The importance of mentorship in psychology training has received increased attention because of the purported positive outcomes associated with effective mentoring. However, mentorship can be a difficult construct to operationalize, and measuring the quality of mentorship and associated outcomes can be challenging. A specific type of mentorship, relational mentoring, has been proposed to be particularly useful in psychology training, not only to help trainees succeed in their careers but also to enhance their professional identity, resilience, and overall quality of life. This article describes a formal mentorship program in an American Psychological Association (APA)-accredited doctoral psychology internship at a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) health care system in the south-central United States, wherein staff psychologist preceptors formed a mentoring relationship with interns rather than a supervisory one. Widely ranging intended positive outcomes have been observed. Data collected as part of this program evaluation and development revealed both the strengths and weaknesses of this mentorship model and demonstrated that many mentorship dyads in this program had relational mentorship characteristics. Implications for both mentors and mentees, as well as the program and host facility, are discussed. Public Significance StatementThis article is the first, to our knowledge, to report on the use and adaption of measurement scales to assess the effectiveness of a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) doctoral internship's formal mentoring program. Feedback was obtained both from mentors and mentees, and the results provide data on elements of a successful formal mentorship program, as well as areas for growth and development.
Purpose/Objective: Advocacy has received increasing attention in the field of psychology over the past few years, including in the subfield of rehabilitation psychology. Psychology has been criticized for over-focusing on individual responses to complex sociopolitical problems. Rehabilitation psychology has tended to do this in much the same way, by placing the onus on individual disabled persons' responses to disability and overlooking the systemic and structural concerns of the environment. Advocacy has a long and important history as a competency for the practice of Rehabilitation Psychology. Yet, rehabilitation psychologists rarely receive formal training or guidance about performing effective advocacy efforts. The original six Foundational Principles include the person-environment relation, the insider-outsider distinction, adjustment to disability, psychological assets, self-perception of bodily states, and human dignity. Beatrice Wright advised that the guiding principles must be subject to review and open to expansion. Research Method/Design: N/A. Results: N/A. Conclusions/Implications: These authors believe that advocacy should be officially adopted as the seventh foundational principle of Rehabilitation Psychology. Rather than define advocacy narrowly as efforts within individual patient or family contexts, we argue that advocacy should be a broad construct of work done alongside the disability community and follow the lead of those with lived experience to avoid unintended consequences of well-intentioned advocacy efforts. We share models of advocacy in the field of psychology, including those most pertinent to rehabilitation psychology. Current disability advocacy priorities are highlighted at the individual, institutional, and discipline levels including interfacing with policymakers. Impact and ImplicationsAdvocacy has been a core competency and foundational theme of the field of Rehabilitation Psychology. There are many models of advocacy in psychology, and we argue that advocacy should be undertaken alongside the disability community in the spirit of "nothing about us without us." We believe advocacy should be adopted and added to Wright's Foundational Principles of the field of Rehabilitation Psychology.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.