Membership opinions about reorganizing APA.

To obtain a sense of membership views on plans to reorganize the American Psychological Association (APA), a survey was completed by 1,648 APA members. The results indicated that 59% of the Ss were generally aware that reorganization was being considered. A majority perceived an imbalance in the attention paid by APA to its members in terms of favoring independent health service practitioners over other major constituencies. Concern also was expressed over various aspects of how policy is adopted by the Association. Approximately 70% of the respondents felt that some type of change was needed. At the same time, both reorganizing and not reorganizing were viewed as having a price. Among the two- and three-assembly models that had been proposed, half of the respondents preferred the two-assembly model, which would be composed of an assembly for scientists and academics and one for practitioners. Results suggest that although most members intend to vote on any proposed Bylaws change for reorganization, it is important that any proposed plan (a) be simple to understand, (b) redress the perceived imbalance of interests being served by APA, (c) inrease the efficiency of current governance processes, and (d) provide mechanisms for communication and cooperation across the different groupings that are proposed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The 1986 APA Membership Opinion Survey: Comments by respondents.

Analyzes comments made by 782 respondents to a survey of members of the American Psychological Association (APA) by A. Howard et al (see record 1988-02607-001). Comments primarily dealt with factors such as the restructuring of the APA, quality of executive leadership, involvement of the APA in social and political issues, and publications. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Preferences about APA posters.

Continues the discussion initiated by B. M. Rienzi and M. J. Allen (see record 1994-42924-001) on APA poster presentations by surveying 271 poster session attendees on noteworthy preferences about what makes a poster consummate and professional. Important characteristics include ease of poster review, presenter availability, and complete copy of the paper. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

APA accreditation: A status report.

Outlines the evolution of the procedures and mechanisms of American Psychological Association (APA) accreditation (ACR) between 1966 and 1971. Under the present system, APA accredits professional programs as units rather than singling out individual specialities, programs put on probation are so identified in lists of approved programs, a provisional ACR category has been added, and greater emphasis has been placed on the advisory and consulting functions of the ACR process. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

APA finances: Introduction.

Discusses the profits and investments of the American Psychological Association (APA). Other topics include the financial control system, which provides for 5-yr advance planning, annual budgeting, and current reporting built around programs. These programs are divided into such categories as publications and services and activities. APA revenues, expenses, and net earnings for 1951–70 are listed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The Fort Bragg evaluation: A snapshot in time.

The recently completed Fort Bragg Child and Adolescent Mental Health Demonstration Project (L. Bickman, see record 83-31861; L. Bickman et al, 1995) has provided an opportunity to develop a fully comprehensive continuum of mental health and substance abuse services. However, the study's findings have raised questions concerning the usefulness of the continuum of care and the effectiveness of changing the structure of service delivery on clinical practice and outcomes. The author discusses the planning, methodology, and implementation of the project, and offers some additional insights into potential pitfalls in the evaluation of complex programs and the risks for drawing sweeping conclusions from a study done at a point in time. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A new plan for APA conventions.

An analysis of the results of a questionnaire given out at the 1953 APA meeting in Cleveland in regard to criticisms and suggestions of the various aspects of the annual meeting. A number of recommendations are made as to the solution of these convention problems. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

APA report.

Introduces this new section of the American Psychologist, which will focus on the activities of members on various boards, committees, and by staff representatives at APA. The intent in this department is to report particularly on the activities of the Central Office staff and the issues with which they are concerned. Members of the Central Office staff, appropriately identified in each issue, will serve as reporters for this column. The Associate Editor for this department will be Michael Amrine, who directs the APA information activities. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A manpower placement system for APA.

Speculates on what some of the basic features of a dual manpower-job placement system should be, stressing that the 2 have a close relationship and could complement each other. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

APA Council of Representatives amendment of APA bylaws.

Comments are invited on the proposal that the requirement of a doctoral degree based in part on a psychological dissertation or the requirement that the 5 years of acceptable professional experience be subsequent to granting of the doctoral degree for Fellow status or Member status may be waived under appropriate circumstances. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

APA and public policy: A survey of member views.

Describes a questionnaire published in the american psychologist, concerned with the posture of activism or passivity of the american psychological association (apa) with respect to various political and social policy matters, (the support of professional roles for psychologists, the unified or divided formal organization of apa, and the association's tax status). Only 5% of the total membership returned the questionnaire, nearly 1/3 of whom wrote in comments. A bare majority (52.5%) of the respondents felt that apa should be more active in furthering public policy and/or professional legislation; however, these respondents were divided on the issues to which they believed activity should be addressed. On the basis of the expression of distinctly divergent views and the limited number of respondents, the association policy and planning board concluded that there exists no clear mandate for change among the membership. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Impaired practitioners: Psychologists' opinions about prevalence, and proposals for intervention.

Surveyed 167 licensed psychologists (academicians and practitioners) about opinions toward impaired practitioners. Results suggest the following: (a) A significant proportion of psychologists were judged to be impaired; (b) the majority of Ss believed that impaired practitioners are a serious problem; (c) few Ss were willing to refer impaired colleagues to a therapist or report them to a regulatory agency; (d) training in ethics was related to awareness, seeking help, offering help, and reporting colleagues to a regulatory agency; and (e) Ss overwhelmingly favored the least restrictive proposals for intervention. (9 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

APA insurance trust: Announcing new developments in the APA income protection plan.

Major sections are: Rates for Higher Benefits; Eligibility for Increased Benefits; Members under 40 May Increase Benefits Annually; Premium Credits Announced. "Members in Plan A, which has a 7-day waiting period, are currently limited to a $100 weekly maximum. The new maximum will be $200 a week." Members in Plan B, Plan C, and Plan D, all with longer waiting periods, will presently be eligible for a maximum of $250 weekly. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

A communication from the APA membership committee.

Each year the six-member American Psychological Association Membership Committee meets at least twice: once to consider applications for initial APA membership and once to consider nominations for Fellowship status. Often a third meeting is necessary at the time of the annual convention. In general, decisions with regard to initial membership are reached with a minimum of difficulty. Decisions with respect to Fellowship status are more difficult despite the enormous amount of work that is done by the Divisions and the APA Central Office prior to the meetings of the Membership Committee. It often happens that even though nominations for Fellowship status are read and independently evaluated by each of the Committee members and then thoroughly discussed, the final decision is not reached with the certainty that the Committee members desire. This led the Committee at its last meeting in July 1965 to discuss means whereby such decisions might be made with the degree of certainty that would make Fellowship status in the APA as meaningful as it should be. With this goal in mind the article presents suggestions relevant to future nominations for Fellowship status. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

The APA Archives.

This item reports on the availability of materials within the APA Archives at the Library of Congress. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

APA Fellow Status.

This column comments on the new requirements for Fellow status in the American Psychological Association (APA). The author notes that while the purpose of the new requirements is very commendable, it seems that they actually do very little to elevate this class of membership. He believes that undoubtedly the revised requirements for Fellow status will eventually achieve their end, but they do not now appear to deal with the current situation and need effectively. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)