Top 5 Mistakes Of A Psychologist When Drawing Up A Conclusion

2024 Author: Harry Day | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-17 15:43

Mastering such an important skill for a practical psychologist as drawing up a conclusion will certainly play a plus both in building a reputation, in expanding the application of your psychological knowledge, and in the eyes of your colleagues will make you more competent and confident in your abilities

The ability to integrate the information obtained in the conversation with the client into the psychological conclusion, and the results of the use of methods and tests, allows one to judge the psychologist as a professional in his field. Although it can happen the other way around, when a specialist who is little knowledgeable in drawing up a psychological portrait takes up this matter and writes a conclusion, he makes such gross mistakes that drawing up such a document leads to a loss of reputation.

Under the psychological conclusion in this article is meant - a brief psychological characteristic of the state of development of the subject for the period of the survey based on the data of an objective qualified psychodiagnostic research

My experience in the production of forensic psychological examinations allowed me to get acquainted with the many conclusions that psychologists gave and because of which criminal cases were initiated, among other things.

So, what are the main mistakes a psychologist makes when drawing up a conclusion.

1. Use of purely professional vocabulary

Lexicon, as Wikipedia points out to us, is the vocabulary of a language. It is with the help of vocabulary that we name and convey knowledge about any objects and phenomena. With the help of vocabulary, we show which professional community we belong to.

And many are sure that the more the conclusion contains psychological terms, the more weighty and professional the conclusion looks. In fact, this is not at all the case. In the best case, the conclusion will be read, they will not understand anything from it, and they will not turn to you again.

In the worst case, following this path, you directly ask to be summoned for interrogation (if the conclusion was for the forensic authorities), in order for you to explain what exactly you wrote.

If you presented a case from practice at a conference, symposium or in a circle of colleagues - please, there are no restrictions, you are in your community. Or you are a psychologist who works in a medical institution and the attending physician, psychiatrist will get acquainted with the results of your research, and the conclusion itself will be in the history of the disease, which is kept in the medical institution. However, this is inappropriate when drawing up a conclusion, when a person who is generally far from psychology will read it.

Here are some examples.

“During a psychodiagnostic examination, M., born in 1998. established schizoid and epileptoid accentuations of character …"

“During the experimental psychological examination, F. P. an exogenous-organic pathos-symptom complex was identified, which includes a slight weakening of the productivity of cognitive activity, disturbances in emotional-volitional (including dysphoria, a tendency to affective outbursts, lability of emotional responses), a decrease in the productivity of motivational-need spheres (impoverishment of its diversity) …"

"… The symptomatic picture is outlined in the results of the study on the Symptomatic Questionnaire SCL-90 - the DEP + SOM + ANX triad is expressed in combination with affective lability …"

"… Conclusion: Psychogenic-neurotic register syndrome …"

For such words as "rigidity, lability, reference group, conformity, sensitivity, accentuation (and its names), agitation, hyperprotection, psychological characteristics of the schizoid circle, infantilism, etc.", I am more than sure that you will find understandable synonyms … As a last resort, after the given term, its explanation should always be given.

This error most often appears when there is an error number 2

2. Lack of goals of psychodiagnostics

When you are asked to give an opinion, it is imperative to clarify two points -

1) what is the purpose of the conclusion (what is specifically expected of you, the answers to what questions they want to receive);

2) for what purpose your opinion will be used (for what and who needs it).

A clear answer to the first point will give you an understanding of which methods and research methods to choose to achieve this goal. Answering the second point will prepare you for possible unpleasant surprises in the future.

There may be situations when the client himself does not fully understand why he needs the conclusion, but believes that he has been walking for a long time or pays enough to get at least some reinforcement of the value of services on paper. This is due to the fact that psychological services, especially in the field of psychotherapy, cannot be touched, touched, or tasted. Customers pay money for a product (service) that does not have a "physical carrier", for a hypothetical improvement of their (or child's) condition. Thus, in such a situation, to give a conclusion is to assess the condition of the client, his progress. There is very thin ice here, it is imperative to follow ethical principles, because Your assessment may not be the same as the client's, so the conclusion should be “highly therapeutic,” without strong categorical judgments or judgments. Well, if you sometimes used some tests or techniques during the sessions (Luscher, Dembo-Rubinstein, Eysenck's EPI, children's techniques, including the test by Rene Gilles, Wechsler, etc.), then you can safely use.

Sometimes the other side, the client gives a clear request - “I want to know the level of readiness for school of the child”, “I want to know the emotional and psychological state of the child”, “I want to get career guidance, where the teenager should go”, “I want you to write what I have (happened) psychotrauma "," to whom is the child more attached to mom or dad? " etc. The psychologist, ignoring or not clarifying the client's request, writes a conclusion without a conclusion. Those. conducts a psychodiagnostic examination and simply writes the results, without analysis.

Example: "Eysenck's EPI test - the scale of" extraversion-introversion "- 8 points, the scale of" nairothism "- 17 points, the scale of lies - 3 points, the type of temperament - melancholic …" (further by the method Ctrl C + Ctrl V (copy-paste) - a verbatim description of the results obtained from the methodology is inserted into the text of the conclusion).

And the answer to the second question, "for what purpose your conclusion will be used" will answer the question of what you "get involved" in giving this conclusion. In my practice, there were cases when my mother asked a certain psychologist to give an opinion on the psycho-emotional state of the child, and then went to the police, filed an application against the father and attached the psychologist's opinion as a motivation for submitting the conclusion. How likely is it that you will be summoned for questioning? 99%.

Another example, a woman came to you for about those months, then she has a divorce proceedings, you continue to consult her, and at one point she asks for an assessment of her condition and draw up a conclusion. You find out the fact that the lawyer advises her to get such a paper in order to receive compensation for the moral suffering caused. What are you going to do? If she is motivated by the words of a lawyer, and receives a refusal from you, she will go to another psychologist who will agree to give such a conclusion, and will never recommend you again.

Thus, clarifying this goal indirectly also influences the choice of research methods and prepares you for future events (for example, interrogation, or participation in a court hearing).

3 A common mistake is the use of irrelevant methods and tests when drawing up a conclusion

If you are writing a conclusion, then always carefully check which methods you use, namely:

whether this technique is suitable for a given age;

what this technique establishes;

whether the methodology is consistent with the purpose of the report;

is the chosen method a proven research method?

As a rule, these methods should have been introduced into practice long ago, passed many years of testing and proved their effectiveness. Each psychologist is looking for his own toolkit that would give him the most comprehensive answers to the questions posed, but if in judicial practice this toolkit is clearly spelled out, then in the practice of psychological counseling it is not. Of course, you can use in your work those methods that you consider appropriate, but when writing an opinion, you should use reliable and valid methods.

Examples are the following cases:

“Characteristics for a 7-B grade student Pupkin V.

… The Leonhard-Shmishek test showed that V. has such pointed features as … School psychologist P."

“The study of the intellectual development of K. for 17 years was carried out using the Veksler method. The results are as follows:

1 subtest (Awareness) -… 2 subtest (Comprehensibility) -… 3 subtest (Arithmetic) -… 4 subtest (Similarity) -… 5 subtest (Vocabulary) -… 6 subtest (Repetition of numbers) -… 7 subtest (Missing details) - … 8 subtest (Consecutive pictures) -… 9 subtest (Cubes of Koos) -… 10 subtest (Folding figures) -… 11 subtest (Encryption-encryption) -… 12 subtest (Labyrinths) -… . (A children's version of the Wechsler WISC technique is used, although the subject is already 17 years old).

This also includes independently developed methods and tests, metaphorical maps (as of today), foreign tests (even if you can easily translate them) that have not been translated into our language and tested on our sample, tests downloaded from the Internet without specifying the source data (in which book you can get acquainted with the test, who is the author, who adapted it, in what year, etc.).

4 mistake is the lack of structure and logic in the conclusion

The conclusion, as an essay, must have certain parts: introduction, content, conclusion (introduction, research, conclusions). Very often, psychologists either do not adhere to this structure at all, or they miss some part (sometimes the first and the third at the same time).

But even in the presence of all parts, the following is observed - the name of the method is written, and then the results for each of the scales are described.

In a well-written conclusion, methods are listed in a separate paragraph, the purpose of using one method or another is indicated (for example, for the study of the intellectual sphere, the following were used: Veksler's test (WISC, children's version), an adapted and standardized version of A. Yu. Panasyuk, supplemented and corrected by Yu. I. Filimonenko and V. I. Timofeev), and then, in accordance with the logic of the conclusion, the results of the methods are described, while the scores are rarely indicated.

A big flaw is the literal rewriting of the interpretation of the test: “… Neuroticism corresponds to emotionality, impulsivity; unevenness in contacts with people, variability of interests, self-doubt, pronounced sensitivity, impressionability, tendency to irritability. The neurotic personality is characterized by inadequately strong reactions in relation to the stimuli that cause them. Individuals with high indices on the scale of neuroticism in unfavorable stressful situations may develop neurosis ….

Where is there even a word directly about your expert? Where is the integration of the information obtained in the conversation with the client with the results of the methods used, the anamnesis, as well as additional data (for example, we can get information about the child when talking with the mother and other relatives, from the school characteristics, from the conversation with him).

Psychodiagnostics is, to a certain extent, an art, to conduct a test and get a result on it, now absolutely anyone who has access to the Internet can do it. Why would a client need to list "naked" results.

The most important thing in the conclusion is the conclusion. What have you come to after conducting a conversation and a psychodiagnostic examination? What are the leading individual psychological characteristics? What is the current state? And what recommendations can you give based on the research?

And, probably, the most important mistake (No. 5) is the psychologist going beyond his competence.

Every practicing psychologist is obliged to know the limits of competence, this is an axiom. What questions he can answer, and what not. Where does his competence end and where does the competence of another specialist (psychiatrist or neurologist) begin.

Examples:

“… Child N., born in 2009. there is a psychotrauma received as a result of violence from the father …"

“… T., 2007 year of birth. prone to lying …"

"… K., born in 1940, diagnosed with dementia …"

"… According to the results of the study, the minor P. is unable to understand the nature of the actions being performed …".

It was a long text, I hope that I was able to reveal certain new points and in the future, when writing a conclusion, you will be armed with this knowledge.