MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2059693616 · doi:10.1037/a0024549

Ethical supervision in teaching, research, practice, and administration.

2011· article· en· W2059693616 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jean L. Pettifor, Michelle McCarron, Greg Schoepp, Cannie Stark, Donald Stewart

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAdministration (probate law)Engineering ethicsPedagogyPsychotherapistMedical educationPolitical scienceLawMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Supervision is a specialized area of psychological activity that has its own foundation of knowledge, skills, and attitudes, which are enhanced by training. As our discipline develops its standards for competent practice in supervision, there is a need to develop ethical guidelines to assist both supervisors and supervisees in maintaining productive working relationships. Organized around the hierarchy of ethical principles comprising the Canadian Code of Ethics for Psychologists, the Canadian Psychological Association adopted Ethical Guidelines for Supervision in Psychology: Teaching, Research, Practice, and Administration in early 2009. In this article, each of the four ethical principles (Respect for the Dignity of Persons, Responsible Caring, Integrity in Relationships, and Responsibility to Society) is examined in the context of supervision within the areas of teaching, research, practice, and administration. The history of the guidelines, as well as some of their innovative and unique elements, is also discussed. Keywords: ethics, supervision, guidelines Resume La supervision est un domaine specialise de l'activite des psychologues qui comporte ses propres fondements du savoir, competences et attitudes, autant d'elements qui s'ameliorent par la formation. Tandis que notre discipline etablit des normes en matiere de competence en supervision, elle doit aussi definir des lignes directrices deontologiques visant a favoriser le maintien de relations de travail productives entre superviseurs et supervises. S'appuyant sur l'hierarchie des principes de deontologie enonces dans le Code canathen de deontologie professionnelle des psychologues, la Societe canathenne de psychologie a adopte, au debut de 2009, les Lignes directrices deontologiques dans la supervision en psychologie : enseignement, recherche, pratique et administration. Dans le present article, on examine chacun des quatre principes de deontologie (respect de la dignite de la personne, soins responsables, l'integrite dans les relations et responsabilite envers la societe) dans le contexte de la supervision dans les domaines de l'enseignement, de la recherche, de la pratique et de l'administration. Sont aussi presentes l'histoire des lignes directrices et certains de leurs elements novateurs et uniques. Mots-cles : deontologie, supervision, lignes directrices. In the last decade, much effort has gone into identification and elaboration of core competencies in professional psychology (e.g., Mutual Recognition Agreement, 2004). Among these core competencies, psychologists increasingly recognise supervision as a distinct competency area that requires special knowledge and skill based on professional training and experience (e.g., Falender et al., 2004; Rings, Genuchi, Hall, Angelo, & Cornish, 2009). Definitions of supervision abound in the literature, but all seem to include the following skills for supervisors: maintaining a working alliance; observing, evaluating, and gatekeeping; supporting; providing constructive feedback; facilitating self-evaluation; instructing; modelling; mentoring; and mutual problem solving. Complementary skills for supervisees include the following: understanding the tasks, purpose, roles, and boundaries of supervision; maintaining a working alliance; preparing adequately for supervision sessions; remaining open to feedback; and taking initiative in discussing innovative ideas (Canadian Psychological Association [CPA], 2009). Essential to competent supervision is the development and maintenance of ethically appropriate supervisory relationships that extend beyond the narrow discussion of specific clinical problems (Koocher, Shafranske, & Falender, 2008). However, despite a burgeoning literature in the area of supervision, specific guidance related to ethical considerations in supervision has, until very recently, been lacking. The Canadian Code of Ethics for Psychologists (CPA, 1986, 1991, 2000) has provided the moral and ethical foundation for the development of ethical guidelines for special topics, such as Guidelines for Non-Discriminatory Practice (CPA, 1996a), Guidelines for Psychologists Addressing Recovered Memories (CPA 1996b), and Guidelines for Ethical Psychological Practice with Women (CPA, 2007). …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.186
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.263 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienneSame topicCounseling Practices and SupervisionFrench-language works237,207