한국심리학회지: 일반
- P-ISSN : 1229-067X
- E-ISSN : 2734-1127
- Publisher : 한국심리학회
- CCL :
4개 논문이 있습니다.
Given the need for empirical evidence to inform evidence-based interventions and systematic policy development for the mental health of Youth who are in Readiness for Self-Reliance(YRSR), this study examined the need for and effectiveness of professional counseling for YRSR. Study 1 examined the changes in 31 young adults (mean age 21.81 years, 18 females) before and after receiving a mean of 9.90 (SD=2.13) counseling sessions from a counselor with a first-level license as a counseling psychologist. After counseling, there was a significant decrease in psychological symptoms and a significant increase in self-identity and self-esteem. They reported significantly lower levels of major complaints and higher levels of counseling satisfaction. Study 2 explored the process of counseling effectiveness through a qualitative study of the counseling experiences of YRSR. We analyzed the counseling experiences of five young adults who participated in Study 1 and organized the 20 concepts into four categories: empathic honesty, time to get to know me, freedom from irrational beliefs, and increased positivity. An empathic counseling relationship allows for emotional stability and self-expression as it is, which in turn promotes mindfulness, conscious reflection, acceptance, and integration, leading to the reduction of psychological symptoms and the strengthening of an empowered self-concept. The need to secure the professionalism of counseling personnel was discussed as a key factor in the effectiveness of counseling.
Structural equation model, which is widely used to describe the relationship between latent variables, can be judged by its goodness of fit. The test for statistical significance and the effect size index for practical significance of model fit use dichotomous and continuous interpretation approach to evaluate the usefulness of the model, respectively. However, despite the fact that the level of fit is represented on a continuum for practical significance, the calculated effect size index is interpreted dichotomously by using the guideline as an absolute standard. The present study discusses the process of assessing the practical significance of fit in terms of the effect size index and the correct use of guidelines so that researchers evaluating the fit of a model can interpret the level of fit on a continuum. We begin with a brief discussion of the importance of assessing statistical significance using test, and then define the concept of effect size in the context of structural equation models. We then introduce the different types of goodness of fit effect size indices and describe the characteristics of the guidelines used to interpret them. Finally, we provide examples of appropriate guidelines for interpreting calculated effect size index values on a continuum and discuss examples of incorrect model evaluation when continuity is not reflected, as well as the correct interpretation of models with marginal fit.
In various fields of psychology, researchers commonly investigate difference in changes between treatment and control groups by analyzing data gathered before and after interventions. The most widely used analytical methods used in such cases are the difference score model and the analysis of covariance model. However, since these models may produce conflicting outcomes, researchers often get confused when determining the most appropriate method for their studies. Therefore, this study aims to offer an in-depth examination of the theoretical and empirical difference between these models, aiming to furnish guidelines on when to use which method. Initially, we introduce and illustrate each model using an example dataset to showcase their potential divergent analytical outcomes. Subsequently, we scrutinize the debate on the use of difference scores, debunking traditional criticisms grounded in oversimplified assumptions and misunderstandings. We then delve into the implicit assumptions of both models within the framework of causal inference and, drawing upon these assumptions and findings from simulation studies, furnish recommendations for selecting the appropriate method under different participant allocation methods and analytical purposes. This study endeavors to empower researchers in making informed decisions regarding their choice of analytical methods, thereby enhancing the rigor and efficacy of their investigations.
This current study conducted a systematic review of translating and adapting psychological tests based on the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing and the ITC Guidelines. We reviewed a total of 107 KAPA articles published from 2017 to 2023 and examined validation and reporting practices. The current study examined whether sufficient information about the psychometric properties of the tests was reported and whether each study conducted adequate analyses to ensure validity. Specifically, we reviewed the implementation and reporting of factor analysis for validation. In short, we found that most studies reported reliability and used factor analysis for testing construct validity; therefore, we suggested recommendations in this regard. We also indicated that academic terminologies in psychology research should be unified as the studies often used different terms for the same concept. Although the study results are based on the translating and adapting tests, the findings and recommendations will be also useful for development and validation new tests.