Canadian Psychology

Collaborative practice in Canadian psychologists’ standards of practice.
Health care professions have been incorporating collaborative practice competencies into codes of ethics, standards of practice, and accreditation frameworks for decades. As collaborative practice in mental health care has received increased attention in recent years, in order to provide the best care to their clients psychologists must redouble their efforts to ensure they are trained and supported in the process of collaborating with other health care providers and relevant third parties. This review examined the standards of practice used by regulatory organizations for psychologists across Canada. Four provinces/territories (P/T) have standards specific to collaborative practice and two P/Ts have standards that briefly address working with other professionals. Specific practices that are relevant to collaboration found in the documents included referral, consultation, third-party interactions, shared record keeping, and assessment. Variations in both the structure and wording of the standards reviewed may impact the ability of psychologists in Canada to consistently understand and communicate their roles in interprofessional health care teams. Furthermore, many of the standards appear to be difficult to interpret within a collaborative care context, seemingly having been designed with individual practice in mind. Consideration of collaborative competency frameworks when designing standards of practice, practice guidelines, and health legislation may provide support to both practitioners and educators who strive to enhance the role of collaborative practice in Canadian psychology. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)
Ethics of psychotherapy rationing: A review of ethical and regulatory documents in Canadian professional psychology.
Ethical and regulatory documents in Canadian professional psychology were reviewed for principles and standards related to the rationing of psychotherapy. Despite Canada’s high per capita health care expenses, mental health in Canada receives relatively low funding. Further, surveys indicated that Canadians have unmet needs for psychotherapy. Effective and ethical rationing of psychological treatment is a necessity, yet the topic of rationing in psychology has received scant attention. The present study involved a qualitative review of codes of ethics, codes of conduct, and standards of practice documents for their inclusion of rationing principles and standards. Findings highlight the strengths and shortcomings of these documents related to guiding psychotherapy rationing. The discussion offers recommendations for revising these ethical and regulatory documents to promote more equitable and cost-effective use of limited psychotherapy resources in Canada. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)
Research productivity norms among Canadian I–O psychology scholars.
We present research output norms for Canadian industrial–organizational (I–O) psychologists. Previous studies have presented publication norms for the field as a whole (Bowling & Burns, 2010; Vancouver et al., 2008). Yet, in many cases, research output relative to other Canadian scholars is an important metric, as Canadian scholars compete for the same pool of graduate students and grant funding. To this end, we recorded each Canadian I–O faculty member’s publications in the 38 I–O journals identified by Highhouse et al. (2020). Furthermore, we used Highhouse et al.’s journal prestige rankings to compute an indicator of research output taking both quantity and quality into account. PhD year was used to compute productivity-per-year statistics, thereby equating scholars on opportunity to perform. Norms are also presented split by employment setting (psychology programme vs. business school), academic rank, and among the five I–O psychology PhD-granting programmes in Canada. The norms presented in this article are useful for prospective graduate students seeking to identify potential PhD supervisors, as well as scholars who wish to communicate their output relative to these norms to granting agencies, tenure/promotion committees, and during performance reviews. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)
Assessing the publication productivity of clinical psychology professors in Canadian psychological association-accredited Canadian psychology departments: A 10-year replication study.
The landscape of academia in clinical psychology has changed drastically over the last 10 years. Since 2012, the Canadian Psychological Association (CPA) accredited six additional programmes, an influx of faculty joined the field, and research productivity substantially increased. Canadian productivity norms can also reasonably be expected to have meaningfully changed given changes in academia since norms were published in 2012. The present replication study was designed to update normative data for publication counts, citations, and h-indices for CPA-accredited clinical psychology professors stratified by rank and gender. The present study results evidenced that average and annual publication counts, citation counts, and h-indices have at least doubled in the last 10 years across all professorial ranks for men and women. Results also suggest gendered differences are diminishing, as men do not appear to be outproducing women except at the full professor rank. The top 15% of men and women professors from CPA-accredited clinical psychology programmes stratified by career status are detailed to recognize the academic achievements of individuals and promote transparency; however, inclusion as a top producer does not indicate the quality of psychology professors or represent their impact on the field. We caution against using any single set of indicators to evaluate any type of professorial productivity and recommend promoting the early success of researchers to truly engender equity. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)
Follow the money: Is borderline personality disorder research underfunded in Canada?
Although borderline personality disorder (BPD) is prevalent, highly lethal, and involves comparable or elevated distress, societal burden, and mortality to several other mental health conditions, studies suggest that BPD research is underfunded by granting agencies in the United States. However, it remains unclear whether BPD research is similarly underfunded in Canada, especially when compared with a number of disorders with similar prevalence and lethality rates. The present study, therefore, examined whether BPD may be underfunded in Canada compared to disorders of similar lethality and prevalence (i.e., bipolar disorder, psychotic disorders, eating disorders). The Canadian Institute for Health Research funding database was searched to identify all grants funded by Canadian Institute for Health Research between 1999 and 2022 with terms related to the above mental health conditions. Coders then identified whether the grants focused on BPD, bipolar disorder, psychosis, eating disorders, or none of these populations. Results indicated that both BPD and eating disorder research received fewer funded grants than bipolar disorder and psychosis research across 23 years of funding and in the past 7 years specifically. These populations also received less total grant dollars than bipolar disorder and psychosis research across 23 years of funding and psychosis research in the past 7 years specifically. BPD and eating disorder research may be underfunded in Canada, but grants for this work may also be under sought by researchers. Efforts to destigmatize these populations to encourage scholars to study them, and grant reviewers to recognize the need and impact of research on them, are needed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)
The significance quest theory and the 3N model: A systematic review.
According to the Significance Quest Theory (Kruglanski et al., 2009) and the 3N model (Webber & Kruglanski, 2018), violent extremism is the product of a quest for significance triggered by a need for significance (need) and nourished by subscription to a radical ideology (narrative) and affiliation with a radical network (network). The present systematic review aims to synthesize extant quantitative empirical research mobilizing this framework. We screened a total of 151 reports, of which 31 met our eligibility criteria. These regrouped a total of 84 studies. Our findings show an important heterogeneity in the measurements and manipulations of significance (need and quest), narrative, and network, as well as in the pathways examined. Moreover, while the theory’s predictions are confirmed by a majority of the studies’ findings (n = 74), such predictions are also infirmed by a considerable number of studies’ findings (n = 29). This is particularly the case for the empirical evidence related to the association between significance loss and extremism, as well as the association between significance loss and narrative, and between network and extremism. More consistent evidence was found concerning the association between significance loss and network, significance quest and narrative, significance quest and extremism, and narrative and extremism. The methodological, operational, and theoretical implications of these findings are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)
Endel Tulving (1927–2023).
Memorializes Endel Tulving (1927-2023), an Estonian Canadian cognitive psychologist and cognitive neuroscientist. He was among the first scientists to advocate a cognitive approach to the study of memory and learning in the 1960s and was an early convert to cognitive neuroscience in the 1990s. He was a major Canadian psychologist and one of the most important researchers of human memory in the last 100 years. Although his early work was conducted at the Unit for Memory Disorders at the University of Toronto, the majority of Tulving’s work on the brain was carried out at the Rotman Research Institute in Toronto. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)

Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne - Vol 65, Iss 1