Chapter 2: Intensive Research: A Review of Methodological Issues in Clinical, Counseling, and School Psychology

Abstract

Clinical, school, and counseling psychologists are involved in implementing psychological principles and techniques toward the solution of applied problems. Those working with clients and various socialization agents (e.g., parents, teachers) who attempt to change behavior and the environment to promote human welfare should be guided by an empirical knowledge base that promotes the development of the most successful intervention program possible (Bergan, 1977; Goldman, 1978a Goldman, , 1978b. Moreover, these individuals are in a unique position to contribute to such a knowledge base. Both of these notions have remained cherished ideals, but both remain far from common practice in applied psychology (Kazdin & Marholin, 1978;Kazdin & Wilson, 1978;Ricks, 1976). Some doubt has been cast on the usefulness of various conventional research practices for applied psychology. At times counseling psychology has been its own hardest critic on research issues. Brayfield (1963) characterized the scientific contributions of counseling psychology as "unimpressive." Schmidt and Pepinsky (1965) reviewed counseling research and concluded that serious methodological problems pervaded the studies. Despite some positive comments on subsequent counseling research (Carkhuff, 1966; Myers, 1966), serious concerns raised over methodology have been more common (Hansen & Warner, 47 validity, the vast majority were one-shot case studies characterized by serious methodological flaws. Some writers have noted that poorly formulated research is not only worthless, but also deceptive (Whitely, 1967; Ripstra, Note 1). More recently, Goldman (1978a) raised a number of limitations in traditional research practices in the counseling field. His theme was also that the field needs more credible research strategies which are relevant to practice. (See also Sprinthall, 1975.) The related profession of school psychology has also had its share of concerns over applied research. Elsewhere, I have suggested (cf. Kratochwill, 1977) that school psychologists have long lamented that they are unable to perform research in applied settings (e.g., Bardon & Bennett, 1974;Eiserer, 1972;Guttentag, 1968;Itkin, 1967;Reger, 1965; Sciarra, 1968; White & Harris, 1961). Despite rhetoric about its desirability, historically research has not been a major role function of school psychologists (Eiserer, 1972). Many psychologist-practitioners are concerned with effecting change in their clients and are less concerned with formal research endeavors. Nevertheless, school psychologists are being increasingly called upon to document the effectiveness of their interventions; this is labeled "accountability". Moreover, there has been an upsurge of interest in their involvement in program evaluation research, as documented by various articles (e.g., Granger & Campbell, 1977) and an issue of the Journal of School Psychology devoted to recommending training and involvement in program evaluation research (e.g., Kratochwill & Bergan, 1978). Ysseldyke (1978) noted that most of the critical...