I. RESOLVING ETHICAL ISSUES
A. Misuse of Psychologist’s Works
B. Conflicts between Ethics and Law, Regulations or other Governing legal Authority
C. Conflicts between Ethics and Organizational Demands
D. Informal Resolution of Ethical Violations
E. Reporting Ethical Violations
F. Cooperating with Ethics Committee
G. Improper Complaints
H. Unfair Discrimination Against Complainants and Respondents

II. COMPETENCIES
A. Boundaries of Competence
B. Providing Services in Emergencies
C. Maintaining Competence
D. Bases for Scientific and Professional Judgments
E. Delegation of Work to Others
F. Personal Problems and Conflicts

III. HUMAN RELATIONS
A. Unfair Discrimination
B. Sexual Harassment
C. Other Harassment
D. Avoiding Harm
E. Multiple Relationships
F. Conflict of Interest
G. Third-Party Requests for Services
H. Exploitative Relationships
I. Cooperation with Other Professionals
J. Informed Consent
K. Psychological Services Delivered To or Through Organizations
L. Interruption of Psychological Services

IV. CONFIDENTIALITY
A. Maintaining Confidentiality
B. Limitations of Confidentiality
C. Recording
D. Minimizing Invasions of Privacy
E. Disclosures
F. Consultation
G. Use of Confidential Information for Other Purposes

V. ADVERTISEMENTS AND PUBLIC STATEMENTS
A. Avoidance of False or Deceptive Statements
B. Public Statements
C. Workshops, Seminars and Non-Degree-Granting Educational Programs
D. Media Presentations
E. Testimonials

VI. RECORDS AND FEES
A. Documentation and Maintenance of Records
B. Confidentiality of Records
C. Withholding Client Records
D. Fees and financial arrangements


ETHICAL STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES IN SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS

VII. ASSESSMENT
A. Bases for Assessment
B. Informed Consent in Assessment
C. Assessment Tools
D. Obsolete and Outdated Test Results
E. Interpreting Assessment Results
F. Release of Test Data
G. Explaining Assessment Results
H. Test Security
J. Test Construction

VIII. THERAPY
A. Confidentiality
B. Informed Consent
C. Client’s Wellbeing
D. Relationships
E. Record Keeping
F. Competent Practice
G. Working with Young People
H. Referrals
I. Interruption
J. Termination

IX. EDUCATION AND TRAINING
A. Design of Education and Training Programs
B. Descriptions of Education and Training Programs
C. Accuracy in Teaching
D. Student Disclosure of Personal Information
E. Mandatory Individual or Group Therapy
F. Assessing Student and Supervisee Performance
G. Sexual Relationships with Students and Supervisees

X. RESEARCH
A. Rights and Dignity of Participants
B. Informed Consent to Research
C. Informed Consent for Recording Voices and Images in Research
D. Research Participation of Client, Students and Subordinates
E. Dispensing with Informed Consent for Research
F. Offering Inducements for Research Participation
G. Deception in Research
H. Debriefing
I. Observational Research
J. Humane Care and Use of Animals in Research
K. Reporting Research Results
L. Plagiarism
M. Publication Credit
N. Duplicate Publication of Data
O. Sharing Research Data for Verification
P. Reviewers
Q. Limitations of the Study

================

CODE OF ETHICS FOR PHILIPPINE PSYCHOLOGISTS
PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES
SCIENTIFIC AND PROFESSIONAL ETHICS COMMITTEE
(2008-2009)

PREFACE
The Psychological Association of the Philippines (PAP) adopted a Code of Ethics for Clinical
Psychologists in the 1980s, and this Code has remained unchanged since then. In 2007, the
Board of Directors of the PAP resolved to constitute a committee to revise the code of ethics,
with the goal of updating the code and making it more inclusive and applicable to all
psychologists.

In 2008, the PAP Board of Directors appointed immediate past president, Dr. Allan B. I.
Bernardo as Chair of the Scientific and Professional Ethics Committee, in compliance with the
PAP Charter. The PAP Board also appointed Dr. Ma. Lourdes A. Carandang, Dr. Natividad A.
Dayan, Dr. Rosalito De Guzman, and Ms. Anna Guerrero as members of this committee.
Given a clear mandate from the PAP Board, the committee set out to accomplish its task with the
assistance of three graduate assistants: Mary Libertine Amor, Mary Grace M. Serranilla, and
Sheri Anne C. Zerna. The committee chair and the assistants undertook the preparatory work
which involved studying the old Code, and several documents related to ethical standards for
psychologists (e.g., the Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists, the ethics
codes of the American Psychological Association, the British Psychological Society, the
Canadian Psychological Society, among others).

The complete committee conducted a day-long workshop on February 27, 2009 to finalize the
proposed Code of Ethics for Philippine Psychologists. The committee was strongly influenced by
existing codes from other countries (which is reflected in the scope and structure of the Code),
but worked hard to ensure that the code was contextualized with the realities and constraints
within the professional environments that Philippine psychologists do their work.
The first draft of this Code was presented to the PAP Board of Directors on April 18, 2009. This
draft was further revised (with the editorial assistance of Reginal Bueno), and finally ratified by
the PAP Board of Directors on July 24, 2009.

The PAP shall take steps to ensure that all members of the PAP and the larger community of
Philippine psychologists will know, understand, and be properly guided by this Code. As such
the PAP will encourage continuous discussions on the Code and any of its specific provisions,
with the goal of making the Code a priority concern for all Philippine psychologists.

Mindful of the fact that the Code can never complete address all the possible emergent ethical
concerns, the PAP encourages all its members to study the code and make suggestions for its
continuous improvement. Members who have suggestions for new provisions or improvements
and/or amendments to the old provisions should submit these in writing, with supporting
arguments and explanations, to the PAP Board. The Board will regularly discuss such
suggestions and adopt amendments to the Code.

Finally, any person who has a strong basis for asserting that a member of the PAP, especially a
Certified Psychology Specialist of the PAP, has violated any provision of this Code should
inform the PAP in writing, and provide supporting evidence for the assertion. This information
should be addressed to the PAP President and Board of Directors (ATTN: Scientific and
Professional Ethics Committee). Upon receipt of such information, the PAP shall take steps to
investigate, make appropriate actions, and place proper sanctions, if necessary.

DECLARATION OF PRINCIPLES

Psychologists in the Philippines adhere to the following Universal Declaration of Ethical
Principles for Psychologists that was adopted unanimously by the General Assembly of the
International Union of Psychological Science in Berlin on July 22, 2008 and by the Board of
Directors of the International Association of Applied Psychology in Berlin on July 26, 2008.

Refer to this link for the text - http://psychometricpinas.blogspot.com/2014/08/universal-declaration-of-ethical.html

GENERAL ETHICAL STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES

We subscribe to the following general ethical standards and procedures as we conduct ourselves
in the various aspects of our professional and scholarly activities as psychologists. These general
standards and procedures refer to:

I. how we resolve ethical issues in our professional lives and communities;
II. how we adhere to the highest standards of professional competence;
III. how we respect for the rights and dignity of our clients, our peers, our students, and
our other stakeholders in the profession and scientific discipline;
IV. how we maintain confidentiality in the important aspects of our professional and
scholarly functions;
V. how we ensure truthfulness and accuracy in all our public statement; and
VI. how we observe professionalism in our records and fees.

I. RESOLVING ETHICAL ISSUES

A. Misuse of Psychologist’s Works
In instances where misuse or misrepresentation of our work comes to our attention, we take
appropriate and reasonable steps to correct or minimize effects of such misuse or
misrepresentation.

B. Conflicts between Ethics and Law, Regulations or other Governing legal Authority
In instances where our code of ethics conflicts with the law, regulations or governing legal
authority, our first step is to take appropriate actions to resolve the conflicts while being
committed to our code of ethics. However, if the conflicts cannot be resolved by such means,
we adhere to the law, regulations or governing legal authority.

C. Conflicts between Ethics and Organizational Demands
In instances where our code of ethics conflicts with organizational demands, we make our
code of ethics known to the organization. We also declare our commitment and adherence to
this code when resolving the conflicts.

D. Informal Resolution of Ethical Violations
When we become aware that another psychologist violated our code of ethics, we may
resolve the issue by bringing it to the attention of the psychologist. We do so if informal
resolution is sufficient and if the intervention does not violate confidentiality rights.

E. Reporting Ethical Violations
1. If there is likely to have substantial harm to a person or organization, we take further
action to report violation of the code of ethics to appropriate institutional authorities.
2. However, this does not apply when an intervention would violate confidentiality rights or
when we are called to review the work of another psychologist whose professional
conduct is in question.

F. Cooperating with Ethics Committee
We cooperate with the ethics investigation, proceedings and requirements of any
psychological association we belong to.

G. Improper Complaints
We refrain from filing ethical complaints with reckless disregard or willful ignorance of facts
that would disprove allegations of ethical violations. We also refrain from filing complaints
without supporting factual evidence.

H. Unfair Discrimination Against Complainants and Respondents
1. We do not discriminate against complainants and respondents of ethical complaints by
denying them employment, advancement, admissions to academic, tenure or promotion.
2. This does not rule out taking appropriate actions based on outcomes of proceedings.

II. COMPETENCIES

A. Boundaries of Competence
1. We shall provide services, teach, and conduct research with persons, populations in areas
only within the boundaries of our competence, based on our education, training,
supervised internship, consultation, thorough study, or professional experience.
2. We shall make appropriate referrals, except as provided in Standard A.2, Providing
Services in Emergencies, where our existing competencies are not sufficient to ensure
effective implementation or provision of our services.
3. When we plan to provide services, teach, or conduct research involving populations,
areas, techniques, or technologies that are new to us and/or are beyond our existing
competence, we must undertake relevant education, training, supervised experience,
consultation, or thorough study.

4. So as not to deprive individuals or groups of necessary services, which we do not have
existing competence, we may provide the service, as long as:
a. we have closely related prior training or experience, and
b. we make a reasonable effort to obtain the competence required by undergoing
relevant research, training, consultation, or thorough study.

5. In those emerging areas in which generally recognized standards for preparatory training
do not yet exist, but in which we are required or requested to make available our services,
we shall take reasonable steps to ensure the competence of our work and to protect our
clients/patients, students, supervisees, research participants, organizational clients, and
others from harm.
6. We shall be reasonably familiar with the relevant judicial or administrative rules when
assuming forensic roles.

B. Providing Services in Emergencies
We shall make available our services in emergency situations to individuals for whom the
necessary mental health services are not available even if we lack the training appropriate to the
case to ensure these individuals are not deprived of the emergency services they require at that
time. However, we shall immediately discontinue said services as soon as the emergency has
ended, and ensure that appropriate competent services are made available.

C. Maintaining Competence
We shall undertake continuing education and training to ensure our services continue to be
relevant and applicable.

D. Bases for Scientific and Professional Judgments
We shall base our work upon established scientific and professional knowledge of the discipline.
(See also Standards II.A (e), Boundaries of Competence; VIII.B.(a), Informed Consent to
Therapy; V.A, Avoiding of False Deceptive Statements; V.C, Workshops, Seminars, and Non-
Degree-Granting Educational Programs; VII. E, Interpreting Assessment Results; VII.G,
Explaining Assessment Results; VIII.F, Competent Practice; IX.C, Accuracy in Teaching)

E. Delegation of Work to Others
In cases where we shall have to delegate work to employees, supervisees, or research or teaching
assistants or when using the services of others, such as interpreters, we shall take reasonable steps
to:
1. Avoid delegating such work to persons who have a multiple relationship with those being
served that would likely lead to exploitation or loss of objectivity;
2. Authorize only those responsibilities that such persons can be expected to perform
competently on the basis of their education, training, or experience, either independently
or with the level of supervision being provided; and
3. See that such persons perform these services competently.
(See also Standards II.B, Providing Services in Emergencies; III.E, Multiple Relationships; IV.A,,
Maintaining Confidentiality; VII.A, Bases for Assessments; , VII.C, Use of Assessment Tools;
VII.B, Informed Consent in Assessments; VII.I, Assessment by Unqualified Persons; and X.F,
Offering Inducements for Research Participation)

F. Personal Problems and Conflicts
1. We shall refrain from initiating an activity when we know or anticipate that there is a
substantial likelihood that our personal problems will prevent us performing work-related
activities in a competent manner.
2. When we shall become aware of personal problems that may interfere with performing
work-related duties adequately, we shall take appropriate measures, such as obtaining
professional consultation or assistance, and determine whether we should limit, suspend,
or terminate these work-related duties. (See also Standard 10.10, Terminating Therapy.)

III. HUMAN RELATIONS

A. Unfair Discrimination
In our work-related activities, we shall not discriminate against persons based on age, gender,
gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability,
socioeconomic status, or any basis proscribed by law.

B. Sexual Harassment
We do not engage in sexual harassment as defined in the Philippine Anti-Sexual Harassment
Act (RA No. 7877).

C. Other Harassment
We shall not knowingly harass or demean persons with whom we interact in our work on the
bases of those persons’ age, sex, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin,
religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, or socioeconomic status.

D. Avoiding Harm
We shall take reasonable steps to avoid harming our clients/patients, students, supervisees,
research participants, organizational clients, and others with whom we work, and to minimize
harm where it is foreseeable but unavoidable.

E. Multiple Relationships
1. We shall refrain from entering into a multiple relationship if the multiple relationships
could reasonably be expected to impair our objectivity, competence, or effectiveness in
performing our functions as psychologists, or otherwise risks exploitation or harm to the
person with whom our professional relationship exists

The multiple relationship occurs when a psychologist is in a professional role with a
person and at the same time (1) is in another role with the same person or (2) is in a
relationship with a person closely associated with or related to the person with whom the
psychologist has the professional relationship or (3) promises to enter into a future
relationship with that client/patient or a person closely associated with or related to that
client/patient.

If however, we shall find that, due to unforeseen factors, a potentially harmful multiple
relationship has arisen, we shall take reasonable steps to resolve it with regard for the best
interests of the affected person and maximum compliance with the Ethics Code.

2. When we shall be required by law, institutional policy, or extraordinary circumstances to
serve in more than one role in judicial or administrative proceedings, at the outset we
shall endeavor to inform the authorities about our code of ethics, to clarify role
expectations and extent of confidentiality and thereafter as changes occur. (See also
Standards III.D, Avoiding Harm, and III.G, Third-Party Requests for Services.)

F. Conflict of Interest

We shall refrain from taking on a professional role when personal, scientific, professional,
legal, financial, or other interests or relationship could reasonably be expected to (1) impair
our objectivity, competence, or effectiveness in performing our functions as psychologists, or
(2) expose the person or organization with whom our professional relationship exists to harm
or to exploitation.

G. Third-Party Requests for Services

When we agree to provide services to a person or entity at the request of a third party, we
shall attempt to clarify at the outset of the service the nature of the relationship with all
individuals or organizations involved. This clarification includes our expected role (e.g.,
therapist, consultant, diagnostician, or expert witness), an identification of who is the client,
the probable uses of the services provided or the information obtained, and the fact that there
may be limits to confidentiality. (See also Standards II.B, Providing Services in Emergencies;
III.E, Multiple Relationships; IV.B, Limitations of Confidentiality; IV.G, Use of Confidential
Information for Other Purposes; VII.B (c), Informed Consent in Assessment; VII.G,
Explaining Assessment Results; VIII.A,, Confidentiality; X.O, Sharing Research Data for
Verification; and X.P, Reviewers)

H. Exploitative Relationships

We shall not exploit persons over whom we have supervisory, evaluative, or other authority
such as clients/patients, students, supervisees, research participants, and employees. (See also
Standards III.E, Multiple Relationships; VI.D, Fees and Financial Arrangements; ___, Barter
with Clients/Patients; IX.G, Sexual Relationships With Students and Supervisees;, Sexual
Intimacies With Current Therapy Clients/Patients; VIII.D (e), Sexual Intimacies with
Relatives or Significant Others of Current Therapy Clients/Patients; VIII.D (f), Therapy With
Former Sexual Partners; and VIII.D (f), Sexual Intimacies With Former Therapy
Clients/Patients.)

I. Cooperation with Other Professionals
Whenever necessary and professionally appropriate, we shall cooperate with other
professionals in order to serve our clients/patients effectively and appropriately. (See also
Standard 4.05, Disclosures.)

J. Informed Consent

1. When conducting research or providing assessment, therapy, counseling, or consulting
services in person or via electronic transmission or other forms of communication, we
shall obtain the informed consent of the individual or individuals using language that is
reasonably understandable to that person or persons except when conducting such
activities without consent is mandated by law or governmental regulation or as other
provided in this Ethics Code. (See also Standards 8.02, Informed Consent to Research;
9:03, Informed Consent in Assessments; and 10.01, Informed Consent to Therapy.)
2. For persons who are legally incapable of giving informed consent, we shall nevertheless
(a) provide an appropriate explanation, (b) seek the individual’s assent, (c) consider such
persons’ preferences and best interests, and (d) obtain appropriate permission from a
legally authorized person, if such substitute consent is permitted or required by law.
When consent by a legally authorized person is not permitted or required by law, we shall
take reasonable steps to protect the individual’s rights and welfare.
3. When psychological services are court ordered or otherwise mandated, we shall inform
the individual of the nature of the anticipated services, including whether the services are
court ordered or mandated and any limits of confidentiality, before proceeding.
4. We shall appropriately document written or oral consent, permission, and assent. (See
also Standards 8.02, Informed Consent to Research; 9.03, Informed Consent in
Assessments; and 10.01, Informed Consent to Therapy.)

K. Psychological Services Delivered To or Through Organizations

1. When delivering services to or through organizations, we shall provide information
beforehand to clients and when appropriate, to those directly affected by the services
about (1) the nature and objectives of the services, (2) the intended recipients, (3) which
of the individuals are clients, (4) the relationship we will have with each person and the
organization, (5) the probable uses of the services provided and information obtained, (6)
who will have access to the information, and (7) limits of confidentiality. As soon as
feasible, we shall provide information about the results of the conclusions of such
services to appropriate persons.

2. In the event that we are precluded by law or by organizational rules from providing such
information to particular individuals or groups, we shall so inform those individuals or
groups at the outset of the service.

L. Interruption of Psychological Services
Unless otherwise covered by contract, we shall make reasonable efforts to plan for facilitating
services in the event that psychological services are interrupted by factors such as illness,
death, unavailability, relocation, or retirement or by the client’s/patient’s relocation or
financial limitations. [See also Standards 6.02(c), Maintenance, Dissemination, and Disposal
of Confidential Records of Professional and Scientific Work.]

IV. CONFIDENTIALITY

A. Maintaining Confidentiality
It is our duty to safeguard any information divulged by our clients, regardless of the medium
where it was stored. It is also our duty to make sure that this information is secured and is not
placed in areas, spaces or computers easily accessible to other unqualified persons.

B. Limitations of Confidentiality
1. It is our duty to discuss the limitations of confidentiality to our clients, may it be due to
regulated laws, institutional rules, or professional or scientific relationship. In cases
where the client is a minor or is legally incapable of giving informed consent, the primary
guardian or legal representative should be informed about the limitations of
confidentiality.
2. Before the actual interview, session, or any other related psychological activities, we
explain explicitly to the client all anticipated uses of the information they will disclose.
3. We may release information to appropriate individuals or authorities only after careful
deliberation or when there is imminent danger to the individual and community. In court
cases, information should be limited only to those pertinent to the legitimate request of
the court.
4. If the psychological services, products, or information is coursed through an electronic
transmission, it is our duty to inform the clients of risks to privacy.

C. Recording
It is our duty to obtain permission from clients or their legal representatives before recording
the voices or images of the clients. Before the actual recording, we explain explicitly all
anticipated uses of recorded voices or images of the clients. (See also section VII.B.)

D. Minimizing Invasions of Privacy
1. When we consult cases with our colleagues or make written and oral reports, we only
reveal information that is relevant to the purpose for which the communication is made.
2. We discuss confidential information we obtained from our work only to persons clearly
concerned or only for scientific, medical and professional purposes.

E. Disclosures
1. We take reasonable steps to ensure that information to be disclosed will not be misused,
misunderstood or misinterpreted to infringe on human rights, whether intentionally or
unintentionally.
2. We may disclose confidential information only when the client or legal representative
gave their consent, unless it is prohibited by law.
3. We may disclose confidential information only to the source of referral and with a written
permission from the client if it is self-referral.

4. We may disclose confidential information without the consent of the client or legal
representative only when it is mandated by law or permitted by law for valid purposes
such as:
(a) when professional services are needed to be provided;
(b) when appropriate professional consultations are needed to be obtained;
(c) when the client, psychologist, or others are needed to be protected from harm;
and,
(d) When payments for psychological services are needed to be obtained from a
client who does not pay for services as agreed (see also section VI).
However, the extent to which we divulge information is limited to what is only needed to
achieve the purpose.

5. When confidential information is needed to be shared with schools, organizations, social
agencies or industry, we make sure that only qualified psychologists will supervise such
releases.
6. Information gathered from school, hospital, office or organization becomes part of the
institution where it was obtained. Release of such information becomes confidential and
may be acquired only with prior approval from management.

F. Consultation

1. We do not discuss with our colleagues or other professionals confidential information
that could lead to the identification of the client, unless the client gave consent or the
disclosure cannot be avoided.
2. When we seek second opinion from our colleagues or other professionals, we make sure
that the extent to which we disclose information is limited to what is only needed to
achieve the purpose.

G. Use of Confidential Information for Other Purposes
We do not reveal confidential and personally identifiable information of our clients in our
writings, lectures, classroom discussions, or other public media unless the client or legal
representative consented in writing; there is legal authorization; or, we take reasonable steps to
adequately disguise the client.

V. ADVERTISEMENTS AND PUBLIC STATEMENTS

A. Avoidance of False or Deceptive Statements

1. As developer or promoter of psychological advices, programs, books, or other products,
we make sure that announcements include scientifically acceptable and factually
informative material, and that these are presented in a highly professional manner without
any trace of sensationalism, exaggeration, or superficiality.
Announcements may include, but is not limited to, paid or unpaid advertisement, product
endorsements, grant applications, licensing applications, other credentialing applications,
printed matter, personal resumes or curriculum vitae, or comments for use in media such
as print or electronic transmission, statements in legal proceedings, lectures and public
oral presentations, and published materials.
2. Announcements through telephone listings, brochures, and calling cards for professional
services may include such information as: name, highest relevant academic degrees
earned, certification status, address, contact numbers, office hours, and a brief listing of
the type of psychological services or programs offered with appropriate presentations of
the information.

3. In all spoken, written, printed communications, or electronic transmission, we do not
make false, deceptive or fraudulent statements concerning ourselves or our colleagues’:
• training, experience or competence
• academic degrees
• credentials
• qualifications
• institutional or association affiliations
• services
• scientific or clinical basis for, or results or degree of success of, our services
• fees
• publications or research findings

We ensure that we do not use descriptions or information that could be misinterpreted
and we act quickly to correct such misinterpretation.

4. We claim degrees as credentials for our psychological services only if these degrees were
earned from a CHED recognized educational program or from accredited foreign
educational programs.

B. Public Statements

1. In all written or oral communication, we use language that conveys respect for the dignity
of others.
2. We ensure that we communicate as accurately and objective as possible and we clearly
distinguish facts, opinions, theories, hypotheses, and ideas when conveying knowledge,
findings, and views. We act quickly to correct any misinterpretation or misconception.
3. When making public statements or when involved in public activities, we clearly state
whether we are representing ourselves as private citizens, as members of specific
organizations or groups, or as representative of the discipline of psychology.
4. We do not seek personal gain by recommending the purchase or use of any product,
activities or service to the general public, especially when participating in commercial
announcements, advertisements, television or radio programs.
5. We do not seek personal interest and we retain professional responsibility when engaging
others to create public statements about our professional practice, products, or activities.
6. We shall not compensate or give anything of value to the representatives or employees of
the press, radio, television, electronic transmission, or other communication medium in
anticipation of, or in return for, professional publicity in a news item.
7. Unless it is a paid advertisement regarding our psychological services and programs, then
we must make sure that it is clearly identified and recognizable. We abide by professional
rather than commercial practices when making known our services.
8. We do not give degrading comments about others, such as demeaning jokes about one’s
culture, nationality, ethnicity, color, race, religion, sex, gender identity, disability, social
economic status, or sexual orientation.
9. We avoid any comparative denigration of the services of other psychologist or
practitioners from other professions. We do not claim that our services are of superlative
quality or that we give better services than others.
10. Neither do we advertise, claim, or imply the certainty of cure for any conditions to be
treated nor the certainty of success of our psychological services.
11. We do not advertise or offer refund of money to dissatisfied users of our psychological
services.

C. Workshops, Seminars and Non-Degree-Granting Educational Programs

It is our duty to ensure that our announcements, brochures, catalogs, or advertisements describing
workshops, seminars, or other non-degree-granting educational programs describe accurately the
audience for which the program is intended, the educational objectives, the presenters, and the
fees involved. It is also our duty to ensure that no misrepresentation is made.

D. Media Presentations

We are cautious when we provide public advice or comment through printed materials, radio or
television programs, internet or other electronic transmission to ensure that our statements are:
1. based on our professional knowledge, training or experience in accord with appropriate
psychological literature and practice;
2. consistent with this Code of Ethics; and,
3. not indicative that a professional relationship has been established with the recipient.

E. Testimonials
We do not ask for testimonials from current and past clients, their legal representatives, or other
persons, who due to certain situations might be vulnerable to undue influence of our
psychological services, activities or programs.

VI. RECORDS AND FEES

A. Documentation and Maintenance of Records
We create records and data relating to our professional and scientific work in order to (1)
facilitate provision of services by ourselves or by other professionals, (2) allow for replication
and evaluation o our research, (3) meet institutional requirements, (4) ensure accuracy of billing
and payments, and (5) ensure compliance with relevant laws. Whenever possible, we take
responsibility for maintaining, disseminating, storing, retaining, and disposing of such records
and data.

B. Confidentiality of Records
1. We maintain confidentiality in creating, storing, accessing, transferring, and disposing of
our records in whatever form or media these are encoded and stored.
2. When confidential information is entered into databases or other systems that are
available to other people, we use codes and other techniques to avoid the inclusion of any
personal identifiers.
3. In the event that we withdraw from a position or practice, we make advanced plans to
facilitate the appropriate transfer and to protect the confidentiality of records and data.

C. Withholding Client Records
We may not withhold records that are requested and needed by and for a client’s emergency
treatment, solely because payment has not been received.

D. Fees and financial arrangements
We reach an agreement with the recipients of our psychological services specifying compensation
and billing arrangements as early as is feasible in the professional relationship. We do not
misrepresent our fees.


ETHICAL STANDARDS AND PROCEDURES IN SPECIFIC FUNCTIONS

We subscribe to the following ethical standards and procedures related to the following specific
functions of psychologists: psychological assessment, therapy, education and training, and
research.

VII. ASSESSMENT

A. Bases for Assessment

1. The expert opinions that we provide through our recommendations, reports, and
diagnostic or evaluative statements are based on substantial information and appropriate
assessment techniques.
2. We provide expert opinions regarding the psychological characteristics of a person only
after employing adequate assessment procedures and examination to support our
conclusions and recommendations.
3. In instances where we are asked to provide opinions about an individual without
conducting an examination on the basis of review of existing test results and reports, we
discuss the limitations of our opinions and the basis of our conclusions and
recommendations.

B. Informed Consent in Assessment

1. We gather informed consent prior to the assessment of our clients except for the
following instances:
a. when it is mandated by the law
b. when it is implied such as in routine educational, institutional and organizational
activity
c. when the purpose of the assessment is to determine the individual’s decisional
capacity.

2. We educate our clients about the nature of our services, financial arrangements, potential
risks, and limits of confidentiality. In instances where our clients are not competent to
provide informed consent on assessment, we discuss these matters with immediate family
members or legal guardians. (See also III-J, Informed Consent in Human Relations)
3. In instances where a third party interpreter is needed, the confidentiality of test results
and the security of the tests must be ensured. The limitations of the obtained data are
discussed in our results, conclusions, and recommendations.

C. Assessment Tools

1. We judiciously select and administer only those tests which are pertinent to the reasons
for referral and purpose of the assessment.
2. We use data collection, methods and procedures that are consistent with current scientific
and professional developments.
3. We use tests that are standardized, valid, reliable, and has a normative data directly
referable to the population of our clients.
4. We administer assessment tools that are appropriate to the language, competence and
other relevant characteristics of our client.

D. Obsolete and Outdated Test Results

1. We do not base our interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations on outdated test
results.
2. We do not provide interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations on the basis of
obsolete tests.

E. Interpreting Assessment Results

1. In fairness to our clients, under no circumstances should we report the test results without
taking into consideration the validity, reliability, and appropriateness of the test. We
should therefore indicate our reservations regarding the interpretations.
2. We interpret assessment results while considering the purpose of the assessment and
other factors such as the client’s test taking abilities, characteristics, situational, personal,
and cultural differences.

F. Release of Test Data

1. It is our responsibility to ensure that test results and interpretations are not used by
persons other than those explicitly agreed upon by the referral sources prior to the
assessment procedure.
2. We do not release test data in the forms of raw and scaled scores, client’s responses to
test questions or stimuli, and notes regarding the client’s statements and behaviors during
the examination unless regulated by the court.

G. Explaining Assessment Results

1. We release test results only to the sources of referral and with a written permission from
the client if it is a self referral.
2. Where test results have to be communicated to relatives, parents, or teachers, we explain
them through a non-technical language.
3. We explain findings and test results to our clients or designated representatives except
when the relationship precludes the provision of explanation of results and it is explained
in advanced to the client.
4. When test results needs to be shared with schools, social agencies, the courts or industry,
we supervise such releases.

H. Test Security

The administration and handling of all test materials (manuals, keys, answer sheets, reusable
booklets, etc.) shall be handled only by qualified users or personnel.
I. Assessment by Unqualified Persons
1. We do not promote the use of assessment tools and methods by unqualified persons
except for training purposes with adequate supervision.
2. We ensure that test protocols, their interpretations and all other records are kept secured
from unqualified persons.

J. Test Construction

We develop tests and other assessment tools using current scientific findings and knowledge,
appropriate psychometric properties, validation, and standardization procedures.


VIII. THERAPY

A. Confidentiality

1. We regard confidentiality as an obligation that arises from our client’s trust. We therefore
restrict disclosure of information about our clients except in instances when mandated or
regulated by the law.
2. For evaluation purposes, we discuss the results of clinical and counseling relationships
with our colleagues concerning materials that will not constitute undue invasion of
privacy.
3. We release information to appropriate individuals or authorities only after careful
deliberation or when there is imminent danger to the individual and the community. In
court cases, data should be limited only to those pertinent to the legitimate request of the
court.

B. Informed Consent

1. We seek for freely given and adequate informed consent for psychotherapy. We inform
clients in advance the nature and anticipated course of therapy, potential risks or conflicts
of interests, fees, third party involvement, client’s commitments, and limits of
confidentiality.
2. We respect client’s rights to commit to or withdraw from therapy.
3. In instances where there is a need to provide generally recognized techniques and
procedures that are not yet established, we discuss with our clients the nature of the
treatment, its developing nature, potential risks, alternatives and obtain consent for their
voluntary participation.
4. We discuss with our clients both our rights and responsibilities at appropriate points in
the working relationship.
5. In instances where the therapist is still undergoing training, we discuss this matter with
the client and assure them that adequate supervision will be provided.

C. Client’s Wellbeing

1. We engage in systematic monitoring of our practice and outcomes using the best
available means in order to ensure the well being of our clients.
2. We do not provide services to our clients in instances when we are physically, mentally,
or emotionally unfit to do so.
3. We are responsible for learning and taking into account beliefs, practices and customs
that pertain to different working contexts and cultures.

D. Relationships

1. We do not enter into a client- clinician relationship other than for professional purposes.
2. We do not enter into multiple relationships that can have unforeseeable beneficial or
detrimental impact on our clients. (For exceptions, refer to III-E Multiple Relationships in
Human Relations)
3. We maintain a professional relationship with our clients, avoiding emotional involvement
that would be detrimental for the client’s well being.
4. We do not allow our professional therapeutic relationships with our clients to be
prejudiced by any personal views we hold about lifestyle, gender, age, disability, sexual
orientation, beliefs and culture.
5. We do not engage in sexual intimacies with our current therapy clients, their relatives or
their significant others. We do not terminate therapy to circumvent this standard.
6. We do not engage in sexual intimacies with our former clients, their relatives, or their
significant others for at least 2 years after cessation of our therapy with them.

E. Record Keeping

We keep appropriate records with our clients and protect them from unauthorized disclosure
unless regulated by the court.

F. Competent Practice

1. We keep up to date with the latest knowledge and scientific advancements to respond to
changing circumstances. We carefully review our own need for continuing need for
professional development and engage in appropriate educational activities.
2. We responsibly monitor and maintain our fitness to provide therapy that enables us to
provide effective service.
3. When the need arises, we seek supervision or consultative support.

G. Working with Young People

1. We assess and ensure the balance between young people’s dependence on adults and
carers and their capacity for acting independently. We carefully consider the issues of
young people such as capacity to give consent, confidentiality issues and receiving of
service independent of the parents and legal guardian’s responsibility.

H. Referrals

1. We ensure that referrals with colleagues are discussed and consented by our clients. We
provide an explanation to our clients regarding the disclosure of information that
accompany the referral.
2. We ensure that the recipient of the referral is competent in providing the service and the
client will likely benefit from the referral.
3. In considering referrals, we carefully assess the appropriateness of the referral, benefits of
the referral to the client and the adequacy of client’s consent for referral.

I. Interruption

We assume orderly and appropriate resolution of responsibility for our client in instances when
our therapy services are terminated.

J. Termination

1. We terminate therapy when we are quite sure that our client no longer needs the therapy,
is not likely to benefit from therapy, or would be harmed by continued therapy.
2. In cases when therapy is prematurely terminated, we provide pretermination counseling
and make reasonable efforts to arrange for an orderly and appropriate referral.

IX. EDUCATION AND TRAINING

A. Design of Education and Training Programs

We shall take reasonable steps to ensure that education and training programs are designed to
provide the appropriate knowledge and proper experiences, and to meet the requirements for
licensure, certification, or other goals for which claims are made by the program. (See also
Standard 5.03, Descriptions of Workshops and Non-Degree-Granting Educational Programs; IX.
B, Descriptions of Education and Training Programs; IX. C, Accuracy in Teaching; X.K,
Reporting Research Results)

B. Descriptions of Education and Training Programs

We shall take reasonable steps to ensure that education and training programs have a current and
accurate description of the program content (including required supervised practicum or
internship), training goals and objectives, stipends and benefits, and requirements that must be
met for satisfactory completion of the program. This information must be made readily available
to all interested parties.

C. Accuracy in Teaching

1. We shall take reasonable steps to ensure that course syllabi are accurate regarding the
subject matter to be covered, bases for evaluating progress, and the nature of course
experiences. This standard does not preclude an instructor from modifying course content
or requirements when the instructor considers it pedagogically necessary or desirable, so
long as students are made aware of these modifications in a manner that enables them to
fulfill course requirements. (See also Standard II.D, Bases for Scientific and Professional
Judgments; V.A,, Avoidance of False or Deceptive Statements; VIII.F Competent
Practice; IX.A, Design of Education and Training Programs; and IX.B, Description of
Education and Training Programs)

2. When engaged in teaching or training, we shall present psychological information
accurately. (See also Standard II.C, Maintaining Competence.)

D. Student Disclosure of Personal Information
In course- or program-related activities, we shall not require students or supervisees to disclose
personal information, either orally or in writing, regarding sexual history, history of abuse and
neglect, psychological treatment, and relationships with parents, peers, and spouses or significant
others except in the following cases:

1. the program or training facility has clearly identified this requirement in its admissions
and program materials, or
2. the information is necessary to evaluate or obtain assistance for students whose personal
problems could reasonably be judged to be preventing them from performing their
training- or professionally related activities in a competent manner or posing a threat to
the students or others.

E. Mandatory Individual or Group Therapy

1. When individual or group therapy is a program or course requirement, we shall ensure
that the program allows students in undergraduate and graduate programs the option of
selecting such therapy from practitioners who are not affiliated with the program. (See
also Standard II.E, Delegation of Work to Others, III.I, Cooperation with Other
Professionals; VII.I, Assessment of Unqualified Persons; IX.A., Descriptions of
Education and Training Programs; X.F, Offering Inducements for Research Participation)

2. We shall ensure that faculty who are or are likely to be responsible for evaluating
students’ academic performance do not themselves provide that therapy. (See also
Standard III.E, Multiple Relationships.)

F. Assessing Student and Supervisee Performance

1. In academic and supervisory relationships, we shall establish a timely and specific
process for providing feedback to students and supervisees. Information regarding the
process is provided to the student at the beginning of supervision.

2. We shall evaluate students and supervisees on the basis of their actual performance on
relevant and established program requirements.

G. Sexual Relationships with Students and Supervisees

We must not engage in sexual relationships with students or supervisees who are in our
department, agency, or training center or over whom we have or are likely to have evaluative
authority. (See also Standard III.E, Multiple Relationships.)

X. RESEARCH

A. Rights and Dignity of Participants

1. In all aspects, we respect the rights, safeguard the dignity, and protect and promote the
welfare of research participants.

2. Before beginning any research work in a community not our own or not familiar to us,
we obtain essential information about their mores, culture, social structure, customs, and
traditions.

3. We respect and abide by their cultural expectations, provided that this does not
contravene any of the ethical principles of this Code of Ethics.

4. We respect the rights of research participants should they wish to discontinue their
participation at any time. We are responsive all throughout the research to participants’
non-verbal indications of a desire to withdraw from participation, especially if the person
has difficulty with verbal communication, is a young child, or is culturally unlikely to
communicate.

5. We do not contribute nor engage in research which contravenes international
humanitarian law, such as development of methods intended to torture persons,
development of prohibited weapons, or destruction of the environment.

6. It is our duty to ask participants about any factors that could bring forth potential harm,
such as pre-existing medical conditions, and to detect, remove, or correct any foreseeable
undesirable consequences prior to research proper.

7. To ensure that participants’ rights are protected, we seek independent and sufficient
ethical review of the possible risks our research may pose to them.

B. Informed Consent to Research

1. We do not just ask participants to sign in the consent form; we recognize that informed
consent happens due to the willingness of the participants to work collaboratively with
us.

2. We make sure that the consent form is translated in language or dialect that the
participants understand. We will take reasonable measures to guarantee that the
information was understood.

3. When we conduct research with persons below 18 years of age, we obtain informed
assent from them and informed consent from their parents or legal guardian.

4. When we conduct research with adult participants who have difficulties in
comprehension or communication, we obtain informed consent from adult family
members of the participants and approval from independent advisors.

5. When we conduct research with detained persons, we pay attention to special
circumstances which could affect the latter’s ability to give informed consent.

6. When obtaining informed consent as required in section III.J. of this Code of Ethics, it is
our duty to inform research participants about:
a. the purpose of research, expected duration, and procedures;
b. mutual responsibilities;
c. their right to decline to participate and to withdraw from the research once
participation has begun;
d. the foreseeable consequences of declining or withdrawing;
e. reasonably foreseeable factors that may be expected to influence their willingness
to participate such as potential risks, discomfort, or adverse effects;
f. how to rescind consent if desired;
g. any prospective research benefits;
h. protections and limits of confidentiality and/or anonymity;
i. incentives for participation; and,
j. whom to contact for questions about the research and research participants’
rights.

We shall provide an opportunity for prospective participants to ask questions and receive
answers.

7. When conducting intervention research using experimental treatments, it is our duty to
clarify to participants at the beginning of research the following:
a. experimental nature of the treatment
b. services that will or will not be available to the control group(s) if appropriate;
c. means by which assignment to treatment and control groups will be made;
d. available treatment alternatives if an individual does not wish to participate in the
research or wishes to withdraw once a study has begun; and,
e. compensation for or monetary costs of participating, and if appropriate, including
whether reimbursement from the participant or a third-party payor will be sought.

8. In longitudinal research, we may need to obtain informed consent on more than one
occasion.

C. Informed Consent for Recording Voices and Images in Research

1. It is our duty to obtain informed consent from research participants before recording their
voices or images for data collection, except when:
a. the research consists only of naturalistic observations in public places, and it is
not anticipated that the recording will be used in a manner that could cause
personal identification or harm; and,
b. the research design includes deception, and consent for the use of the recording is
obtained during debriefing.

D. Research Participation of Client, Students and Subordinates

1. When we conduct research with our clients, students or subordinates, we do not coerce
them to participate, rather, we inform them about their right not to participate and we do
not reprimand or penalize them for doing so.
2. When research participation is a course requirement or an opportunity for extra credit, we
inform our clients, students or subordinates about equitable alternative activities that
could fulfill their educational or employment goals.

E. Dispensing with Informed Consent for Research

1. We may dispense informed consent only on the following conditions:

a. when we believe that the research would not distress or create harm to
participants or general welfare or when our study involves:
i. the study or normal educational practices, curricula, or classroom
management methods conducted in educational settings;
ii. only anonymous questionnaires, naturalistic observations, or archival
research for which disclosure of responses would not place participants
at risk of criminal or civil liability or damage their financial standing,
employability, or reputation, and confidentiality is protected;
iii. the study of factors related to job or organization effectiveness conducted
in organizational settings which would not affect the participants’
employability, and confidentiality is protected; or,

b. when it is mandated by law or is an institutional regulation.

F. Offering Inducements for Research Participation

1. We may fairly compensate participants for the use of their time, energy, and knowledge,
unless such compensation is refused in advance.
2. We make reasonable efforts not to offer undue, excessive or, inappropriate reward,
financial or other inducements for research participation, which could likely pressure or
coerce participation.
3. When we offer psychological and professional services as an incentive for research
participation, it is our duty to clarify the nature of the services, including the risks,
obligations and limitations.

G. Deception in Research

1. We refrain from conducting research involving deception, except:
a. when we have determined that the use of deceptive techniques is justified by the
study’s significant prospective scientific, educational, medical, or applied value;
and,
b. when effective non-deceptive alternative procedures are not possible.

2. We do not deceive prospective research participants about our study that is reasonably
expected to interfere their decision to give informed consent. We ensure that level of risk,
discomfort, or inconvenience that could cause physical pain or severe emotional distress
is not withheld from the participants.

3. It is our duty to explain any deception as an integral feature of design and conduct of an
experiment to those who participated in research as soon as possible, preferably at the
end of their participation but not later than the end of data gathering.

H. Debriefing

1. We debrief by informing the participants that they have contributed to the body of
knowledge and we make sure that they have also learned from their participation.
2. We give participants an opportunity to obtain the nature, results, and conclusions of the
research. We also take reasonable steps to correct any misconceptions participants have
about our research, especially when the participants were led to believe that the research
has a different purpose.
3. When participants’ trust may have been lost due to incomplete disclosure or temporarily
leading participants to believe that the research had a different purpose, we seek to reestablish
trust and assure them that the research procedures were carefully structured and
necessary for scientifically valid findings.
4. If scientific or humane values justify delaying or withholding this information, we take
reasonable measures to reduce the risk of harm.
5. When we become aware that our research procedures have harmed a participant, we act
to correct and minimize the harm.
6. If after debriefing, the participants decided to withdraw their data, we shall respect and
grant their request. The participants have the right to appeal that their own data, including
recordings, be destroyed.

I. Observational Research

We respect the privacy and psychological well-being of persons studied based on observational
research. This method is acceptable only when those being observed would expect to be observed
by strangers.

J. Humane Care and Use of Animals in Research

1. We do not use animals in research, except when there is a sufficient reason to say that it
is the only way to:
a. further increase understanding of the structures and processes underlying human or
animal behavior;
b. increase understanding of the specific specie used in the study; or
c. eventually augment benefits to the health and welfare of humans or other animals.

2. We comply with current laws, regulations and professional standards when we acquire,
care for, use, and dispose animals used in research.

3. We take reasonable steps to ensure that animals used in research are treated humanely
and are not exposed to unnecessary discomfort, pain, or disruption. If possible, a
psychologist trained in research methods and experience in care of laboratory animals
shall supervise all procedures in researches of this kind.

4. We make sure that all individuals under our supervision have received clear instructions
and guidelines in research methods and in care, maintenance, and handling of animals or
specific species being used, to the extent that is appropriate to their role.

5. We use a procedure causing pain, stress, and privation to animals only when:
a. an alternative procedure is unavailable;
b. the goal is justified by its prospective scientific, educational, or applied value; and,
c. we make reasonable efforts to minimize the discomfort, infection, illness, and
pain of animal subjects.

6. We perform surgical procedures with appropriate anesthesia and we follow techniques to
avoid infection and minimize the pain during and after surgery.

7. Only when it is appropriate that an animal’s life be terminated, then we proceed rapidly,
with an effort to minimize pain and in accordance with accepted procedures.

K. Reporting Research Results

1. Whenever feasible and appropriate, we consult with groups, organizations, or
communities being studied the findings of our research so as to increase the accuracy of
interpretation and to minimize the risk of misunderstanding, misinterpretation or misuse.
2. We are cautious when reporting results of our research regarding vulnerable groups or
communities and we ensure that the results will not be misinterpreted or misused in the
development of social policy, attitude, and practices.
3. In research involving children, we are cautious when discussing the results with parents,
legal guardians, or teachers and we make sure that there is no misinterpretation or
misunderstanding.
4. We do not fabricate data.
5. If we discover significant errors in our published data, we act quickly to correct such
errors in a correction, retraction, erratum, or other appropriate publication means.

L. Plagiarism
We do not present any portions of other’s work or data as our own, even if the source is cited
occasionally.

M. Publication Credit

1. We take responsibility and credit only for work we have actually done and credit others
(including students and research assistants) for work they have actually performed or to
which they have substantially contributed.
2. We ensure that principal authorship and co-authorship accurately reflect the relative
scientific or professional contributions of the individuals involved, regardless of their
relative status. Mere possession of an institutional position, such as department chair or
head of the research unit, does not justify authorship credit. Minor contributions to the
research or to the writing for publications must be acknowledged appropriately, such as
in footnotes or an introductory statement.
3. We do not claim credit or authorship in a publication that is substantially based on our
student’s thesis or dissertation if we do not have substantial contributions to the research
beyond our regular duties as thesis/dissertation mentor or advisor. As faculty advisors, we
should discuss with students, publication credit at the outset and throughout the research
and publication process based on our relative contributions to the research work.
4. In a multiple-authored article that is partly and/or substantially based on the student’s
thesis or dissertation, we shall give appropriate publication credit to the student based on
the student’s contribution relative to the other authors. When the article is mainly based
on the student’s thesis or dissertation, we credit the student with primary authorship.

N. Duplicate Publication of Data
We do not publish data that have been previously published and claim them as original data.
However, this does not prohibit republishing of data as long as proper acknowledgement is
clearly stated.

O. Sharing Research Data for Verification
It is our duty to share and not to withhold our data to other competent professionals, who seek to
verify and reanalyze the research results and substantive claims of our publication, provided that:
1. the latter obtain prior written agreement for the use of data;
2. the latter intend to use the data solely for the purpose declared;
3. the latter will hold responsibility for costs associated with the release of data; and,
4. confidentiality of participants can be protected.
Unless legal rights concerning proprietary data preclude such release, then the latter should seek
permission from the concerned institution, organization or agency.

P. Reviewers
When we review material submitted for presentation, publication, grant, or research proposal
review, we respect the confidentiality and the proprietary rights of those who submitted it.

Q. Limitations of the Study
1. We acknowledge the limitations of our knowledge, methods, findings, interventions,
interpretations, and conclusions.
2. In cases wherein our research touches on social policies and structures of communities
which we do not belong, we thoroughly discuss the limits of our data with respect to their
social policy.
3. We do not conceal disconfirming evidence about our findings and views and we
acknowledge alternative hypotheses and explanations.

-END-

Source -  http://www.pap.org.ph/includes/view/default/uploads/code_of_ethics_pdf.pdf

Monday, August 4, 2014

Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists


Image source - http://www.householdappliancesworld.com/files/2013/07/Fig1.jpg (modified) 




Below are some excerpts of the presentation on Developing a Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists: Overview and Update, by Prof. Janel Gauthier, Ph.D., Chair of the Ad Hoc Joint Committee For a Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists, of the International Union of Psychological Science, International Association of Applied Psychology. The presentation was made at the Education Leadership Conference, Washington, D.C. on September 17, 2005, the objective of the consultation is to present the framework at international meetings to gather comments and suggestions (e.g., symposia, focus-group discussions).

Following the excerpt is the draft text of the UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF ETHICAL PRINCIPLES FOR PSYCHOLOGISTS as of March 28, 2008. In the Code of Ethics for Philippine Psychologists made references of several code of ethics from countries like the US and Canada as well as the Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists. We are featuring here in our blog so you can appreciate similarities and differences of the the two codes of ethics.


Why a Universal Declaration

There are tremendous variations in the form, content, usefulness and rate of development of codes of ethics in the world.

The development and the proclamation of a Universal Declaration would provide a generic set of moral principles to be used as a template by psychology organizations worldwide to develop or revise their ethical codes and standards.

A universal standard against which the psychology community worldwide can assess progress in the ethical and moral relevancy of its codes of ethics;

A shared moral framework for representatives of the psychology community to speak with a collective voice on matters of ethical concern;

A common basis for psychology as a discipline to evaluate alleged unethical behavior by its members.


Developing a Framework
  • Comparison between codes of ethics in psychology to identify commonalties in the ethical principles used to develop them.
  • Comparison across domains and throughout history to assess the universality of the ethical principles used to develop codes of ethics in psychology.
  • Integration of principles and values having the greatest commonalty and universality into a framework.

Distilling a generic set of ethical principles
  • Respect for the dignity and rights of persons/peoples
  • Caring for others and concerns for their welfare
  • Competence
  • Integrity
  • Responsibility to society (professional, scientific)

Assessing universality
  • Review of internationally accepted documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to delineate the moral imperatives that underlie them.
  • Review of codes of ethics in other disciplines to identify the ethical principles used to develop them (e.g., sports, martial arts).
  • Review historical documents to identify roots of “modern” ethical principles (Babylon, India, Greece, Persia, Egypt, Japan, China…)
Source - http://www.apa.org/ed/governance/elc/2005/gauthier-declaration.ppt




Source - http://www.apa.org/ed/governance/elc/2005/gauthier-declaration.ppt
(Converted PPT file to PDF.)





The objectives of the Universal Declaration of Ethical Principles for Psychologists are to provide:

(a) a generic set of moral principles to be used as a template by psychology organizations worldwide to develop and revise their country-specific or region-specific ethical codes and standards;

(b) a universal standard against which the psychology community worldwide can assess progress in the ethical and moral relevancy of its codes of ethics;

(c) a shared moral framework for representatives of the psychology community to speak with a collective voice on matters of ethical concern; and

(d) a common basis for psychology as a discipline to evaluate alleged unethical behavior by its members.


 

Source - http://e-book.lib.sjtu.edu.cn/iupsys/ethics/Universal_dec.pdf


 

Source -  http://www.sagepub.com/cac6study/pdf/UniversalDeclaration.pdf


QUESTIONS AND ISSUES

A number of questions or issues have been brought up by psychologists during international consultations and focus-group discussions. I will now discuss briefly those encountered most frequently.

To avoid any confusion or misunderstanding, it is important to keep in mind that a universal declaration is

NOT a code of ethics, NOR is it a code of conduct.

  • Codes of conduct define the bottom lines of professional conduct (i.e., what you must or must not do)
  • Codes of ethics are more aspirational, articulating standards according to underlying principles and values.
  • Declarations of ethical principles reflect the principles and values that would guide the development of code of ethics or a code of conduct.

Because a universal declaration is aspirational in nature and generic in its wording, it cannot be enforced like a code or a law or a set of regulations. The purpose of a universal declaration is to inspire, NOT to enforce. History has shown that a universal declaration can be quite influential over time. For example, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has greatly influenced the world since it was proclaimed by the United Nations in 1948.

The document emphasizes respect and caring not just for individuals, but also for families, groups, and communities. This is deliberate and it aims to address the issue of balance between the individual and the communal. Some cultures tend to emphasize the individual; others tend to emphasize the collective. Such cultural differences have implications for the interpretation of informed consent, confidentiality, privacy, professional boundaries, and decision-making. The document also emphasizes the role of community and culture in people’s lives. We have been strongly encouraged by cross-cultural psychologists to recognize the need to respect the dignity of peoples as well as of individuals. To address this issue more directly, the term “Respect for the Dignity of Persons / Peoples” will likely replace the term “Respect for the Dignity of All Human Beings” in a forthcoming revision of the document.

The document does not specifically use the term “human rights.” This is deliberate and in accordance with advice that was kindly given as early as 2002 and that was further validated by a group of cross-cultural psychologists at the 2006 International Congress of Cross-Cultural Psychology in Spetses, Greece. The term “human rights” is a forbidden term in some parts of the world and its use in the document would make it difficult and perhaps impossible for psychologists living in those parts to use the document to promote and develop ethics where they work. Concern for cultural sensitivity and the wish to have a document of worldwide value have directed us not to use the term “human rights” in the document.

It has been suggested at times that the document is too generic to be useful. It is true that it would be meaningless and useless if it were too generic. This is why each of the four ethical principles is followed by brief articles that are not only aspirational in terms of reflecting the fundamental values contained in the principle, but also that are somewhat more specific and focused in terms of content. This helps to make the document less generic without becoming prescriptive. It belongs to cultures to determine how best to translate the principles, values, and articles of the draft Declaration into reality.



Related read - http://psychometricpinas.blogspot.com/2014/06/code-of-ethics-for-philippine.html





Sunday, August 3, 2014

Result of the survey Handa ka na ba para sa Psychometrician Licensure Exam

Below is the result of the survey we conducted - Handa ka na ba para sa Psychometrician Licensure Exam. The survey first got a response on July 20 and the last was July 29, 2014. A total of 15 respondents answered the survey. The survey is now deactivated and we will reactivate it after 8 October 2014, the last day of the application for the Psychometrician Licensure Exam.

Initial response shows that as of July still many are not yet prepared as a proof only one of the 15 respondents got the notice of admission for the licensure exam. We observe that most of the respondents also are newly graduate, perhaps still undecided whether to take or not the licensure exam. We hope that these respondents will not do the last minute application. At least having delayed their application they benefited from the additional instruction from PRC like affixing documentary stamp to each of the 3 certificates of good moral characters and the provision of Certificate of Authentication and Validation (CAV) to TOR that does not have SO (special order). Check link here - http://psychometricpinas.blogspot.com/2014/07/email-from-prc-regarding-submission-of.html  and the FB discussion here - https://www.facebook.com/psychometricianreviewer/posts/249070291970124.



Majority (67%) of the respondents are familiar with the outcome-based assessment and 93% are confident they will pass the licensure exam. We at TR Reviewer believe of the self-fulfilling prophecy, if you think and firm on the thought you will pass then half of the effort of passing is done - the rest is hard work of preparation of reading, reviewing and exercising in test taking. So to our readers believe you will pass couple it with hard work and prayers, so be it - you'll be a registered Psychometrician!



Respondents consider Theories of Personality as the subject they will get a good grade and comparing it with the subjects they will get a poor grade validate their responses of the former question - Abnormal Psychology, Psychological Assessment and Industrial Psychology. Our initial observation tells us that the confusion on the use of  DSM4 TR or DSM 5 compounds the difficulty of many on the Abnormal Psychology subject, as to Psychological Assessment many students of psychology are averse to math so they consider the subject difficult and for Industrial Psychology the lack of experience and exposure to a work settings among newly graduate will prove difficult compared to those already exposed and experienced to a work settings. Also another observation, among the different subjects up to this day the Philippines has not come up with a book or textbook on Industrial Psychology to think that many graduates tend to have a profession on an industrial setting compared to the clinical setting.

Although as to the subject respondents will have a good grade  many answered Theories of Personality and it is the same responses with Psychological Assessment.

The survey provides us input and will help us prioritize which review subjects to focus on and share with our survey respondents.

We hope to get back to the respondents after 8 October 2014 and see how many of them will take the licensure exam for Psychometrician.