Promoting the internationalization of evidence‐based practice: Benchmarking as a strategy to evaluate culturally transported psychological treatments.

Abstract

In addition to the growing evidence‐based practice movement in psychology, psychological treatments are undergoing increasing adaptation and transportation to other countries and cultures around the world, prompting the need to evaluate treatments in these diverse settings. This article proposes the “benchmarking” strategy as a valuable approach to evaluate the effectiveness of culturally adapted or transported treatments and to promote the internationalization of evidence‐based practice. We first describe the benchmarking concept in clinical research, followed by considerations for the cultural adaptation and transportation of psychological treatments. We then explain how the benchmarking strategy may be used to validate culturally transported and adapted psychological treatments. The article concludes with a discussion of considerations, limitations, and challenges for conducting cross‐cultural benchmarking research.

A working definition and conceptual model of internationalization for school and educational psychology

“…Within the existing literature, I identified at least nine types of goals that various authors have described. Some examples include finding solutions to local and global needs (e.g., Gerstein, Heppner, Ægisdóttir, Leung, & Norsworthy, ; Heppner, Leong, & Chiao, ), including but not limited to developing and evaluating culturally appropriate, evidence‐based interventions and assessments (Begeny, Levy, Hida, & Norwalk, ; Spilka & Dobson, ); creating a more culturally informed, inclusive, and internationally applicable profession, and in so doing, enhancing professionals’ training and development in areas such as intercultural competence (e.g., Bullock, ; Hurley, Gerstein, & Ægisdóttir, ; Ng, Choudhuri, Noonan, & Ceballos, ); improving representation of international professionals working within the discipline—such as by having geographically representative scholarship in discipline‐specific journals or representative leadership in international organizations (e.g., Arnett, ; Pieterse, Fang, & Evans, ); ensuring that theories, practices, and systems within a discipline are tied to the local culture (e.g., Leong & Ponterotto, ; Leung, ); and creating a better synthesis of theories, procedures, and/or data across cultures (e.g., Leung et al., ; van de Vijver, ). Later in this article, each of the nine identified goals are summarized in a table and presented within the context of a conceptual model of internationalization.…”

“…These are broad descriptions of assessment, intervention, and collaborative consultation processes that many practicing educational psychologists are familiar with, and there is much literature within and outside of educational psychology to support these types of processes when the goal is to understand a problem and/or collaborate to strategically address it (e.g., Begeny, Schulte, & Johnson, ; Jameson, Jaeger, & Clayton, ; Nastasi, ; Sheridan & Kratochwill, ). Furthermore, although past descriptions of internationalization have not specifically described the internationalization process in this particular way, the vast majority of the scholarship has described these elements within a broader description of the internationalization process, such as the importance of collaboration, cultural understanding, promoting equal partnerships, including representative stakeholders, and a commitment to social justice (Arfken, ; Bullock, ; Consoli, Bullock, & Consoli, ; Gerstein et al., ; Ng & Noonan, ; Spilka, & Dobson, ; van de Vijver, ). Perhaps the only element less commonly described in the internationalization scholarship is the interventionist perspective, which emphasizes the use of various forms of data so that intentional, strategic decisions can be made and specifically enacted to support internationalization goals.…”

“…This fact may not be surprising given that most conceptual discussions about internationalization either directly or indirectly reflect the importance of scholarship. For example, key elements of conceptual discussions usually include (1) the importance of culturally responsible and multinational research collaboration, (2) synthesizing data and knowledge generated from practice and scholarship to engender a more culturally informed and globally applicable discipline, and (3) the potential that theories or procedures from the Western world—typically developed and communicated about via scholarship—are simply exported to other countries without regard to cultural appropriateness or sufficient evaluation (e.g., Bullock, ; Leung et al., ; Pederson, ; Spilka & Dobson, ; van de Vijver, ). Thus, aligned with the existing literature, I suggest that one goal of internationalization for school psychology should be to enhance internationally representative, culturally informed, and accessible scholarship that helps to improve local, national, and/or global research, practice, or theory.…”

An overview of internationalization and its relevance for school and educational psychology

“…and the role of globalization in cross‐cultural exchanges of ideas and information (e.g., how is psychological theory and scholarship developed, disseminated, and/or adapted in cross‐cultural contexts?). However, like other disciplines in the social sciences, concepts and theories of internationalization within psychology extend well beyond globalization (Begeny, ; Leung et al., ); and the scholarship on this topic, especially over the past 5–10 years, has offered many valuable perspectives (e.g., Arfken, ; Gerstein, Heppner, Ægisdóttir, Leung, & Norsworthy, ; Spilka & Dobson, ; van de Vijver, ), a small but increasing number of empirical studies (e.g., Aleksandrova‐Howell, Abramson, & Craig, ; Arnett, ; Begeny, Levy, Hida, & Norwalk, ; Lo Bianco, Almeida, Koller, & Paiva, ; Pieterse, Fang, & Evans, ; Turner‐Essel & Waehler, ), and a range of descriptions and definitions (Gerstein, Heppner, Ægisdóttir, Leung, & Norsworthy, ).…”

Benchmarking Family Therapy for Adolescent Behavior Problems in Usual Care: Fidelity, Outcomes, and Therapist Performance Differences

“…Benchmarking is a method for assessing whether therapists delivering evidence-based treatments (EBTs) in routine clinical settings can approximate performance standards set by research-funded clinicians in controlled trials (Spilka & Dobson, 2015). Benchmarking studies typically focus on critical areas such as client retention, model implementation, and clinical outcomes (Hunsley & Lee, 2007).…”