Becoming a Supervisor: Qualitative Findings on Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Doctoral Student Supervisors-in-Training

Melodie H. Frick, Harriet L. Glosoff

Counselor education doctoral students are influenced by many factors as they train to become supervisors. One of these factors, self-efficacy beliefs, plays an important role in supervisor development. In this phenomenological, qualitative research, 16 counselor education doctoral students participated in focus groups and discussed their experiences and perceptions of self-efficacy as supervisors. Data analyses revealed four themes associated with self-efficacy beliefs: ambivalence in the middle tier of supervision, influential people, receiving performance feedback, and conducting evaluations. Recommendations for counselor education and supervision, as well as future research, are provided.

Keywords: supervision, doctoral students, counselor education, self-efficacy, phenomenological, focus groups

Counselor education programs accredited by the Council for Accreditation and Related Educational Programs (CACREP) require doctoral students to learn supervision theories and practices (CACREP, 2009). Professional literature highlights information on supervision theories (e.g., Bernard & Goodyear, 2009), supervising counselors-in-training (e.g., Woodside, Oberman, Cole, & Carruth, 2007), and effective supervision interventions and styles (e.g., Fernando & Hulse-Killacky, 2005) that assist with supervisor training and development. Until recently, however, few researchers have studied the experiences of counselor education doctoral students as they prepare to become supervisors (Hughes & Kleist, 2005; Limberg et al., 2013; Protivnak & Foss, 2011) or “the transition from supervisee to supervisor” (Rapisarda, Desmond, & Nelson, 2011, p. 121). Specifically, an exploration of factors associated with the self-efficacy beliefs of counselor education doctoral student supervisors is warranted to expand this topic and enhance counselor education training of supervisor development.

Bernard and Goodyear (2009) described supervisor development as a process shaped by changes in self-perceptions and roles, much like counselors-in-training experience in their developmental stages. Researchers have examined factors that may influence supervisors’ development (e.g., experiential learning and the influence of feedback). For example, Nelson, Oliver, and Capps (2006) explored the training experiences of 21 doctoral students in two cohorts of the same counseling program and reported that experiential learning, the use of role-plays, and receiving feedback from both professors and peers were equally as helpful in learning supervision skills as the actual practice of supervising counselors-in-training. Conversely, a supervisor’s development may be negatively influenced by unclear expectations of the supervision process or dual relationships with supervisees, which may lead to role ambiguity (Bernard & Goodyear, 2009). For example, Nilsson and Duan (2007) examined the relationship between role ambiguity and self-efficacy with 69 psychology doctoral student supervisors and found that when participants received clear supervision expectations, they reported higher rates of self-efficacy.

Self-efficacy is one of the self-regulation functions in Bandura’s social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986) and is a factor in Larson’s (1998) social cognitive model of counselor training (SCMCT). Self-efficacy, the differentiated beliefs held by individuals about their capabilities to perform (Bandura, 2006), plays an important role in counselor and supervisor development (Barnes, 2004; Cashwell & Dooley, 2001) and is influenced by many factors (Schunk, 2004). Along with the counselor’s training environment, self-efficacy beliefs may influence a counselor’s learning process and resulting counseling performance (Larson, 1998). Daniels and Larson (2001) conducted a quantitative study with 45 counseling graduate students and found that performance feedback influenced counselors’ self-efficacy beliefs; self-efficacy increased with positive feedback and decreased with negative feedback. Steward (1998), however, identified missing components in the SCMCT, such as the role and level of self-efficacy of the supervisor, the possible influence of a faculty supervisor, and doctoral students giving and receiving feedback to supervisees and members of their cohort. For example, results of both quantitative studies (e.g., Hollingsworth & Fassinger, 2002) and qualitative studies (e.g., Majcher & Daniluk, 2009; Nelson et al., 2006) indicate the importance of mentoring experiences and relationships with faculty supervisors to the development of doctoral students and self-efficacy in their supervisory skills.

During their supervision training, doctoral students are in a unique position of supervising counselors-in-training while also being supervised by faculty. For the purpose of this study, the term middle tier will be used to describe this position. This term is not often used in the counseling literature, but may be compared to the position of middle managers in the business field—people who are subordinate to upper managers while having the responsibility of managing subordinates (Agnes, 2003). Similar to middle managers, doctoral student supervisors tend to have increased responsibility for supervising future counselors, albeit with limited authority in supervisory decisions, and may have experiences similar to middle managers in other disciplines. For example, performance-related feedback as perceived by middle managers appears to influence their role satisfaction and self-efficacy (Reynolds, 2006). In Reynolds’s (2006) study, 353 participants who represented four levels of management in a company in the United States reported that receiving positive feedback from supervisors had an affirming or encouraging effect on their self-efficacy, and that their self-efficacy was reduced after they received negative supervisory feedback. Translated to the field of counselor supervision, these findings suggest that doctoral students who participate in tiered supervision and receive positive performance feedback may have higher self-efficacy.

Findings to date illuminate factors that influence self-efficacy beliefs, such as performance feedback, clear supervisor expectations and mentoring relations. There is a need, however, to examine what other factors enhance or detract from the self-efficacy beliefs of counselor education doctoral student supervisors to ensure effective supervisor development and training. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to build on previous research and further examine the experiences of doctoral students as they train to become supervisors in a tiered supervision model. The overarching research questions that guided this study included: (a) What are the experiences of counselor education doctoral students who work within a tiered supervision training model as they train to become supervisors? and (b) What experiences influenced their sense of self-efficacy as supervisors?

 

Method

 

Design

A phenomenological research approach was selected to explore how counselor education doctoral students experience and make meaning of their reality (Merriam, 2009), and to provide richer descriptions of the experiences of doctoral student supervisors-in-training, which a quantitative study may not afford. A qualitative design using a constructivist-interpretivist method provided the opportunity to interact with doctoral students via focus groups and follow-up questionnaires to explore their self-constructed realities as counselor supervisors-in-training, and the meaning they placed on their experiences as they supervised master’s-level students while being supervised by faculty supervisors. Focus groups were chosen as part of the design, as they are often used in qualitative research (Kress & Shoffner, 2007; Limberg et al., 2013), and multiple-case sampling increases confidence and robustness in findings (Miles & Huberman, 1994).

 

Participants

Sixteen doctoral students from three CACREP-accredited counselor education programs in the southeastern United States volunteered to participate in this study. These programs were selected due to similarity in supervision training among participants (e.g., all were CACREP-accredited, required students to take at least one supervision course, utilized a full-time cohort design), and were in close proximity to the principal investigator. None of the participants attended the first author’s university or had any relationships with the authors. Criterion sampling was used to select participants that met the criteria of providing supervision to master’s-level counselors-in-training and receiving supervision by faculty supervisors at the time of their participation. The ages of the participants ranged from 27–61 years with a mean age of 36 years (SD = 1.56). Fourteen of the participants were women and two were men; two participants described their race as African-American (12.5%), one participant as Asian-American (6.25%), 12 participants as Caucasian (75%), and one participant as “more than one ethnicity” (6.25%). Seven of the 16 participants reported having 4 months to 12 years of work experience as counselor supervisors (M = 2.5 years, SD = 3.9 years) before beginning their doctoral studies. At the time of this study, all participants had completed a supervision course as part of their doctoral program, were supervising two to six master’s students in the same program (M = 4, SD = 1.2), and received weekly supervision with faculty supervisors in their respective programs.

 

Researcher Positionality

In presenting results of phenomenological research, it is critical to discuss the authors’ characteristics as researchers, as such characteristics influence data collection and analysis. The authors have experience as counselors, counselor educators, and clinical supervisors. Both authors share an interest in understanding how doctoral students move from the role of student to the role of supervisor, especially when providing supervision to master’s students who may experience critical incidents (with their clients or in their own development). The first author became engaged when she saw the different emotional reactions of her cohort when faced with the gatekeeping process, whether the reactions were based on personality, prior supervision experience, or stressors from inside and outside of the counselor education program. She wondered how doctoral students in other programs experienced the aforementioned situations, what kind of structure other programs used to work with critical incidents that involve remediation plans, and if there were ways to improve supervision training. It was critical to account for personal and professional biases throughout the research process to minimize biases in the collection or interpretation of data. Bracketing, therefore, was an important step during analysis (Moustakas, 1994) to reduce researcher biases. The first author accomplished this by meeting with her dissertation committee and with the second author throughout the study, as well as using peer reviewers to assess researcher bias in the design of the study, research questions, and theme development.

 

Quality and Trustworthiness

To strengthen the rigor of this study, the authors addressed credibility, dependability, transferability and confirmability (Merriam, 2009). One way to reinforce credibility is to have prolonged and persistent contact with participants (Hunt, 2011). The first author contacted participants before each focus group to convey the nature, scope and reasons for the study. She facilitated 90-minute focus group discussions and allowed participants to add or change the summary provided at the end of each focus group. Further, information was gathered from each participant through a follow-up questionnaire and afforded the opportunity for participants to contact her through e-mail with additional questions or thoughts.

By keeping an ongoing reflexive journal and analytical memos, the first author addressed dependability by keeping a detailed account throughout the research study, indicating how data were collected and analyzed and how decisions were made (Merriam, 2009). The first author included information on how data were reduced and themes and displays were constructed, and the second author conducted an audit trail on items such as transcripts, analytic memos, reflection notes, and process notes connecting findings to existing literature.

Through the use of rich, thick description of the information provided by participants, the authors made efforts to increase transferability. In addition, they offered a clear account of each stage of the process as well as the demographics of the participants (Hunt, 2011) to promote transferability.

Finally, the first author strengthened confirmability by examining her role as a research instrument. Selected colleagues chosen as peer reviewers (Kline, 2008), along with the first author’s dissertation committee members, had access to the audit trail and discussed and questioned the authors’ decisions, further increasing the integrity of the design. Two doctoral students who had provided supervision and had completed courses in qualitative research, but who had no connection to the research study, volunteered to serve as peer reviewers. They reviewed the focus group protocol for researcher bias, read the focus group transcripts (with pseudonyms inserted) and questionnaires, and the emergent themes, to confirm or contest the interpretation of the data. Further, they reviewed the quotes chosen to support themes for richness of description and provided feedback regarding the textural-structural descriptions as they were being developed. Their recommendations, such as not having emotional reactions to participants’ comments, guided the authors in data collection and analysis.

 

Data Collection

Upon receiving approval from the university’s Institutional Review Board, the first author contacted the directors of three CACREP-accredited counselor education programs and discussed the purpose of the study, participants’ rights, and logistical needs. Program directors disseminated an e-mail about this study to their doctoral students, instructing volunteer participants to contact the first author about participating in the focus groups.

Within a two-week period, she conducted three focus groups—one at each counselor education program site. Each focus group included five to six participants and lasted approximately 90 minutes. She employed a semi-structured interview protocol consisting of 17 questions (see Appendix). The questions were based on an extensive literature review on counselor and supervisor self-efficacy studies (e.g., Bandura, 2006; Cashwell & Dooley, 2001; Corrigan & Schmidt, 1983; Fernando & Hulse-Killacky, 2005; Gore, 2006; Israelashvili & Socher, 2007; Steward, 1998; Tang et al., 2004). The initial questions were open and general at first, so as to not lead or bias the participants in their responses. As the focus groups continued, the first author explored more specific information about participants’ experiences as doctoral student supervisors, focusing questions around their responses (Kline, 2008). Conducting a semi-structured interview with participants ensured that she asked specific questions and addressed predetermined topics related to the focus of the study, while also allowing for freedom to follow up on relevant information provided by participants during the focus groups.

Approximately six to eight weeks after each focus group, participants received a follow-up questionnaire consisting of four questions: (a) What factors (inside and outside of the program) influence your perceptions of your abilities as a supervisor? (b) How do you feel about working in the middle tier of supervision (i.e., working between a faculty supervisor and the counselors-in-training that you supervise)? (c) What, if anything, could help you feel more competent as a supervisor? (d) How can your supervision training be improved? The purpose of the follow-up questions was to explore participants’ responses after they gained more experiences as supervisors and to provide a means for them to respond to questions about their supervisory experiences privately, without concern of peer judgment.

 

Data Analysis

 

Data analysis began during the transcription process, with analysis occurring simultaneously with the collection of the data. The first author transcribed, verbatim, the recording of each focus group and changed participant names to protect their anonymity. Data analysis was then conducted in three stages: first, data were analyzed to identify significant issues within each focus group; second, data were cross-analyzed to identify common themes across all three focus groups; and third, follow-up questionnaires were analyzed to corroborate established themes and to identify additional, or different themes.

During data analysis, a Miles and Huberman (1994) approach was employed by using initial codes from focus-group question themes. Inductive analysis occurred with immersion in the data by reading and rereading focus group transcripts. It was during this immersion process that the first author began to identify core ideas and differentiate meanings and emergent themes for each focus group. She accomplished data reduction by identifying themes in participants’ answers to the interview protocol and focus group discussions until saturation was reached, and displayed narrative data in a figure to organize and compare developed themes. Finally, she used deductive verification of findings with previous research literature. During within-group analysis, she identified themes if more than half (i.e., more than three participants) of a focus group reported similar experiences, feelings or beliefs. Likewise, in across-group analyses, she confirmed themes if statements made by more than half (more than eight) of the participants matched. There were three cases in which the peer reviewers and the first author had differences of opinion on theme development. In those cases, she made changes guided by the suggestions of the peer reviewers. In addition, she sent the final list of themes related to the research questions to the second author and other members of the dissertation committee for purposes of confirmability.

 

Results

 

Results of this phenomenological study revealed several themes associated with doctoral students’ perceptions of self-efficacy as supervisors (see Figure 1). Cross-group analyses are provided with participant quotes that are most relevant to each theme being discussed. Considerable overlap of four themes emerged across groups: ambivalence in the middle tier of supervision, influential people, receiving feedback, and conducting evaluations.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1. Emergent themes of doctoral student supervisors’ self-efficacy beliefs. Factors identified by doctoral student as affecting their self-efficacy as supervisors are represented with directional, bold-case arrows from each theme toward supervisor self-efficacy; below themes are sub-themes in each group connected with non-directional lines.

 

Ambivalence in the Middle Tier of Supervision

All participants noted how working in the middle tier of supervision brought up issues about their roles and perceptions about their capabilities as supervisors. All 16 participants reported feeling ambivalent about working in the middle tier, especially in relation to their role as supervisors and about dealing with critical incidents with supervisees involving the need for remediation. What follows is a presentation of representative quotations from one or two participants in the emergent sub-themes of role uncertainty and critical incidents/remediation.

 

Role Uncertainty. Participants raised the issue of role uncertainty in all three focus groups. For example, one participant described how it felt to be in the middle tier by stating the following:

I think that’s exactly how it feels [to be in the middle] sometimes….not really knowing how much you know, what does my voice really mean? How much of a say do we have if we have big concerns? And is what I recognize really a big concern? So I think kind of knowing that we have this piece of responsibility but then not really knowing how much authority or how much say-so we have in things, or even do I have the knowledge and experience to have much say-so?

Further, another participant expressed uncertainty regarding her middle-tier supervisory role as follows:

[I feel a] lack of power, not having real and true authority over what is happening or if something does happen, being able to make those concrete decisions…Where do I really fit in here? What am I really able to do with this supervisee?…kind of a little middle child, you know really not knowing where your identity really and truly is.  You’re trying to figure out who you really are.

Participants also indicated difficulty discerning their role when supervising counselors-in-training who were from different specialty areas such as college counseling, mental health counseling, and school counseling. All participants stated that they had not had any specific counseling or supervision training in different tracks, which was bothersome for nine participants who supervised students in specialties other than their own. For example, one participant stated the following:

I’m a mental health counselor and worked in the community and I have two school counselor interns, and so it was one of my very first questions was like, what do I do with these people? ’Cause I’m not aware of the differences and what I should be guiding them on anything.

Another participant noted how having more information on the different counseling tracks (e.g., mental health, school, college) would be helpful:

We’re going to be counselor educators. We may find ourselves having to supervise people in various tracks and I could see how it would be helpful for us to all have a little bit more information on a variety of tracks so that we could know what to offer, or how things are a little bit different.

Working in the middle tier of supervision appeared to be vexing for focus group participants. They expressed feelings of uncertainty, especially in dealing with critical incidents or remediation of supervisees. In addition to defining their roles as supervisors in the middle tier, another sub-theme emerged in which participants identified how they wanted to have a better understanding of how remediation plans work and have the opportunity to collaborate with faculty supervisors in addressing critical incidents with supervisees.

 

Critical Incidents/Remediation. Part of the focus group discussion centered on what critical incidents participants had with their supervisees and how comfortable they were, or would be, in implementing remediation plans with their supervisees. All participants expressed concerns about their roles as supervisors when remediation plans were required for master’s students in their respective programs and were uncertain of how the remediation process worked in their programs. Thirteen of the 16 participants expressed a desire to be a part of the remediation process of their supervisees in collaboration with faculty supervisors. They discussed seeing this as an important way to learn from the process, assuming that as future supervisors and counselor educators they will need to be the ones to implement such remediation plans. For example, one participant explained the following:

If we are in the position to provide supervision and we’re doing this to enhance our professional development so in the hopes that one day we’re going to be in the position of counselor educators, let’s say faculty supervisors, my concern with that is how are we going to know what to do unless we are involved [in the remediation process] now? And so I feel like that should be something that we’re provided that opportunity to do it.

Another participant indicated that she felt not being part of the remediation process took away the doctoral student supervisors’ credibility:

I don’t have my license yet, and I’m not sure how that plays into when there is an issue with a supervisee, but I know when there is an issue, there is something we have to do if you have a supervisee who is not performing as well, then that’s kind of taken out of your hands and given to a faculty. So they’re like, ‘Yeah you are capable of providing supervision,’ but when there’s an issue it seems like you’re no longer capable.

Another participant noted wanting “to see us do more of the cases where we need to do remediation” in order to be better prepared in identifying critical incidents, thus feeling more capable in the role as supervisor. Discussion on the middle tier proved to be a topic participants both related to and had concerns about. In addition to talking about critical incidents and the remediation process, another emergent theme included people within the participants’ training programs who were influential to their self-efficacy beliefs as supervisors.

 

Influential People

When asked about influences they had from inside and outside of their training programs, all participants identified people and things (e.g., previous work experience, support of significant others, conferences, spiritual meditation, supervision literature) as factors that affected their perceived abilities as supervisors. The specific factors most often identified by more than half of the participants, however, were the influence of supervisors and supervisees in their training programs.

 

Supervisors. All participants indicated that interactions with current and previous supervisors influenced their self-efficacy as supervisors. Ten participants reported supervisors modeling their supervision style and techniques as influential. For example, in regard to watching supervision tapes of the faculty supervisors, one participant stated that it has “been helpful for me to see the stance that they [faculty supervisors] take and the model that they use” when developing her own supervision skills. Seven participants also indicated having the space to grow as supervisors as a positive influence on their self-efficacy. One participant explained as follows:

I know people at other universities and it’s like boot camp, they [faculty supervisors] break them down and build them up in their own image like they’re gods. And I don’t feel that here. I feel like I’m able to be who I am and they’re supportive and helping me develop who I am.

In addition to the information provided during the focus groups, 11 focus group participants reiterated on their follow-up questionnaires that faculty supervisors had a positive influence on the development of their self-efficacy. For example, for one participant, “a lot of support from faculty supervisors in terms of their accessibility and willingness to answer questions” was a factor in strengthening her perception of her abilities as a counselor supervisor. Participants also noted the importance of working with their supervisees as beneficial and influential to their perceptions of self-efficacy as supervisors.

 

Supervisees. All participants in the focus groups discussed supervising counselors-in-training as having both direct and vicarious influences on their self-efficacy. One participant stated that having the direct experience of supervising counselors-in-training at different levels of training (e.g., pre-practicum, practicum, internship) was something that “really helped me to develop my ability as a supervisor.” In addition, one participant described a supervision session that influenced him as a supervisor: “When there are those ‘aha’ moments that either you both experience or they experience. That usually feels pretty good. So that’s when I feel the most competent, I think as a supervisor.” Further, another participant described a time when she felt competent as a supervisor: “When [the supervisees] reflect that they have taken what we’ve talked about and actually tried to implement it or it’s influenced their work, that’s when I have felt closest to competence.” In addition to working relations with supervisors and supervisees, receiving feedback was noted as an emergent theme and influential to the growth of the doctoral student supervisors.

 

Receiving Feedback

Of all of the emergent themes, performance feedback appeared to have the most overlap across focus groups. The authors asked participants how they felt about receiving feedback on their supervisory skills. Sub-themes emerged when participants identified receiving feedback from their supervisors, supervisees and peers as shaping to their self-efficacy beliefs as supervisors.

 

Supervisors. Fifteen participants discussed the process of receiving performance feedback from faculty as an important factor in their self-efficacy. Overall, participants reported receiving constructive feedback as critical to their learning, albeit with mixed reactions. One participant noted that “at the time it feels kind of crappy, but you learn something from it and you’re a better supervisor.” Some participants indicated how they valued their supervisors’ feedback and they preferred specific feedback over vague feedback. For example, as one participant explained, “I kind of just hang on her every word….it is important. I anticipate and look forward to that and am even somewhat disappointed if she kind of dances around an issue.” Constructive feedback was most preferred across all participants. In addition to the impact of receiving feedback from supervisors, participants commented on being influenced by the feedback they received from their supervisees.

 

Supervisees. Thirteen focus group participants reported that receiving performance evaluations from supervisees affected their sense of self-efficacy as supervisors and appeared to be beneficial to all participants. Participants indicated that they were more influenced by specific rather than general feedback, and they preferred receiving written feedback from their supervisees rather than having supervisees subjectively rate their performance with a number. One participant commented that “it’s more helpful for me when [supervisees] include written feedback versus just doing the number [rating]…something that’s more constructive.” Further, a participant described how receiving constructive feedback from supervisees influenced his self-efficacy as a supervisor:

I’d say it affects me a little bit. I’m thinking of some evaluations that I have received and some of them make me feel like I have that self-efficacy that I can do this. And then the other side, there have been some constructive comments as well, and some of those I think do influence me and help me develop.

Similar to feedback received from supervisors and supervisees, participants reiterated their preference in receiving clear and constructive feedback. Focus group participants also described receiving feedback from their peers as being influential in the development of their supervision skills.

 

Peers. Eleven participants shared that feedback received from peers was influential in shaping the perception of their skills and how they conducted supervision sessions. Participants described viewing videotapes of supervision sessions in group supervision and receiving feedback from peers on their taped supervision sessions as positive influences. For example, one participant stated that “there was one point in one of our classes when I’d shown a tape and I got some very… specific positive feedback [from peers] that made me feel really good, like made me feel more competent.” Another participant noted how much peers had helped her increase her comfort level in evaluating her supervisees: “I had a huge problem with evaluation when we started out….in supervision, my group really worked on that issue with me and I feel like I’m in a much better place.”

Performance feedback from faculty supervisors, supervisees, and peers was a common theme in all three focus groups and instrumental in the development of supervisory style and self-efficacy as supervisors. Constructive and specific feedback appeared to more positively influence participants’ self-efficacy than vague or unclear subjective rating scales. In addition to receiving performance feedback, another theme emerged when participants identified issues with providing supervisees’ performance evaluations.

 

Conducting Evaluations

Participants viewed evaluating supervisees with mixed emotions and believed that this process affected their self-efficacy beliefs as supervisors. Thirteen participants reported having difficulty providing supervisees with evaluative feedback. For example, one participant stated the following:

I had a huge problem with evaluation when we started out. It’s something I don’t like. I feel like I’m judging someone….And after, I guess, my fifth semester….I don’t feel like I’m judging them so much as it is a necessity of what we have to do, and as a gatekeeper we have to do this. And I see it more as a way of helping them grow now.

Conversely, one participant, who had experience as a supervisor before starting the doctoral counselor education program stated, “I didn’t really have too much discomfort with evaluating supervisees because of the fact that I was a previous supervisor before I got into this program.” Other participants, who either had previous experience with supervisory positions or who had been in the program for a longer period of time, confirmed this sentiment—that with more experience the anxiety-provoking feelings subsided.

All focus group participants, however, reported a lack of adequate instruction on how to conduct evaluations of supervisee performance. For example, participants indicated a lack of training on evaluating supervisees’ tapes of counseling sessions and in providing formal summative evaluations. One participant addressed how receiving more specific training in evaluating supervisees would have helped her feel more competent as a supervisor:

I felt like I had different experiences with different supervisors of how supervision was given, but I still felt like I didn’t know how to give the feedback or what all my options were, it would have just helped my confidence… to get that sort of encouragement that I’m on the right track or, so maybe more modeling specifically of how to do an evaluation and how to do a tape review.

All focus group participants raised the issue of using Likert-type questions as part of the evaluation process, specifically the subjectivity of interpretation of the scales in relation to supervisee performance and how supervisors used them differently. For example, a participant stated, “I wish there had been a little bit more concrete training in how to do an evaluation.” A second participant expanded this notion:

I would say about that scale it’s not only subjective but then our students, I think, talk to each other and then we’ve all evaluated them sometimes using the same form and given them a different number ’cause we interpret it differently…. It seems like another thing that sets us up for this weird ‘in the middle’ relationship because we’re not faculty.

Discussions about providing performance evaluations seemed to be one of the most vibrant parts of focus group discussions. Thus, it appears that having the support of influential people (e.g., supervisors and supervisees) and feedback from supervisors, supervisees and peers was helpful. Having more instruction on conducting evaluations and clarifying their role identity and expectations, however, would increase their sense of self as supervisors in the middle tier of supervision.

 

Discussion

 

The purpose of this study was to explore what counselor education doctoral students experienced working in the middle tier of supervision and how their experiences related to their sense of self-efficacy as beginning supervisors. Data analysis revealed alignment with previous research that self-efficacy of an individual or group is influenced by extrinsic and intrinsic factors, direct and vicarious experiences, incentives, performance achievements, and verbal persuasion (Bandura, 1986), and that a person’s self-efficacy may increase from four experiential sources: mastery, modeling, social persuasion, and affective arousal (Larson, 1998). For example, participants identified factors that influence their self-efficacy as supervisors such as the direct experience of supervising counselors-in-training (mastery) as “shaping,” and how they learned vicariously from others in supervision classes. Participants also noted the positive influence of observing faculty supervision sessions (modeling) and receiving constructive feedback by supervisors, supervisees, and peers (verbal persuasion). In addition, participants described competent moments with their supervisees as empowering performance achievements, especially when they observed growth of their supervisees resulting from exchanges in their supervision sessions. Further, participants indicated social persuasion via support from their peers and future careers as counselor supervisors and counselor educators were incentives that influenced their learning experiences. Finally, participants discussed how feelings of anxiety and self-doubt (affective arousal) when giving performance evaluations to supervisees influenced their self-efficacy as supervisors.

Results from this study also support previous research on receiving constructive feedback, structural support, role ambiguity, and clear supervision goals from supervisors as influential factors on self-efficacy beliefs (Bernard & Goodyear, 2009; Nilsson & Duan, 2007; Reynolds, 2006). In addition, participants’ difficulty in conducting evaluations due to feeling judgmental and having a lack of clear instructions on evaluation methods are congruent with supervision literature (e.g., Corey, Haynes, Moulton, & Muratori, 2010; Falender & Shafranske, 2004). Finally, participants’ responses bolster previous research findings that receiving support from mentoring relationships and having trusting relationships with peers positively influence self-efficacy (Hollingsworth & Fassinger, 2002; Wong-Wylie, 2007).

 

Implications for Practice

The comments from participants across the three focus groups underscore the importance of receiving constructive and specific feedback from their faculty supervisors. Providing specific feedback requires that faculty supervisors employ methods of direct observation of the doctoral student’s work with supervisees (e.g., live observation, recorded sessions) rather than relying solely on self-report. Participants also wanted more information on how to effectively and consistently evaluate supervisee performance, especially those involving Likert-type questions, and how to effectively supervise master’s students who are studying in different areas of concentration (e.g., mental health, school counseling, and college counseling). Counselor educators could include modules addressing these topics before or during the time that doctoral supervisors work with master’s students, providing both information and opportunities to practice or role-play specific scenarios.

In response to questions about dealing with critical incidents in supervision, participants across groups discussed the importance of being prepared in handling remediation issues and wanting specific examples of remediation cases as well as clarity regarding their role in remediation processes. Previous research findings indicate teaching about critical incidents prior to engaging in job requirements as effective (Collins & Pieterse, 2007; Halpern, Gurevich, Schwartz, & Brazeau, 2009). As such, faculty supervisors may consider providing opportunities to role-play and share tapes of supervision sessions with master’s students in which faculty (or other doctoral students) effectively address critical incidents. In addition, faculty could share strategies with doctoral student supervisors on the design and implementation of remediation plans, responsibilities of faculty and school administrators, the extent to which doctoral student supervisors may be involved in the remediation process (e.g., no involvement, co-supervise with faculty, or full responsibility), and the ethical and legal factors that may impact the supervisors’ involvement. Participants viewed being included in the development and implementation of remediation plans for master’s supervisees as important for their development even though some participants experienced initial discomfort in evaluating supervisees. This further indicates the importance of fostering supportive working relationships that promote students’ growth and satisfaction in supervision training.

 

Limitations

Findings from this study are beneficial to counselor doctoral students, counselor supervisors, and supervisors in various fields.  Limitations, however, exist in this study. The first is researcher perspective. The authors’ collective experiences influenced the inclusion of questions related to critical incidents and working in the middle tier of supervision. However, the first author made efforts to discern researcher bias by first examining her role as a research instrument before and throughout conducting this study, by triangulating sources, and by processing the interview protocol and analysis with peer reviewers and dissertation committee members. A second limitation is participant bias. Participants’ responses were based on their perceptions of events and recall. Situations participants experienced could have been colored or exaggerated and participants may have chosen safe responses in order to save face in front of their peers or in fear that faculty would be privy to their responses—an occurrence that may happen when using focus groups. The first author addressed this limitation by using follow-up questionnaires to provide participants an opportunity to express their views without their peers’ knowledge, and she reinforced confidentiality at the beginning of each focus group.

 

Recommendations for Future Research

Findings from this study suggest possible directions for future research. The first recommendation is to expand to a more diverse sample. The participants in this study were predominantly White (75%) and female (87.5%) from one region in the United States. As with all qualitative research, the findings from this study are not meant to be generalized to a wider group, and increasing the number of focus groups may offer a greater understanding as to the applicability of the current findings to doctoral student supervisors not represented in the current study. A second recommendation is to conduct a longitudinal study by following one or more cohorts of doctoral student supervisors throughout their supervision training to identify stages of growth and transition as supervisors, focusing on those factors that influence participants’ self-efficacy and supervisor development.

 

Conclusion

 

The purpose of this phenomenological study was to expand previous research on counselor supervision and to provide a view of doctoral student supervisors’ experiences as they train in a tiered supervision model. Findings revealed factors that may be associated with self-efficacy beliefs of doctoral students as they prepare to become counseling supervisors. Recommendations may assist faculty supervisors when considering training protocols and doctoral students as they develop their identities as supervisors.

 

References

Agnes, M. (Ed.). (2003). Webster’s new world dictionary (4th ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for creating self-efficacy scales. In F. Pajares & T. C. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 307–337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age.

Barnes, K. L. (2004). Applying self-efficacy theory to counselor training and supervision: A comparison of two approaches. Counselor Education and Supervision, 44, 56–69. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2004.tb01860.x

Bernard, J. M., & Goodyear, R. K. (2009). Fundamentals of clinical supervision (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Pearson.

Cashwell, T. H., & Dooley, K. (2001). The impact of supervision on counselor self-efficacy. The Clinical Supervisor, 20(1), 39–47. doi:10.1300/J001v20n01_03

Collins, N. M., & Pieterse, A. L. (2007). Critical incident analysis based training: An approach for developing active racial/cultural awareness. Journal of Counseling & Development, 85, 14–23. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6678.2007.tb00439.x

Corey, G., Haynes, R., Moulton, P., & Muratori, M. (2010). Clinical supervision in the helping professions: A practical guide (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Corrigan, J. D., & Schmidt, L. D. (1983). Development and validation of revisions in the

counselor rating form. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 30, 64–75. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.30.1.64

Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs. (2009). 2009 CACREP accreditation manual. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Daniels, J. A., & Larson, L. M. (2001). The impact of performance feedback on counseling self-efficacy and counseling anxiety. Counselor Education and Supervision, 41, 120–130. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2001.tb01276.x

Falender, C. A., & Shafranske, E. P. (2004). Clinical supervision: A competency-based approach. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Fernando, D. M., & Hulse-Killacky, D. (2005). The relationship of supervisory styles to satisfaction with supervision and the perceived self-efficacy of master’s-level counseling students. Counselor Education and Supervision, 44, 293–304. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2005.tb01757.x

Gore, P. A., Jr. (2006). Academic self-efficacy as a predictor of college outcomes: Two incremental validity studies. Journal of Career Assessment, 14(1), 92–115. doi:10.1177/ 1069072705281367

Halpern, J., Gurevich, M., Schwartz, B., & Brazeau, P. (2009). What makes an incident critical for ambulance workers? Emotional outcomes and implications for intervention. Work & Stress, 23(2), 173–189. doi:10.1080/02678370903057317

Hollingsworth, M. A., & Fassinger, R. E. (2002). The role of faculty mentors in the research

training of counseling psychology doctoral students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49, 324–330. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.49.3.324

Hughes, F. R., & Kleist, D. M. (2005). First-semester experiences of counselor education

doctoral students. Counselor Education and Supervision, 45, 97–108. doi:10.1002/ j.1556-6978.2005.tb00133.x

Hunt, B. (2011). Publishing qualitative research in counseling journals. Journal of Counseling & Development, 89, 296–300. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6678.2011.tb00092.x

Israelashvili, M., & Socher, P. (2007). An examination of a counselor self-efficacy scale (COSE) using an Israeli sample. International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 29, 1–9. doi:10.1007/s10447-006-9019-0

Kline, W. B. (2008). Developing and submitting credible qualitative manuscripts. Counselor Education and Supervision, 47, 210–217. doi:10.1002/j.1556 6978.2008.tb00052.x

Kress, V. E., & Shoffner, M. F. (2007). Focus groups: A practical and applied research approach for counselors. Journal of Counseling & Development, 85(2), 189–195. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6678.2007.tb00462.x

Larson, L. M. (1998). The social cognitive model of counselor training. The Counseling Psychologist, 26(2), 219–273. doi:10.1177/0011000098262002

Limberg, D., Bell, H., Super, J. T., Jacobson, L., Fox, J., DePue, M. K, . . . Lambie, G. W. (2013). Professional identity development of counselor education doctoral students: A qualitative investigation. The Professional Counselor, 3(1), 40–53.

Majcher, J., & Daniluk, J. C. (2009). The process of becoming a supervisor for students in a doctoral supervision training course. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3, 63–71. doi:10.1037/a0014470

Merriam, S. B. (Ed.). (2002). Qualitative research in practice: Examples for discussion and analysis. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Moustakas, C. E. (1994). Phenomenological research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Nilsson, J. E., & Duan, C. (2007). Experiences of prejudice, role difficulties, and counseling self-efficacy among U.S. racial and ethnic minority supervisees working with white supervisors. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 35(4), 219–229. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1912.2007.tb00062.x

Nelson, K. W., Oliver, M., & Capps, F. (2006). Becoming a supervisor: Doctoral student perceptions of the training experience. Counselor Education and Supervision, 46, 17–31. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2006.tb00009.x

Protivnak, J. J., & Foss, L. L. (2009). An exploration of themes that influence the counselor education doctoral student experience. Counselor Education and Supervision, 48(4), 239–256. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2009.tb00078.x

Rapisarda, C. A., Desmond, K. J., & Nelson, J. R. (2011). Student reflections on the journey to being a supervisor. The Clinical Supervisor, 30, 109–113. doi:10.1080/07325223.2011.564958

Reynolds, D. (2006). To what extent does performance-related feedback affect managers’ self-efficacy? International Journal of Hospitality Management, 25, 54–68. doi:10.1016/j.ijhm.2004.12.007

Schunk, D. H. (2004). Learning theories: An educational perspective (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Steward, R. J. (1998). Connecting counselor self-efficacy and supervisor self-efficacy: The continued search for counseling competence. The Counseling Psychologist, 26, 285–294. doi:10.1177/0011000098262004

Tang, M., Addison, K. D., LaSure-Bryant, D., Norman, R., O’Connell, W., & Stewart-Sicking, J. A. (2004). Factors that influence self-efficacy of counseling students: An exploratory study. Counselor Education and Supervision, 44, 70–80. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2004.tb01861.x

Wong-Wylie, G. (2007). Barriers and facilitators of reflective practice in counsellor education: Critical incidents from doctoral graduates. Canadian Journal of Counselling, 41(2), 59–76.

Woodside, M., Oberman, A. H., Cole, K. G., & Carruth, E. K. (2007). Learning to be a

counselor: A prepracticum point of view. Counselor Education and Supervision, 47, 14–28. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.2007.tb00035.x

 

Appendix

Focus Group Protocol

    1. How is your program designed to provide supervision training?
    2. What factors influence your perceptions of your abilities as supervisors?

Prompt: colleagues, professors, equipment, schedules, age, cultural factors such as gender, ethnicity, social class, whether you have had prior or no prior experience as supervisors.

    1. How does it feel to evaluate the supervisees’ performance?
    2. How, if at all, do your supervisees provide you with feedback about your performance?
    3. How do you feel about evaluations from your supervisees?

Prompt: How, if at all, do you think or feel supervisees’ evaluations influence how you perceive your skills as a supervisor?

    1. How, if at all, do your supervisors provide you with feedback about your performance?
    2. How do you feel about evaluations from your faculty supervisor?

Prompt: In what ways, if any, do evaluations from your faculty supervisor influence how you perceive your skills as a supervisor?

    1. What strengths or supports do you have in your program that guide you as a supervisor?
    2. What barriers or obstacles do you experience as a supervisor?
    3. What influences do you have from outside of the program that affect how you feel in your role as a supervisor?
    4. How does it feel to be in the middle tier of supervision: working between a faculty supervisor and master’s-level supervisee?

Prompt: Empowered, stuck in the middle, neutral, powerless.

    1. What, if any, critical incidents have you encountered in supervision?

Prompt: Supervisee that has a client who was suicidal or it becomes clear to you that a supervisee has not developed basic skills needed to work with current clients.

  1. If a critical incident occurred, or would occur in the future, what procedures did you or would you follow? How comfortable do you feel in having the responsibility of dealing with critical incidents?
  2. If not already mentioned by participants, ask if they have been faced with a situation in which their supervisee was not performing adequately/up to program expectations. If yes, ask them to describe their role in any remediation plan that was developed. If no, ask what concerns come to mind when they think about the possibility of dealing with such a situation.
  3. Describe a time when you felt least competent as a supervisor.
  4. Describe a time when you felt the most competent as a supervisor.
  5. How could supervision training be improved, especially in terms of anything that could help you feel more competent as a supervisor?

Melodie H. Frick, NCC, is an Assistant Professor at Western Carolina University. Harriett L. Glosoff, NCC, is a Professor at Montclair State University. Correspondence can be addressed to Melodie H. Frick, 91 Killian Building Lane, Room 204, Cullowhee, NC, 28723,  mhfrick@email.wcu.edu.

Wounded Warriors with PTSD: A Compilation of Best Practices and Technology in Treatment

Mary Alice Fernandez, Melissa Short

This article offers mental health counselors a compilation of best practices and technology in the treatment of combat veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The goal is to increase counselors’ awareness of the resources available to enhance their repertoire of tools and techniques to assess, diagnose, case-conceptualize and treat the growing population of combat veterans with PTSD. The National Center for PTSD provides guidelines for diagnosing PTSD using the DSM-5. PTSD is now recognized as a trauma disorder related to an external event rather than an anxiety disorder associated with mental illness. The authors describe assessment tools and treatment strategies for PTSD validated on veteran populations. The paper also highlights new technology and mobile apps designed to assist in the treatment of combat PTSD.

Keywords: combat PTSD, trauma disorder, treatment of combat veterans, National Center for PTSD,  mobile apps

Volunteering to serve one’s country during wartime is an act of heroism, and counselors working with combat veterans are in a unique position to honor these heroes. Combat veterans have offered the supreme sacrifice and some are paying a price by suffering from combat post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The task of providing mental health services to a growing veteran population and their immediate family members is complicated by the lack of accessible services and the complexities of the disorder. To begin to address this challenge, Senator Jon Tester (D-MT) recently introduced legislation focused on improving access to mental health counselors by tasking the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) with recruiting more licensed professional mental health counselors (Tester, 2013).

This article offers an overview of resources available to mental health counselors to assess, case-conceptualize, diagnose and treat a growing population of combat veterans with PTSD. The goal is to increase the awareness of both beginning counselors and more experienced counselors of new therapies as well as best practices in treating combat PTSD. The compilation of resources begins with diagnostic criteria, assessment tools, and evidence-based practices, including new technologies for treating PTSD, and culminates with a list of resources available to counselors and veterans.

 

Diagnosing PTSD

 

Changes in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) place PTSD under a new heading, Trauma and Stressor-Related Disorders, and remove it from the DSM-4 anxiety category. This new DSM-5 categorization de-stigmatizes PTSD because it recognizes PTSD as a trauma disorder related to an external event rather than an anxiety related to mental illness (Staggs, 2014). The DSM-5 provides eight clear criteria for diagnosing PTSD, beginning with identifying a traumatic event (criterion A) and then noting behavioral symptoms related to PTSD. It organizes symptoms into four clusters: intrusions (criterion B), avoidance (criterion C), negative symptoms (criterion D), and arousal (criterion E) (American Psychological Association, 2013). In order for a client to meet the full criteria for a PTSD diagnosis, his or her symptoms must last longer than a month (criterion F), must prevent him or her from functioning well in significant area(s) of life (criterion G), and cannot be due to physical factors such as a medical condition or substance use (criterion H).

The National Center for PTSD (2014a) provides guidelines for diagnosing PTSD using the DSM-5. Criterion A (stressor) indicates that the person was exposed to at least one of the following: death, threatened death, actual or threatened serious injury, or actual or threatened sexual violence. The person must persistently re-experience at least one of the intrusion symptoms (criterion B) of the traumatic event and one of the avoidance efforts (criterion C) of distressing trauma-related stimuli. Two negative symptoms or alterations in cognition or mood (criterion D) and two alterations in arousal and reactivity (criterion E) that began or worsened after the traumatic event must be present for a diagnosis of PTSD.  Although symptoms may occur soon after the event, a person does not qualify for a PTSD diagnosis until at least six months after the traumatic event. An individual with PTSD will experience high levels of either depersonalization or derealization (National Center for PTSD, 2014a).

Nussbaum’s (2013) brief version for diagnosing PTSD begins by asking the following:

What is the worst thing that has ever happened to you? Have you ever experienced or witnessed an event in which you were seriously injured or your life was in danger, or you thought you were going to be seriously injured or endangered? (p. 90)

If the client answers in the affirmative, the counselor is to ask these questions: “Do you think about or re-experience these events? Does thinking about these experiences ever cause significant trouble with your friends or family, at work, or in another setting?” (Nussbaum, 2013, p. 90). Nussbaum (2013) provides a set of questions for each cluster and its associated symptoms to guide the process of diagnosis.

 

Assessment Tools

Ottati and Ferraro (2009) describe three assessment tools, validated on veteran populations, to screen for combat-related PTSD: the 17-item self-report PTSD Checklist (PCL), the 35-item self-report Mississippi Scale for Combat-Related PTSD (M-PTSD), and the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS). The PCL was recently updated to 20 items to reflect the changes in DSM-5. PCL-5 is a self-report measure that takes 5–10 minutes to complete and may be used to screen, diagnose and monitor changes during and after treatment of PTSD (Weathers et al., 2013). The M-PTSD uses a 5-point Likert scale to rate PTSD symptoms and related symptoms of substance abuse, suicidal ideation, and depression. It provides a PTSD symptom severity index with scores ranging from 35–175. The M-PTSD has not been revised since DSM-3, but may still be useful since it was normed with veteran populations (National Center for PTSD, 2014b). CAPS is a diagnostic structured interview that also measures the severity of symptoms and was recently revised to assess the DSM-5 PTSD symptoms. CAPS-5 is a 30-item questionnaire that takes 45–60 minutes to administer and yields a single score of PTSD severity (Weathers et al., 2013).

Other instruments are available to counselors for consideration. The PTSD Symptom Scale, Interview Version (PSS-I) with 17 items is a shorter clinical interview comparable to CAPS (Peterson, Luethcke, Borah, Borah, & Young-McCaughan, 2011). The PSS-I can be administered in about 20 minutes by a trained lay interviewer, and each item consists of a brief question so that an initial assessment can be made in shorter time (Peterson et al., 2011).The Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ) assesses differences between expressive suppression and cognitive reappraisal during treatment intake and discharge (Boden et al., 2013). The ERQ assessment assists the counselor in targeting and reducing maladaptive regulation strategies within the context of PTSD treatment in order to help the veteran develop alternative coping skills (Boden et al., 2013). The Quick Test for PTSD (Q-PTSD) is useful for identifying individuals with a true disability (Morel, 2008). Q-PTSD is a time-efficient method of detecting malingering in veterans applying for disability; it may be used by the counselor as an initial assessment of the disorder (Morel, 2008).

Other useful instruments can be incorporated into a treatment plan, such as a strengths-based assessment, depression inventory, substance abuse assessment, and insomnia inventory. Seligman (2011) also recommends the Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI) for use with veterans. The 21-item PTGI “measures the extent to which survivors of traumatic events perceive personal benefits, including changes in perceptions of self, relationships with others, and philosophy of life accruing with their attempt to cope with trauma and its aftermath” (Tedeschi & Calhoun, 1996, p. 458). Seligman (2011) suggests that trauma often sets the stage for growth; a counselor may use the PTGI to facilitate veterans’ understanding of the conditions under which growth can happen.

Making a diagnosis of PTSD requires assessing symptoms and also gathering data from multiple assessments, a structured interview, and other knowledge of the client in order to make an evaluative judgment that leads to the development of a sound treatment plan (Ottati & Ferraro, 2009).

 

PTSD Treatment

 

Cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is unanimously endorsed as the best-practice treatment for PTSD by the VA and the Department of Defense (DOD; U.S. VA & U.S. DOD, 2010), the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (Foa, Keane, & Friedman, 2000), and the American Psychiatric Association (Ursano et al., 2010). Tramontin (2010) specifically states that the VA supports Prolonged Exposure (PE) therapy and Cognitive Processing Therapy (CPT).

In CPT and CBT, counselors challenge clients’ automatic thoughts connected with trauma. Through the use of written narratives in CPT, counselors target issues of safety, trust, power, control and self-esteem. Counselors also work with veterans to identify and label feelings as they work through impasses in their stories (Moran, Schmidt, & Burker, 2013). Exposure therapy is an evidence-based practice for many types of trauma including PTSD. According to Rauch, Eftekhari, and Ruzek (2012), PE therapy reduces PTSD symptoms and aids in treating comorbid issues. Rauch et al. (2012) explain that PE therapy consists of four components: psychoeducation, in vivo exposure, imaginal exposure, and emotional processing. Psychoeducation can help those suffering from trauma to understand their PTSD (Rauch et al., 2012). In vivo exposure consists of literally confronting the variables associated with the trauma (i.e., people, places and things; Rauch et al., 2012). Imaginal exposure involves reliving the memories associated with the trauma and engaging the accompanying emotions (Rauch et al., 2012). Emotional processing involves the counselor posing open-ended questions to the client in order to elicit both the emotions the client felt associated with the trauma and present emotions (Rauch et al., 2012).

 

Virtual reality exposure. In recent years, a new development of a virtual reality exposure therapy has surfaced. Albert “Skip” Rizzo developed a program titled “Virtual Iraq,” a virtual reality simulation designed to assist in the treatment of PTSD (Virtually Better, Inc., 2013). Rizzo developed the program after stumbling upon a video game called “Full Spectrum Warrior” that was originally created to train military service men and women. According to Rothbaum, Rizzo and Difede (2010), the current generation of military service members may be more comfortable participating in virtual reality treatment than conventional talk therapy, due to its similarity to gaming. After viewing several videos that demonstrate the Virtual Iraq system, the authors understand the connection between the exposure to trauma variables in PE and the exposure to trauma variables in virtual reality programs. Sharpless and Barber (2011) found several studies demonstrating the efficacy of virtual reality in treating veterans.

The protocol for virtual reality treatment involves veterans selecting a traumatic combat experience that relates closely to their most severe PTSD symptoms (McLay et al., 2012). Counselors create a realistic experience for the veteran by utilizing various sensory components of the virtual reality environment. Clients then use their senses and are immersed into the virtual reality world where they relive their trauma. Following the treatment, the counselor and the veteran process the material that surfaced in the exposure (McLay et al., 2012). In a study using virtual reality exposure therapy, McLay et al. (2012) found that “75% of participants experienced at least a 50% reduction in PTSD symptoms” (p. 635).

In addition to Virtual Iraq, Virtually Better, Inc. (2013) has developed other programs, including Virtual Vietnam, Afghanistan, Airports, and the World Trade Center. During a phone interview with Emilio Coirini, Director and Business Developer at Virtually Better, Inc., the interviewee stated that a soldier who suffers PTSD costs the government about $50,000 a year to treat, with the average treatment lasting 20 years. In contrast, the virtual reality system costs only about $30,000 with clinical training (E. Coirini, personal communication, November 16, 2012). At the time of the interview, there were about 70 systems installed throughout the United States, and Coirini explained that it is possible to receive grants for the cost of the system.

 

Animal-assisted treatment. In contrast to the relatively new use of virtual reality technology, animals have been assisting persons with disabilities for many years; there are a growing number of organizations that provide trained animals, specifically canines, to veterans who suffer from PTSD. According to Thompson (2010), in order to qualify as a service animal, the animal must undergo training to do work or perform helpful tasks. McConnell (2011) conducted a study that found that having a pet can provide meaningful social support that improves lives. One organization, Pets for Vets, provides animal companions to veterans with PTSD who are capable of caring for a pet. Pets for Vets states the following (2014):

Our goal is to help heal the emotional wounds of military veterans by pairing them with a shelter animal that is specially selected to match his or her personality. Professional animal trainers rehabilitate the animals and teach them good manners to fit into the veteran’s lifestyle. Training can also include desensitization to wheel chairs or crutches as well as recognizing panic or anxiety disorder behaviors. (para. 2)

Animals have been therapeutic partners to persons with disabilities for generations, and they are now serving wounded warriors.

 

Utilization of mobile phone applications. While researching other tools to help in treating PTSD, the authors discovered a few mobile applications available for both the iPhone and the Android that are well-developed, user-friendly and comprehensive. The first application, PTSD Coach (U.S. VA, 2014b), is elaborate in design, taking into account potential areas of concern for those who suffer from PTSD. The four main divisions of the application include Learn, Self-Assessment, Manage Symptoms and Find Support. The learning division of the application provides a comprehensive base and answers questions such as What is PTSD? and Who develops PTSD? In addition, the learning division includes answers regarding who should seek professional assistance and possible treatment protocols. The questions in the professional care subsection include Will it really work? and What if I am embarrassed about seeking help? The self-assessment section gives a person insight into the possibility of having PTSD. An example of an evaluative question is, “In the past month how often have you been bothered by disturbing memories, thoughts or images of the traumatic experience?” Users can track the history of their symptoms and schedule assessments to take periodically to provide a comparison of improvement or decline. When utilizing the manage symptoms option, users can select a mental state such as sadness or hopelessness, and the application will provide a suggestion to improve mood, depending on mood severity. Finally, users can set up their own support network, get support immediately or find professional care by choosing the finding support option. (The Apple phone app version may be found at https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ptsd-coach/id430646302?mt=8, and the Android version may be found at https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=gov.va.ptsd.ptsdcoach.)

Another application, T2 Mood Tracker (The National Center for Telehealth and Technology, 2014), aids individuals in keeping track of their moods, which they can then report to their medical or mental health professional(s). The application can be used as a daily tool to track a client’s mood, keep notes regarding stressors, and chart a graph of the information provided. The initial screen asks whether the user would like to rate anxiety, depression, general well-being, head injury, post-traumatic stress, or general stress. The user selects one of the previously stated fields and is then required to rate several factors associated with the chosen field. The user can then graph results, create reports, save reports, or view notes. The application is user-friendly and simple in design, yet intricate enough to help the user and counselor in developing treatment protocols. (The Apple phone app version may be found at https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/t2-mood-tracker/id428373825?mt=8, and the Android version may be found at https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.t2.vas.)

A third application worthy of acknowledgement is the PE Coach, developed by the VA (2014a). The PE Coach requires a counselor trained in PE therapy. According to the National Center for PTSD (2014c), the PE Coach is a treatment companion that helps the client and counselor work through the PE treatment manual. The features of this application include the following: learning about PE therapy and the most common reactions to trauma, recording therapy sessions for personal use, setting reminders for homework and future therapy appointments, tracking tasks between sessions, practicing breathing exercises, and tracking PTSD symptoms. Currently, anecdotal accounts from veterans indicate that the mobile applications are helpful (U.S. DOD, American Forces Press Service, 2012). (The Apple phone app version may be found at https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pe-coach/id507357193?mt=8, and the Android version may be found at https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.t2health.pe.)

 

Conclusion

 

Wendling (2008) reported results from an online survey administered to mental health practitioners after they had attended a conference called “Healing the Scars of War.” She found that most counselors did not understand military culture or appear to follow best-practice guidelines. The authors hope this paper serves to increase understanding of this critical area.

Technology makes it possible to access information about military families and resources to serve this special population. The VA has PTSD videos, training courses, and other materials available to inform counselors of the needs and unique cultural experiences of a diverse veteran population experiencing PTSD.

The resources identified (see Table 1) can be readily accessed by counselors and veterans to begin the therapeutic journey. We, the authors, salute the wounded warriors and continue to fight for their healing as they have fought for freedom.

 

Table 1

 

Informative Resources about Veterans and PTSD

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-5 (5th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing.

Boden, M. T., Westermann, S., McRae, K., Kuo, J., Alvarez, J., Kulkarni, M. R., … Bonn-Miller, M. O. (2013). Emotion regulation and posttraumatic stress disorder: A prospective investigation. Journal of Social & Clinical Psychology, 32(3), 296–314. doi:10.1521/jscp.2013.32.3.296

Foa, E. B., Keane, T. M., & Friedman, M. J. (Eds.). (2000). Effective treatments for PTSD: Practice guidelines from the International Society for Traumatic Stress Studies. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

McConnell, A. R. (2011, July 11). Friends with benefits: Pets make us happier, healthier. Psychology Today. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-social-self/201107/friends-benefits-pets-make-us-happier-healthier

McLay, R. N., Graap, K., Spira, J., Perlman, K., Johnston, S., Rothbaum, B. O., … Rizzo, A. (2012). Development and testing of virtual reality exposure therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder in active duty service members who served in Iraq and Afghanistan. Military Medicine, 177(6), 635–642.

Moran, S., Schmidt, J., & Burker, E. J. (2013). Posttraumatic growth and posttraumatic stress disorder in veterans. Journal of Rehabilitation, 79(2), 34–43.

Morel, K. R. (2008). Development of a validity scale for combat-related posttraumatic stress disorder: Evidence from simulated malingerers and actual disability claimants. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 19(1), 52–63. doi:10.1080/14789940701594645

National Center for PTSD. (2014a, January 3). DSM-5 criteria for PTSD. Retrieved from http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/PTSD-overview/dsm5_criteria_ptsd.asp

National Center for PTSD. (2014b, January 3). Mississippi Scale for Combat-Related PTSD (M-PTSD). Retrieved from http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/assessment/adult-sr/mississippi-scale-m-ptsd.asp

National Center for PTSD. (2014c, January 28). Mobile app: PE coach. Retrieved from http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/materials/apps/pecoach_mobileapp-public.asp

The National Center for Telehealth and Technology. (2014). T2 Mood Tracker [Mobile application software]. Available from https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/t2-mood-tracker/id428373825?mt=8 or https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.t2.vas

Nussbaum, A.M. (2013). The Pocket Guide to the DSM-5 Diagnostic Exam. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing.

Ottati, A., & Ferraro, F. R. (2009). Combat-related PTSD treatment: Indications for exercise therapy. Psychology Journal, 6(4), 184–196.

Peterson, A. L., Luethcke, C. A., Borah, E. V., Borah, A. M., & Young-McCaughan, S. (2011). Assessment and treatment of combat-related PTSD in returning war veterans. Journal of Clinical Psychology in Medical Settings, 18(2), 164–175. doi:10.1007/s10880-011-9238-3

Pets for Vets. (2014). Healing vets and saving pets. Retrieved from http://pets-for-vets.com

Rauch, S. A. M., Eftekhari, A., & Ruzek, J. I. (2012). Review of exposure therapy: A gold standard for PTSD treatment. Journal of Rehabilitation Research & Development, 49(6), 679–687.

Rothbaum, B. O., Rizzo, A., & Difede, J. (2010). Virtual reality exposure therapy for combat-related posttraumatic stress disorder. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1208, 126–132. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.2010.05691.x

Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and well-being. New York, NY: Free Press.

Sharpless, B. A., & Barber, J. P. (2011). A clinician’s guide to PTSD treatment for returning veterans. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 42(1), 8–15. doi:10.1037/a0022351

Staggs, S. (2014). Symptoms & diagnosis of PTSD. Retrieved from http://psychcentral.com/lib/symptoms-and-diagnosis-of-ptsd/000158

Tedeschi, R. G., & Calhoun, L. G. (1996). The posttraumatic growth inventory: Measuring the positive legacy of trauma. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 9(3), 455–471. doi:10.1002/jts.2490090305

Tester, J. (2013, June 13). Tester introduces comprehensive veterans’ health care legislation [Press release]. Retrieved from http://www.tester.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2965

Thompson, M. (2010, November 22). Bringing dogs to heal. Time, 176(21), 54–57. Retrieved from http://p2v.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/p2v-time-web.pdf

Tramontin, M. (2010). Exit wounds: current issues pertaining to combat-related PTSD of relevance to the legal system. Developments in Mental Health Law, 29, 23–47.

U.S. Department of Defense, American Forces Press Service. (2012, July 31). DOD, VA release mobile app targeting post-traumatic stress [News release]. Retrieved from http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=117339

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (2014a). PE coach [Mobile application software]. Available from https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pe-coach/id507357193?mt=8 or https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.t2health.pe

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. (2014b). PTSD coach [Mobile application software]. Available from https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/ptsd-coach/id430646302?mt=8 or https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=gov.va.ptsd.ptsdcoach

U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, & U.S. Department of Defense. (2010). VA/DoD clinical practice guideline for management of post-traumatic stress. Washington, DC: Management of Post-Traumatic Stress Working Group. Retrieved from http://www.healthquality.va.gov/ptsd/cpg_PTSD-FULL-201011612.pdf

Ursano, R. J., Bell, C., Eth, S., Friedman, M., Norwood, A., Pfefferbaum, B., … Benedek, D. M. (2010). Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with acute stress disorder and posttraumatic stress disorder. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association. Retrieved from http://psychiatryonline.org/pdfaccess.ashx?ResourceID=243186&PDFSource=6

Virtually Better, Inc. (2013). Virtual Iraq. Retrieved from http://www.virtuallybetter.com/virtual-iraq/

Weathers, F. W., Blake, D. D., Schnurr, P. P., Kaloupek, D. G., Marx, B. P. & Keane, T. M. (2013). The clinician-administered PTSD scale for DSM-5 (CAP-5). Retrieved from http://www.ptsd.va.gov/professional/assessment/adult-int/caps.asp

Wendling, P. (2008). Knowledge gap exists on best practices for PTSD. Retrieved from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Knowledge gap exists on best practices for PTSD.-a0199814983

Mary Alice Fernandez, NCC, is an assistant professor at Texas A&M University – Corpus Christi. Melissa Short is a doctoral student at Walden University Online. Correspondence can be addressed to Mary Alice Fernandez, 6300 Ocean Drive, Unit 5834, Corpus Christi, TX 78412-5834, mary.fernandez@tamucc.edu.

The Implications of Attachment Theory for Military Wives: Effects During a Post-Deployment Period

Kristin A. Vincenzes, Laura Haddock, Gregory Hickman

Past research has indicated the negative and positive impacts of deployment on military wives.  Furthermore, research has indicated the need to further understand the different deployment stages, specifically the post-deployment period. The authors examined Bowlby’s and Ainsworth’s attachment theories, specifically separation anxiety occurrence as experienced by stay-behind wives during their husbands’ post-deployment period. Purposive/volunteer sampling was used to survey 57 military wives currently experiencing the post-deployment period. A linear regression analysis produced a significant positive relationship between duration of deployment and the wife’s psychological distress during the post-deployment period. As deployments increased in duration, specifically to longer than 6 months, the levels of psychological distress significantly increased.  Implications for counselors and researchers are addressed. 

Keywords: post-deployment, attachment, military wives, separation anxiety, deployment

Between 2001 and 2012, the U.S. government sent 2.4 million soldiers to Iraq and Afghanistan (U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs, 2012). According to Demers (2008), deployments affected both the soldier and the stay-behind wife (over 56% of the soldiers reported being married according to the Department of Defense, 2012). The couple’s relationship may play an intricate role in identifying effects that a deployment could have on a stay-behind wife. Specifically, stay-behind wives may have both positive and negative experiences in response to prolonged separation from their husbands (Barker & Berry, 2009; Demers, 2008; Morse, 2006).  

This study focuses specifically on wives of male soldiers, and applies Bowlby’s and Ainsworth’s attachment theories (Ainsworth & Bell, 1970; Bowlby, 1969) to military wives’ post-deployment experiences. Bowlby (1969) asserted that an accumulation of early attachment experiences create expectations for future relationships. Over 40 years ago, Ainsworth and Bell (1970) identified three primary types of attachment: secure, avoidant and ambivalent. More specifically, the researchers found that children with an ambivalent attachment style exhibited anxiety following separation when the mother returned, going near the mother, but also exhibiting signs of anger by pushing her away (Ainsworth & Bell, 1970). In comparison, children with a secure attachment welcomed their mother’s return, and children with an avoidant attachment showed little interest in their returning mother (Ainsworth & Bell, 1970). Robertson and Bowlby (1952) also examined the idea of separation anxiety, identifying specific infant stages of attachment. The three phases an infant goes through when separated from their mother include protest, despair, and denial or detachment (Robertson & Bowlby, 1952).

The three separation anxiety phases may be applied to attachment issues that military wives experience during and after their husbands’ out-of-country deployment (Basham, 2008; Riggs & Riggs, 2011). The first phase, protest, occurs when a child is separated from his or her mother, with sadness and anxiety presenting as the most common initial emotional reactions. The protest phase is linked to pre-deployment and deployment time periods, as wives often feel numb, angry and abandoned due to an upcoming or current separation from their husbands (Pincus, House, Christenson, & Adler, 2001). Furthermore, wives also may experience sadness, loneliness and anxiety during this phase (SteelFisher, Zaslavsky, & Blendon, 2008).

The second phase of separation anxiety is despair, characterized by feelings of extreme sadness (Riggs & Riggs, 2011; Robertson & Bowlby, 1952). A wife may often go through similar stages of grief and mourning when her husband is deployed (Pincus et al., 2001). Initially a wife may be in denial that her husband is gone, believing that she will be fine and that he is only away for a few days’ training (Pincus et al., 2001). As time passes, she may experience depression and withdrawal as she realizes that her husband will not return for a long time, if at all (Vormbrock, 1993).

The nature of the military deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan are characterized by continual life-threatening experiences, coupled with the absence of any “safe” place (Demers, 2008). Constant media coverage spotlights the dangers of deployment to active combat zones and undoubtedly impacts a wife’s ability to trust that her husband will safely return (Demers, 2008). Wives have reported being in constant fear for their soldiers’ safety, which may result in feeling helpless throughout the deployment (Demers, 2008; Spera, 2009). Eventually, a wife may begin to accept that her husband is gone, and transfer her love to someone else, such as a child or different partner (Morse, 2006).

The final phase of separation anxiety, denial or detachment, can occur during both the deployment period and the post-deployment period (Morse, 2006). Robertson and Bowlby (1952) postulated that this last phase serves as a defense mechanism, which wives utilize when their husbands abruptly rejoin their families (Pincus et al., 2001; Riggs & Riggs, 2011). Anxiety combined with excitement has been found to impact the restabilization of the couple (Morse, 2006; Pincus et al., 2001). Attempting to regain a physical and emotional connection with one another after a long, seemingly permanent separation has been found to be extremely stressful, resulting in struggles with communication, coparenting, returning to pre-deployment routines, and marital intimacy (Orthner & Rose, 2005).

Additional challenges during the post-deployment period may entail negotiating new roles and boundaries within the family system, household management, financial status, parental rejection and new social supports (Drummet, Coleman, & Cable, 2003). If the husband returns and attempts to resume roles that existed prior to his deployment, it may diminish the stay-behind wife’s feelings of worth and accomplishment, since she successfully managed the various facets of daily life in her husband’s absence (Drummet et al., 2003), further straining the attachment between the couple. Although each endured the deployment simultaneously, the experiences were likely uniquely and vastly different from one another (Pincus et al., 2001).

 

Purpose

 

This quantitative study examined how stay-behind wives experience separation anxiety, through examining the relationship between duration of deployment and psychological distress during post-deployment. The theoretical framework for this study focused on attachment between a husband and wife and how a couple cope with separation. Surveys of wives were conducted during the post-deployment period in an effort to capture data from the time that couples were reattaching. For the purposes of this study, post-deployment is defined as the 12-month period after the husband has returned from deployment.

 

Research Design

 

A nonexperimental, correlational design was chosen for this study. In order to gain access to a multitude of military wives, there was no specific inclusion criteria with regard to the soldier’s branch in the military, rank, or if the husband was active duty, Reserves, or National Guard. In order to attempt to control for the potential confounding variable of gender, this study included only stay-behind wives. Stay-behind wives may or may not have children. Finally, stay-behind wives must currently be in the post-deployment stage; therefore, the husbands must have returned from their deployment within the past 12 months (Vincenzes, 2013).

 

Data Collection

The sampling method used for this research was volunteer purposive sampling. Inclusion criteria included the following: female, currently married and experiencing the post-deployment period (within the 12 months since her husband returned from the deployment), and a deployment that had lasted 6 or more months. Approximately 30 original e-mails were sent out to military advocacy groups, current military wives, the Army Wives Network, and a military advocacy group called Pennsylvania Americans showing Compassion, Assistance, and Reaching out with Empathy for Service members (PA C.A.R.E.S.). These individuals were asked to forward the initial e-mail soliciting military wives for the current study (Vincenzes, 2013).

If individuals agreed to volunteer for the study, they immediately received a background questionnaire, which assessed the duration of deployment (independent variable). Duration of deployment was operationalized as the total number of months that the soldier was deployed, from the day he left until the day he returned (Vincenzes, 2013). Furthermore, the participants took the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995), which was used to operationally define the dependent variable of psychological distress. The DASS-21 is a 21-item Likert scale survey and consists of three subscales (Depression, Anxiety, and Stress). In addition to individual scores on the subscales, the assessment provides an overall global psychological distress level, which was the score this particular study used. The reliability for this measure was high with a .93 internal consistency on the overall global scale (Henry & Crawford, 2005). In addition, the DASS-21 illustrated good convergent and discriminant validity as compared to the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and Personal Disturbance Scale (Henry & Crawford, 2005).

 

Results

 

Of the 145 participants who responded to the survey, 48.9% (n = 68) met the criteria, but 14.7% (n = 10) had missing data. Thus, the final data sample contained 40% (n = 58) of the participants who volunteered. The inclusive sample accurately depicted the dispersion of active duty military (56.9% Army, 22.4% Air Force, 12.1% Navy, and 1.4% Marine Corps); however, fewer participants were associated with the National Guard (5.2%) and Reserves (1.7%) than expected.

The age of the wives ranged from 21–47 (M = 31.2, SD = 6.7), and 50% were 29 years old or younger. The majority of the participants (93.1 %) had some years of college (only 6.9% had a high school diploma/GED or less). Furthermore, 29.3% had some college, but no degree; 20.7% had an associate degree, 31% had a bachelor’s degree, and 12.1% had a graduate degree. With regard to employment status, 53.4% of the participants were not employed and 46.6% were employed. The number of years couples were married ranged from 1–20 (M = 7.2, SD = 5) and 48.3% of the participants had been married 5 years or less. The number of children under 17 who lived in the household ranged from 0–4 (M = 1.5, SD = 1.3) and 51.7% had either no children or one child. The length of deployments ranged from 6–16 months (M = 9.5, SD = 2.8). Finally, the length of time since the husband returned from deployment ranged from 0–12 months (M = 6.0, SD = 4.2).

The study’s null hypothesis stated that in the population under investigation, the proportion of variance in post-deployment psychological distress level explained by the duration of deployment (as measured by the DASS-21) was zero. Linear regression analysis predicted psychological distress from the duration of husband’s deployment. Results from the analysis indicated that duration of deployment significantly predicted psychological distress: F(1, 57) = 5.384,  p = .024, R=.296, Adj. R2 = .071. Duration of deployment accounted for 8.8% of the variance in psychological distress and was positively related to psychological distress ( = .296, sr 2 =.088). Based on these results, the null hypothesis, which stated that distress levels would be zero or not change following longer deployments, was rejected. Thus, as the duration of deployment increases, the psychological distress levels for stay-behind wives also increases.

 

Discussion

 

This study confirmed prior research and extended existing literature regarding attachment theory as it relates to stay-behind military wives. For example, researchers have found that when husbands are deployed or away on military duties for several months, the wives not only demonstrate feelings of anger during the deployments, but that their feelings of anger persist even after their husbands return from deployment and military duties (Pincus et al., 2001; Riggs & Riggs, 2011; Zeff, Lewis, & Hirsch, 1997). Indeed, the findings from this current study supported prior research, as the author found a positive relationship between deployments of increasing length and an increase in distress levels among stay-behind military wives. Although this study did not specifically evaluate wives’ anger, other researchers have found that high distress levels are correlated with the development of anger among military wives (Drummet et al., 2003).

The results of this study illustrate that post-deployment is indeed very stressful for the wife, particularly when the husband was deployed for 6 months or more. Since deployments lasting 6 or more months significantly predicted psychological distress for the wives, it may be that as deployment length increases, stress levels also may increase, resulting in a wife emotionally withdrawing from her husband. The findings from this study support prior research that has identified the coping strategy of emotional withdrawal, which results from psychological distress and may enable the wife to continue her daily life, while also creating a new support system and sense of emotional equilibrium (Pincus et al., 2001).

Some stay-behind wives function well on a daily basis while their husbands are deployed; however, other stay-behind wives appear to struggle with their husbands’ deployment (Riggs & Riggs, 2011). Such research supports the notion that wives who made secure attachments while growing up may be better able to cope with military separations (Riggs & Riggs, 2011). It should be noted, however, that only in the past several years have some deployments lasted up to 15 or 16 months (Sheppard, Malatras, & Israel, 2010). The length of deployments, especially 6 or more months, may significantly alter the ability of stay-behind wives to successfully cope, regardless of their attachment styles. Further research should examine the impact of lengthy deployments (e.g., 6 or more months) on stay-behind wives’ ability to cope as it relates to attachment style, as there may be a point of diminishing returns at which, regardless of one’s attachment to her parents growing up, the ability to cope disappears.

Vormbrock (1993) predicted that as the duration of deployment increased, so too would distress levels during the couple’s reunion. This was hypothesized to be due to the continual unavailability of the attachment figure. The current study supports Vormbrock’s theory in that participants’ reported distress levels during post-deployment were significantly higher (p = .023) as deployment duration increased. Perhaps when the husband is gone for 6 months or more, the potential for the marriage to grow apart or detach may increase. Vormbrock (1993) found that wives can successfully focus on the brevity of their separation as a means of coping; however, as the deployments increase in length, it may affect wives’ ability to maintain the mentality that this separation is only temporary. Deployments that require the couple to be apart for 6 or more months may result in the wife feeling that the separation is more permanent. The longer the husband is away, the more independent the wife may become by creating new schedules and ways of doing things (Morse, 2006; Pincus et al., 2001).

Although this research elaborated on the relationship of the post-deployment period and distress among stay-behind military wives, there are some limitations to the study. The first limitation may be a self-selection bias, which may have impacted the internal validity. More specifically, since participants were volunteers, some individuals may have extremely negative feelings toward the military and may have opted not to participate. This could have inadvertently skewed the population sample, thus impacting the results. Indeed, researchers have discussed that volunteer samples may have biased tendencies as a motivation for their participation in a specific study (Frankfort-Nachmias & Nachmias, 2008). In addition to self-selection bias, an instrumentation threat could be present, as this survey relied on participants’ honesty. Another possible limitation is that this study was a regression study, which relies on the correlational nature of two variables. Perhaps there are extraneous variables that could be moderating or mediating the relationship of deployment length and distress level among stay-behind military wives.

 

Conclusions and Implications

 

Despite existing limitations, this study supported research regarding military deployment as a significant concern for military families, as well as for military leaders who rely on the husbands of these stay-behind wives to provide national security. As surveys within the last decade indicate that nearly 60% of American military members are married (Sierra & Kemp, n.d.), the results of this study also offer further insight into the contextual factors that are part of a therapeutic treatment intervention. Military couples are unique and a counselor’s awareness of needs particular to this group is imperative for therapeutic success.

The current research found a positive correlation between the duration of deployment and stay-behind wives’ psychological distress levels during post-deployment. This finding corroborates the research on separation anxiety for children, particularly when children illustrate signs of detachment from their mother following a separation. Attachment figures may include other vital individuals in one’s life, especially for military couples. Since many military couples do not live close to immediate biological family members, the wife may solely depend on the husband to meet her emotional, physical and social needs, just as an infant child often relies on their mother to meet these same basic needs. With this in mind, the notion of separation anxiety may not be just applicable to young children but also adults, particularly military wives.

Counselors may want to educate stay-behind wives on separation anxiety and assist them in processing their experiences, as well as recognize wives’ desire for a stable, secure relationship and assist them to this end. Furthermore, since deployments are unpredictable and out of the wives’ control, it may be helpful for counselors to assist the wives in gaining a greater sense of control throughout their daily lives. Just as counselors often recommend that children with separation anxiety have a consistent routine, as well as partake in positive social activities, it also may be helpful to encourage stay-behind wives to create predictable routines that include engaging in various social events with friends and/or other military wives.

This study also has implications for further research regarding the human services industry (e.g., clergy, educators) who directly work with such military families. One might assume that not all soldiers or their wives experience deployment the same way, and thus counselors must be prepared to individualize interventions and compose treatment plans according to the needs of the individual as well as needs as a couple. For example, the post-deployment period may entail negotiating new roles and boundaries within the family system. Wives frequently experience the emotion of celebration for the return of their husbands, while also feeling confusion over what it will mean to share a home again after becoming more independent. This experience of boundary ambiguity can be very confusing for wives who recognize that their husbands are physically present, but who are still transitioning toward psychological acceptance that he is present.

Role ambiguity may increase if the couple is not comfortable communicating with each other regarding roles, responsibilities and needs. Simultaneously, a soldier may feel disconnected and unaware of how to reengage without interfering with the family’s new roles. Thus, helping professionals must be prepared to work with the couple on strengthening basic communication skills and nurturing a climate that facilitates safe and transparent information exchange.

Future research could evaluate the experiences of deployed husbands in terms of understanding how the distress level of their stay-behind wives impacts their duties while deployed. Such research might have national security implications. In addition, future research could examine deployments of 6 months or more regarding the struggles, challenges, resiliency, social and psychological effects, educational outcomes, parenting styles, and attachment of the deployed husbands, the stay-behind wives, and their children.

One particular variable that may moderate the relationship between duration of deployment and psychological distress is the stay-behind wife’s social support system. Larsen and Kia-Keating (2010) found that a social support system significantly aided resiliency for stay-behind wives who experienced a military deployment. Furthermore, a wife’s well-being was positively impacted by having a mentor who had previously experienced a deployment herself (Larsen & Kia-Keating, 2010). This brings up an interesting perception of what social support may be necessary for a military wife. Whereas some social support indices examine tangible support (i.e., someone to help around the house), the stay-behind wife may need a social support that relies more on reducing emotional stress.

Future research could qualitatively explore the social support construct further by interviewing stay-behind wives and identifying the indices of social support that they deem important in terms of reducing stress during the post-deployment period. Such a qualitative process could then lead to the quantitative development of a more valid measure of social support necessary to reduce stress for stay-behind military wives, and therefore indirectly for their deployed husbands. Perhaps such a study could examine whether social support serves as a moderating or mediating influence on the relationship between deployment length and psychological distress of stay-behind wives. Such research could have both positive and negative implications for their families, the military, and society at large, as American society depends greatly on its military for national security.

 

References

Ainsworth, M. D. S., & Bell, S. M. (1970). Attachment, exploration, and separation: Illustrated by the behavior of one-year-olds in a strange situation. Child Development, 41, 49–67.

Barker, L. H., & Berry, K. D. (2009). Developmental issues impacting military families with young children during single and multiple deployments. Military Medicine, 174, 1033–1040.

Basham, K. (2008). Homecoming as safe haven or the new front: Attachment and detachment in military couples. Clinical Social Work Journal, 36, 83–96. doi:10.1007/s10615-007-0138-9

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Volume 1: Attachment. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Demers, A. (2008). The war at home: Consequences of loving a veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Internet Journal of Mental Health, 6, 1–12. doi:10.5580/5ac

Drummet, A. R., Coleman, M., & Cable, S. (2003). Military families under stress: Implications for family life education. Family Relations, 52, 279–287.

Frankfort-Nachmias, C., & Nachmias, D. (2008). Research methods in the social sciences (7th ed.). New York, NY: Worth.

Henry, J. D., & Crawford, J. R. (2005). The short-form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21): Construct validity and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 227–239. doi:10.1348/014466505X29657

Larsen, J., & Kia-Keating, M. (2010, August). Resilience based ecological model of military family coping during deployment. Poster session presented at the annual conference of the American Psychological Association, San Diego, CA.

Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33(3), 335–343. doi:10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-U

Morse, J. (2006). New emotional cycles of deployment for service members and their families. U.S. Department of Defense: Deployment Health and Family Readiness Library. San Diego, CA. Retrieved from http://deploymenthealthlibrary.fhp.osd.mil/Product/RetrieveFile?prodId=241

Orthner, D. K., & Rose, R. (2005). SAF V survey report:  Reunion adjustment among Army civilian spouses with returned soldiers. Retrieved from www.army.mil/fmwrc/docs/saf5reunionreport.pdf

Pincus, S. H., House, R., Christenson, J., & Adler, L. E. (2001, April/June). The emotional cycle of deployment: A military family perspective. U.S. Army Medical Department Journal, 15–23. Retrieved from http://cdm15290.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm/ref/collection/p15290coll3/id/898

Renshaw, K. D., Rodrigues, C. S. & Jones, D. H. (2008). Psychological symptoms and marital satisfaction in spouses of operation Iraqi freedom veterans: Relationships with spouses’ perceptions of veterans’ experiences and symptoms. Journal of Family Psychology, 22, 586–594.

Riggs, S. A., & Riggs, D. S. (2011). Risk and resilience in military families experiencing deployment: The role of the family attachment network. Journal of Family Psychology, 25, 675–687. doi:10.1037/a0025286

Robertson, J., & Bowlby, J. (1952). Responses of young children to separation from their mothers. Courrier of the International Children’s Centre, Paris, II, 131–140.

Sheppard, S. C., Malatras, J. W., & Israel, A. C. (2010). The impact of deployment on U.S. military families. American Psychologist, 65, 599–609. doi:10.1037/a0020332

Sierra, T. A. & Kemp, H. (n.d.). Strategies for working with military couples in hope focused couples approach. Retrieved from

http://j.b5z.net/i/u/2043019/i/Strategies_for_Working_with_Military_Couples_in_Hope_Focused_Couples_Approach.pdf

Spera, C. (2009). Spouses’ ability to cope with deployment and adjust to Air Force family demands: Identification of risk and protective factors. Armed Forces & Society, 35, 286–306. doi:10.1177/0095327X08316150

SteelFisher, G. K., Zaslavsky, A. M., & Blendon, R. J. (2008). Health-related impact of deployment extensions on spouses of active duty Army personnel. Military Medicine, 173, 221–229.

U.S. Department of Defense. (2012). 2012 demographics profile of the military community. Retrieved from http://www.militaryonesource.mil/12038/MOS/Reports/2012_Demographics_Report.pdf

U.S. Department of Veteran Affairs. (2012). Analysis of VA health care utilization among Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF) and Operation New Dawn (OND) veterans. Retrieved from www.publichealth.va.gov/docs/epidemiology/healthcare-utilization-report-fy2012-qtr1.pdf

Vincenzes, K. A. (2013). The impact of social support on the relationship between length of deployment and psychological distress for military wives during post-deployment. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest/UMI. (13775).

Vormbrock, J. K. (1993). Attachment theory as applied to wartime and job-related marital separation. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 122–144. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.114.1.122

Zeff, K. N., Lewis, S. J., & Hirsch, K. A. (1997). Military family adaptation to United Nations operations in Somalia. Military  Medicine, 162, 384–387.

Kristin A. Vincenzes, NCC, is an Assistant Professor and Director of the Clinical Mental Health Counseling program at Lock Haven University. Laura Haddock, NCC, is a Core Faculty member and CES Program Coordinator at Walden University. Gregory Hickman is a Core Faculty member at Walden University. Correspondence can be addressed to Kristin A. Vincenzes, 401 N. Fairview Street, Courthouse Annex Room 301, Lock Haven, PA, 17745, KAV813@lhup.edu.

Mental Health Service Providers: College Student Perceptions of Helper Effectiveness

Ashley M. Ackerman, Richard A. Wantz, Michael W. Firmin, Dawn C. Poindexter, Amita L. Pujara

Undergraduate perceptions of the overall effectiveness of six types of mental health service providers (MHSPs) were obtained with a survey. Although many mental health services are available to consumers in the United States, research has indicated that these services are underutilized. Perceptions have been linked to therapeutic outcomes and may potentially serve as barriers to treatment. The results of the present study illustrate a range of perceptions and highlight the value of educating future consumers and practitioners about the roles of various MHSPs in providing mental health services. Future research is proposed.

Keywords: mental health provider, student perceptions, consumers, underutilized, practitioners

At the 2013 National Conference on Mental Health, President Obama called for a national discussion on mental health:

We know that recovery is possible; we know help is available, and yet, as a society, we often think about mental health differently than other forms of health. You see commercials on TV about a whole array of physical health issues, some of them very personal. And yet, we whisper about mental health issues and avoid asking too many questions. In many cases, treatment is available and effective. If there’s anybody out there who’s listening, if you’re struggling, seek help.

(The White House, 2013, 3:20)

To address this plea for mental health awareness at the national level, there is a need for research that identifies and targets the barriers that prevent individuals from seeking mental health services. The goal of the present study was to gain more insight regarding perceptions of the effectiveness of MHSPs. Results of this study offer a baseline for future research that could investigate how these perceptions influence help-seeking behaviors.

According to the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH; n.d.), about one in four American adults has a mental disorder that can be diagnosed. Mental illness is the leading cause of disability (NIMH, 2012), and suicide is the eighth leading cause of death in the United States (Russell, 2010). MHSPs (e.g., counselors, marriage and family therapists [MFTs], psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, psychologists, social workers) offer critical services to their clients, advocate for mental health awareness, and stress the significance of the de-stigmatization of mental illness to the general public. Despite the services available, fewer than 37.9% of adults with mental illnesses receive treatment (Office of Applied Studies, 2009). This statistic reveals some important research questions: Do individuals avoid seeking mental health services because they do not believe the service providers can effectively treat them? Do people seek help from some MHSPs more than others because they believe them to be more effective?

According to World Health Organization’s 2001 report, the effectiveness of mental illness and substance abuse treatment has been well documented and has dramatically improved over the past 50 years. The 1995 Consumer Reports survey on the effectiveness of psychotherapy empirically supports the assertion that consumers benefit substantially from psychotherapy (Seligman, 1995). Participants in the study answered questions about the effectiveness of the treatment they received, how satisfied they were with the therapist’s treatment of their problems, and how their emotional state changed from the beginning to the end of therapy. Of the 426 participants who were feeling “very poor” when they began therapy, 87% reported that they were feeling “very good” or “good” by the time of the survey. No specific modality of psychotherapy was shown to be more effective than any other. Participants reported that primary care physicians were as effective as the other mental health practitioners in the short term, but significantly less effective in the long term. Those who sought treatment from a mental health professional rather than seeing only a primary care physician reported more improvement in the following domains: ability to relate to others, ability to cope with everyday stress, enjoying life more, personal growth and understanding, self-esteem, and confidence (Seligman, 1995). Still, when individuals are struggling with mental health issues, they most commonly consult their primary care physicians (Mickus, Colenda, & Hogan, 2000; Murstein & Fontaine, 1993).

Research conducted by Deen, Bridges, McGahan, and Andrews (2012) offers insight into the role that cognitive factors play in the utilization of mental health services. Participants in their study were presented with vignettes that described depressive episodes and asked if they would seek help from (a) a medical doctor and (b) a counselor or therapist for the presented problem. Participants also were asked if they believed that seeing a medical doctor or counselor would help alleviate the presented problem. A higher perceived need for medical doctors over counselors or therapists was reported. Medical doctors were perceived by participants as more useful and had more favorable therapeutic outcome expectancies than counselors or therapists (Deen et al., 2012).

Furthermore, a five-year study conducted by Su, Tsai, Hung, and Chou (2011) evaluated non-psychiatric physicians’ accuracy in recognizing disorders. In each case, the researchers recorded the primary care physician’s impression and referrals based on psychiatric diagnosis and then compared them with a psychiatrist’s final diagnosis. When the primary care physician was able to recognize psychiatric diagnostic criteria or common symptoms (e.g., low mood, loss of interest and negative thinking, acute confusion, consciousness disturbance, hallucination), this information was recorded as correct recognition. Five common psychiatric diagnoses were chosen for analysis: (a) depressive disorder (major depressive disorder and dysthymic disorder), (b) anxiety disorders, (c) substance use disorders, (d) delirium, and (e) psychotic disorders (schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, and brief psychotic disorder). Su et al. (2011) reported that the overall diagnostic accuracy rate was 41.5%. Substance abuse disorders were the most accurately diagnosed by physicians (70.2%) and psychotic disorders were the least accurately diagnosed (9.7%). The most common psychiatric symptoms that patients report are depressive symptoms, yet the detection of depression by physicians (31.4%) is historically low (Su, et al., 2011).

Although pediatricians are instrumental in assessing and diagnosing the children’s mental health and behavioral challenges, they often state that their medical training does not fully prepare them to treat patients with learning disabilities, attention deficit disorders, mental retardation, substance abuse issues, or psychosocial problems (Russell, 2010). Clients who are seeking mental health services often perceive their primary care physicians and pediatricians as competent in providing mental health services, despite their lack of training on these specific issues. Moreover, many individuals suffer needlessly due to their primary care physicians’ lack of education regarding mental disorders (Tse, Wantz, & Firmin, 2010).

MHSPs have tremendous overlap in the populations served, disorders treated, and services offered (Hanna & Bemak, 1997). The helping professions are represented by diverse training standards, licenses, specialties, philosophies and histories (Fall, Levitov, Jennings, & Eberts, 2000). Although professional diversity allows for the treatment of a wide range of ­issues, this also can cause confusion regarding which type of MHSP a client should consult in a time of need. While perceptions of the competence of helping professionals can greatly affect utilization of services (Firmin, Wantz, Firmin, & Johnson, 2012), a review of the literature indicates that misperceptions are common.

 

Perceptions of MHSPs and Therapeutic Outcomes

Perceptions of MHSPs are important factors in the treatment outcomes of counseling (Firmin et al., 2012). According to Wampold (2001), client expectancy concerning the effectiveness of counseling accounts for 15% of the therapeutic outcome, and factors that clients carry into counseling (e.g., perceptions of MHSP competence and expertise) account for an astounding 40% of the therapeutic outcome. The therapeutic alliance alone accounts for 30% of the outcome of treatment (Wampold, 2001). Client perceptions of an MHSP’s competency in regard to treating specific needs have an effect on the therapeutic alliance as well as clients’ ability to facilitate positive changes in their lives. According to Meyer et al. (2002), client expectancy concerning the effectiveness of counseling is critical and often sufficient for inspiring positive change for the client. As far back as 1973, Frank asserted that counseling is most effective when both the client and counselor believe in the effectiveness of the intervention. Based on past analyses of the link between the expectancy factor and the therapeutic alliance, and their effect on treatment outcomes, the authors propose that creating more awareness and more positive perceptions of the overall effectiveness and accessibility of MHSPs would ultimately increase positive outcomes in counseling.

 

Undergraduate Students as Future Professionals and Help Seekers

College undergraduates’ perceptions of MHSPs are important for a number of reasons. First, the future of the helping profession depends on the incoming generation of undergraduate students, who are making decisions regarding which fields they will work in, and who may consider the helping professions. Career choices are related to well-being and overall life satisfaction (Steger & Dik, 2009). According to Roese and Summerville (2005), the most frequently identified life regrets for Americans involve their educational choices. Because educational choices have been consistently linked with life satisfaction, the accuracy of undergraduate perceptions of MHSPs merits more in-depth exploration.

Attending college can be a major life transition for students, accompanied by new pressures, stress, and surfacing mental health concerns. Most mental disorders are identifiable before or during the traditional college age of 1824 (Kessler et al., 2005). According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA, 2012), about four out of five college students consume alcohol. About half of the college students who drink partake in binge drinking. Around 25% of college students disclosed academic consequences because of their drinking (e.g., missing class, falling behind, performing poorly on assignments, receiving lower grades overall). These statistics indicate an increasing need for mental health and substance abuse counseling among college students. Universities provide a number of resources to their students, yet they are underutilized (Watkins, Hunt, & Eisenberg, 2012). Research focused on undergraduate perceptions of MHSPs could encourage more utilization of MHSP services, potentially motivate more students to join the MHSP workforce, and support a more accurate overall perception and portrayal of the effectiveness and competence of MHSPs. Since perceptions have been linked to help-seeking behaviors, a primary goal of the present study was to gain insight into how college students perceive the effectiveness of the various MHSPs.

 

Method

 

Participants

Data was collected from participants who were enrolled in a general psychology course at a private Midwestern university (N = 261). Participants were surveyed regarding their perceptions of MHSPs. The general psychology course provided a sample spanning a cross section of the university’s 100 academic majors.

Participants represented the freshman, sophomore, junior and senior class levels (Mage= 18.5; range = 17–55 years). Our study included 167 women (64%), 92 men (35%), and two participants that did not report gender (1%). The sample consisted primarily of Caucasian students (91%), while 9% were identified as ethnic minorities. Two participants opted out for undisclosed reasons. Participants reported home residences in 34 U.S. states (including 33% OH, 10% MI, 7% IN, and 6% PA).

 

Instruments

A self-administered questionnaire was developed for the present study in order to evaluate six MHSPs (e.g., for various clinical situations, source of knowledge, and characteristics). Participants were asked to respond to the following question: In general, what is your opinion about how overall effective each of the following MHSPs (counselors, MFTs, psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, psychologists, and social workers) would be with helping a mental health client? Response options were based on a 4-point Likert-type scale: 1 (positive), 2 (neutral), 3 (negative), or 4 (unsure). The survey asked each participant to designate which MHSPs he or she would recommend for several clinical situations using a 3-point Likert-type scale: 1 (Yes, I would recommend this MHSP), 2 (No, I would not recommend this MHSP), or 3 (Not sure, not familiar with this MHSP). Participants also were asked to identify a source from which they had learned about the MHSP. A 3-point Likert-type scale was utilized to indicate if the source information was presented in a: 1 (positive), 2 (neutral), or 3 (negative) way. Lastly, participants categorized MHSPs based on the following: personal attributes (e.g., competent, intelligent/smart, and trustworthy); job-related activities (e.g., diagnose and treat mental and emotional disorders, and prescribe medication); requirements (e.g., can be in independent private practice, doctoral degree required to practice, and over-paid); or not familiar with MHSP.

 

Procedure

An initial pilot study was conducted in order to address and resolve ambiguities before the final survey was administered. A total of 12 students participated in the pilot survey; data obtained from the initial study were not included in the present research.

The survey was administered anonymously and was designed to take 20–25 minutes to complete. MHSPs were presented randomly throughout the survey as suggested by Sarafino’s (2005) protocols. IRB approval for the study was obtained prior to data collection and informed consent was obtained. Participants elected to complete, partially complete, or not complete the survey. The survey was administered during regular class time with no extra credit or other incentives awarded for participation, providing little chance for coercion.

 

Results

 

Analyses focused on participant perceptions of the overall effectiveness of MHSPs in working with a potential mental health consumer. The following is a ranked list of the MHSPs from most positive to least positive by the frequency of perceptions: counselors, psychologists, psychiatrists, MFTs, social workers, and psychiatric nurses. A visual comparison of participant responses is provided in Figure 1. The frequency of participants reporting negative perceptions ranked from highest to lowest in the following order: social workers, MFTs, psychiatric nurses, psychiatrists, counselors and psychologists.

When participants were asked to identify their opinions in regard to the overall effectiveness of each of the MHSPs in helping a mental health consumer, participants selected the “don’t know” option as follows: psychiatric nurses (17.6%),  MFTs (8.8%), psychiatrists (7.3%), psychologists (5.7%),social workers (4.2%), and counselors (3.1%).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1. Undergraduate perceptions of the overall effectiveness of MHSPs.

Since the same participants rated each of the MHSP categories, t-tests were used to compare category means as represented in Figure 2. As expected, the data suggests significant differences in perceptions of MHSPs’ overall effectiveness when comparing the means from each MHSP category. Perceptions of the overall effectiveness of MFTs (M = 1.63, SD = .703) were significantly more negative than the perceptions of the overall effectiveness of professional counselors (PC; M = 1.35, SD = .532); t (234) = 5.648, p < .001, as well as the overall effectiveness of psychologists (M = 1.40, SD = .539); t (226) = 4.05, p < .001. MFT overall effectiveness (M = 1.63, SD = .703) was perceived to be significantly more positive than psychiatric nurse overall effectiveness (M = 1.54, SD = .624); t (203) = 2.104, p < .05. Counselor overall effectiveness (M = 1.35, SD = .532) was perceived to be significantly more positive than psychiatrist overall effectiveness (M = 1.52, SD = .612); t (238) = –3.589, p < .001. Psychiatrists were perceived as less effective overall (M = 1.52, SD 612) than psychologists (M = 1.40, SD = .539); t (236) = 2.934, p <.01.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2. A comparison of the category means of the perceptions of overall effectiveness of MHSPs (lower scores are more positive).

Social workers received the highest percentage of unsure student responses (36.8%), followed closely by psychiatrists (36.4%), and MFTs (34.9%). These findings suggest the need for information and advocacy for these MHSPs in particular. Data from the present study also suggest that social workers have the highest amount of variance in participant responses (.520), while MFTs rank second (.486). For this study, variance is possibly an indication of misinformation and discrepant beliefs regarding the effectiveness of the MHSPs. Counselors had the least amount of variance (.281) when compared to the other MHSPs, suggesting that participants had more similar perceptions of counselor overall effectiveness when compared to the variance in perceptions of the other MHSPs.

 

Discussion

 

The U.S. Surgeon General’s 1999 report on mental health stated to the American people that “the efficacy of mental health treatment is well-documented,” and recommended to “seek help if you have a mental health problem or think you have symptoms of mental illness.” (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (UDHHS; 2000, p. 13). The report further stipulated that stigmatization of mental illness is the greatest obstacle the United States faces in furthering the progress of individuals seeking mental health services (USDHHS, 2000). The present study highlights the need for the advocacy of MHSPs. Specifically, social workers, MFTs, and psychiatric nurses were perceived as significantly less effective overall than psychiatrists, counselors, and psychologists. This coincides with Consumer Reports’ 1994 Annual Questionnaire in which 4,000 subscribers who received some kind of mental health care between 1991 and 1994 responded to questions about their mental health care. This survey showed that participants were satisfied seeing social workers, psychologists, or psychiatrists (“Mental Health,” 1995). Those seeing a marriage and family therapist were slightly less satisfied (“Mental Health,” 1995). Overall, this report provided a positive recommendation to seek MHSPs for mental health issues.

Consumer Reports’ 2009 Annual Questionnaire once again queried its subscribers on the efficacy of mental health providers working specifically with depression and anxiety (“Depression & Anxiety,” 2010). This survey of 1,544 respondents, who had sought help for depression, anxiety, or other mental health problems between January 2006 and April 2009, found that psychologists, social workers, and licensed professional counselors were all equally helpful in providing relief for depression and anxiety (“Depression and Anxiety,” 2010).

Of concern from the present study is that for all MHSP categories, significant percentages of the participants reported a total absence of knowledge regarding MHSP overall effectiveness. This is one reason we recommend that counselors and counseling professional organizations (e.g., AMHCA, ACA, ACCA, CACREP, NBCC) increase their emphasis on professional advocacy.

In a broader sense, research regarding the methods through which people learn about MHSPs could identify more specific opportunities and venues for advocacy. The American College Counseling Association (ACCA) provides marketing strategy suggestions for reaching university faculty, staff, administrators and students: campus publications; campus television and radio shows; flyers posted around campus; e-mails; sponsoring anxiety, depression, and eating disorder screening days; table tents and banners in the cafeteria and student center; sponsoring career counseling week; guest speakers for classes and organizations; distributing brochures around campus; sponsorship and programming for Mental Health Awareness Month; developing mental health “theme of the month” campaigns; placing counseling advertisement kiosks in heavy traffic areas around campus; and hosting an open house (Mattox, 2000). These types of marketing actions are imperative and could be extended beyond university campuses. For example, public service announcements targeted toward specific consumers, mass media campaigns and the use of social networking for advocacy might be effective ways of reaching the increasingly tech-savvy generation. This approach could potentially be instrumental in decreasing the stigmatization of individuals who seek treatment for mental health-related issues and increase the awareness of services that are available.

The Council for Accreditation of Counseling & Related Education Programs (CACREP) could enhance activism for the helping professions by requiring students to demonstrate advocacy at both the master’s and doctoral levels. The American Counseling Association (ACA) and the American Mental Health Counselor’s Association (AMHCA) can direct ongoing advocacy efforts by increasing the ease of access to information related to the effectiveness of MHSPs for undergraduates. Counseling organizations can provide support for young professionals who are interested in joining the helping profession by empirically validating and improving perceptions of the overall effectiveness of MHSPs.

 

Limitations and Future Research

 

Future researchers are encouraged to explore the specific attitudes and perceptions that serve as barriers to the utilization of mental health treatment. Researchers should consider delineating therapeutic outcomes based on the specific type of provider (e.g., counselors, MFTs, psychiatrists, psychiatric nurses, psychologists, social workers). Of particular interest would be comparing the actual therapeutic outcomes of MHSPs to student perceptions of MHSP competence in treating specific mental disorders. The helping professions also could explore the perceptions of the overall effectiveness of MHSPs in comparison to those of primary care physicians.

Participants in the present study were not asked if they had received mental health services themselves. This is an important limitation to consider since perceptions of the effectiveness of MHSPs are likely influenced by firsthand experiences. In much the same way, a lack of familiarity or experience with MHSPs could potentially influence perceptions. The sources by which individuals learn about mental health–related issues could identify specific areas that can be utilized for advocating for the helping professions. For example, do people learn about mental health issues from movies, television, the Internet, commercials, newspapers, books, magazines, classes, friends, family members, firsthand experiences, or other sources? Is the information that individuals receive from these sources providing a foundation for accurate perceptions of the effectiveness of MHSPs? How do the attitudes founded on information from various sources influence help-seeking behavior? Research on these topics might provide further direction for professional advocacy.

Another limitation of the current study is that participants attended college in one geographical location. Though the participants represented 34 of the 50 states and spanned a wide range of academic majors, the results of the present study cannot be generalized to other types of institutions nationwide. All participants in this sample were undergraduate students, and therefore the results cannot be generalized to other populations. Confounding effects associated with the limitations of collecting data from a single university could be reduced by studying a larger and more nationally representative sample of private and public institutions or by comparing and contrasting results from various regions of the country. Perceptions of the general population should be explored for more generalizable results. On a final note, an important limitation of the present study is that only 9% of the participants identified themselves as ethnic minorities. We recommend further investigation of ethnic minority perceptions of MHSPs. Future studies also could focus on socioeconomic status, marital status, sexual orientation, age and gender as moderating variables.

 

References

Deen, T. L., Bridges, A. J., McGahan, T. C., & Andrews, A. R. (2012). Cognitive appraisals of specialty mental health services and their relation to mental health service utilization in the rural population. The Journal of Rural Health, 28, 142–151. doi:10.1111/j.1748-0361.2011.00375.x

Depression and anxiety: Readers reveal the therapists and drugs that helped. (2010, July). Consumer Reports, 75(7), 2831.

Fall, K. A., Levitov, J. E., Jennings, M., & Eberts, S. (2000). The public perception of mental health professions: An empirical examination. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 22, 122134.

Firmin, M. W., Wantz, R. A., Firmin, R. L., & Johnson, C. B. (2012). Sources by which students perceive professional counselors’ effectiveness. The Professional Counselor: Research and Practice, 2, 3342.

Frank, J. (1973). Persuasion and healing: A comparative study of psychotherapy (2nd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Hanna, F. J., & Bemak, F. (1997). The quest for identity in the counseling profession. Counselor Education and Supervision 36, 194206. doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.1997.tb00386.x

Kessler, R. C., Berglund, P., Demler, O., Jin, R., Merikangas, K. R., & Walters, E. E. (2005). Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of DSM-IV disorders in the national co-morbidity survey replication. Archives of General Psychiatry, 62, 593602. doi:10.1001/archpsyc.62.6.593

Mattox, R. (2000). Building effective campus relationships. In D. C. Davis & K. M. Humphrey (Eds.), College counseling: Issues and strategies for a new millennium (pp. 221237). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.

Mental health: Does therapy help? (1995, November). Consumer Reports, 60(11), 734739.

Meyer, B., Pilkonis, P. A., Krupnick, J. L., Egan, M. K., Simmens, S. J., & Stosky, S. M. (2002). Treatment expectancies, patient alliance, and outcome. Journal of Clinical and Consulting Psychology, 70, 10511055. doi:10.1037/0022-006X.70.4.1051

Mickus, M., Colenda, C. C., & Hogan, A. J. (2000). Knowledge of mental health benefits and preferences for type of mental health providers among the general public. Psychiatric Services, 51, 199202. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.51.2.199

Murstein, B. I., & Fontaine, P. A. (1993). The public’s knowledge about psychologists and other mental health professionals. American Psychologist, 48(7), 839.

National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. (2013). College drinking. Retrieved from http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/CollegeFactSheet/CollegeFactSheet.pdf

National Institute of Mental Health. (n.d.). The numbers count: Mental disorders in America. Retrieved from http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/the-numbers-count-mental-disorders-in-america/index.shtml#Intro

Roese, N. J., & Summerville, A. (2005). What we regret most…and why. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 12731285. doi:10.1177/0146167205274693

Russell, L. (2010). Mental health care services in primary care: Tackling the issues in the context of health care reform. Retrieved from
http://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2010/10/pdf/mentalhealth.pdf

Sarafino, E. P. (2005). Research methods: Using processes and procedures of science to understand behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Seligman, M. E. (1995). The effectiveness of psychotherapy: The Consumer Reports study. The American Psychologist, 50, 965974. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.50.12.965

Steger, M. F., & Dik, B. J. (2009). If one is looking for meaning in life, does it help to find meaning in work? Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 1, 303320. doi:10.1111/j.1758-0854.2009.01018.x

Su, J.-A., Tsai, C.-S., Hung, T.-H., & Chou, S.-Y. (2011). Change in accuracy of recognizing psychiatric disorder by non- psychiatric physicians: Five-year data from a psychiatric consultation-liaison service. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 65, 618623. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1819.2011.02272.x

Tse, L. M., Wantz, R. A., & Firmin, M. (2010). Perceptions of effectiveness among college students: Toward marriage and family counseling and therapy. The Family Journal, 18(3), 269274. doi:10.1177/1066480710371799

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (1999). Mental health: A report of the surgeon general. Bethesda, MD. Retrieved from http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/ps/retrieve/ResourceMetadata/NNBBHS

Wampold, B. E. (2001). The great psychotherapy debate: Models, methods, and findings. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Watkins, D. C., Hunt, J. B., & Eisenberg, D. (2012). Increased demand for mental health services on college campuses: Perspectives from administrators. Qualitative Social Work, 11(3), 319–337. doi:10.1177/1473325011401468

The White House. (2013). President Obama speaks at the national conference on mental health [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/photos-and-video/video/2013/06/03/president-obama-speaks-national-conference-mental-health#transcript

World Health Organization. (2001). The world health report 2001- mental health: New understanding, new hope. Geneva, Switzerland. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/whr/2001/en/index.html

 

Ashley M. Ackerman is a graduate student at Wright State University. Richard A. Wantz, NCC, is a Professor of Counselor Education at Wright State University. Michael W. Firmin, NCC, is a Professor at Cedarville University. Dawn C. Poindexter is a graduate student at Wright State University. Amita L. Pujara, NCC, is an Adjunct Instructor at Wright State University and Life Therapist at South Community Behavioral Health Care, Inc. Correspondence can be addressed to Richard A. Wantz, Department of Human Services, College of Education and Human Services, 3640 Colonel Glenn Highway, 108V AL, Wright State University, Dayton, OH 45435-0001, richard.wantz@wright.edu.

 

Assessing the Career-Development Needs of Student Veterans: A Proposal for Career Interventions

Seth Hayden, Kathy Ledwith, Shengli Dong, Mary Buzzetta

Student veterans often encounter unique challenges related to career development. The significant number of student veterans entering postsecondary environments requires career-development professionals addressing the needs of this population to decide upon appropriate career intervention topics. This study utilized a career-needs assessment survey to determine the appropriate needs of student veterans in a university setting. Student veterans indicated a desire to focus on the following topics within career intervention: transitioning military experience to civilian work, developing skills in résumé-building and networking, and negotiating job offers. Results of the needs survey can be used in the development of a career-related assessment.

Keywords: student veterans, career development, needs assessment, military, career-related assessment

 

     In 2013, there were 21.4 million male and female veterans aged 18 and older in the civilian noninstitutional population (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014a). The post-9/11 GI Bill, authorized by Congress in 2008, has contributed to a large number of veterans seeking postsecondary degrees (Sander, 2012). Since 2008, more than 817,000 military veterans have used the bill to attend U.S. colleges (Sander, 2013). Student veterans face many challenges on college campuses, including transition issues, relational challenges, feelings of isolation, and lingering effects of combat-related injuries (Green & Hayden, 2013).

 

     One of the most significant concerns is that veterans typically experience unemployment at a higher rate than their civilian counterparts (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014b). In 2013, the unemployment rate for Gulf War II-era veterans was 10.1 %; Gulf War I-era veterans 5.5%; and World War II, Korean War, and Vietnam War veterans 5.5% (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014b). Younger veterans in particular struggled with unemployment. As of 2013, about 2.8 million of the nation’s veterans had served during the Gulf War II era (September 2001–present; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014a). The unemployment rate for the Gulf War II-era veterans (10.1%) is significantly higher than their civilian counterparts (6.8%; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014b). As young military personnel continue to return to college campuses, it is important to address the career-readiness needs of this population utilizing evidence-based practices.

 

Cognitive Information Processing

 

     The Cognitive Information Processing (CIP) approach to career decision making (Sampson, Reardon, Peterson, & Lenz, 2004) has been suggested as a way to aid veterans as they transition into the civilian workforce (Bullock, Braud, Andrews, & Phillips, 2009; Buzzetta & Rowe, 2012; Clemens & Milsom, 2008; Hayden, Green, & Dorsett, in press; Phillips, Braud, Andrews, & Bullock, 2007; Stein-McCormick, Osborn, Hayden, & Van Hoose, 2013). The CIP approach is designed to assist individuals in making both current and future career choices (Sampson et al., 2004; Buzzetta & Rowe, 2012). This theoretical approach states that career problem solving and decision making are skills that can be learned and practiced (Sampson et al., 2004). Once clients have improved their problem-solving and decision-making skills, then they can apply these same skills to choices they make in the future. According to the CIP approach, the key aspects of career problem solving and decision making are self-knowledge, occupational knowledge, decision-making skills, and metacognitions (Sampson et al., 2004). Engels and Harris (2002) suggest that military individuals would benefit from understanding their self-knowledge, occupational information and decision-making skills.

 

Pyramid of Information Processing

     The CIP approach consists of two key components: the pyramid of information processing, or the knowing, and the CASVE cycle, or the doing. The interactive elements are analogous to a recipe used in cooking. The pyramid is like the ingredients for the dish, while the CASVE cycle reflects the necessary steps to make the dish. Both are critical for effective career decision making and problem solving (Sampson et al., 2004). The pyramid of information processing includes three domains involved in career decision making: knowledge, decision-making skills, and executive processing (Sampson et al., 2004). Sampson et al. (2004) theorized that all components of the pyramid are affected by dysfunctional thinking and negative self-talk. The knowledge domain consists of two main areas: self-knowledge and occupational knowledge. Self-knowledge is the cornerstone of a client’s career-planning process, and is comprised of an individual’s knowledge of his or her values, interests, skills, and employment preferences (Reardon, Lenz, Peterson, & Sampson, 2012; Sampson et al., 2004). Occupational knowledge is the second cornerstone of a client’s career-planning process; it encompasses knowledge of options, including educational, leisure, and occupational alternatives, as well as how occupations can be organized.

 

     The decision-making skills domain consists of a systematic process to help clients improve their problem-solving and decision-making skills, and includes the CASVE cycle, which is a multi-phase decision-making process, intended to increase client awareness and improve a client’s decision-making skills. The executive processing domain includes metacognitions, which include an individual’s thoughts about the decision-making process. There are three cognitive strategies included in the executive processing domain: self-talk, self-awareness, and monitoring and controlling an individual’s progress in the problem-solving process. Metacognitions can include dysfunctional career thinking, which can present problems in career decision making, influence other domains in the pyramid, and impact individuals’ perceptions of their capabilities to perform well (Sampson et al., 2004).

 

CASVE Cycle

     The CASVE cycle is used as a means of approaching a career problem or decision, and consists of five sequential stages (communication, analysis, synthesis, valuing, and execution), with repeated circuits when the problem still exists or new problems arise (Sampson et al., 2004). An individual enters the CASVE cycle after receiving either internal or external cues that he or she must make a career decision. In the communication stage, individuals are required to examine these prompts, and identify a gap that exists between where they are currently and where they would like to be. In the analysis phase, individuals clarify their existing self-knowledge by determining their occupational preferences, abilities, interests and values. The process of clarifying existing knowledge and gaining new information about potential options also is included. In the synthesis phase, individuals narrow down and further develop the options they are considering.

 

     In the valuing phase, individuals assess the costs and benefits of each remaining alternative. This task involves prioritizing the alternatives, as well as selecting a tentative primary and secondary choice. In the execution phase, individuals create and commit to a plan of action for accomplishing their first choice. Upon completion of the execution phase, individuals return to the communication phase to determine whether the gap has been filled. The CASVE cycle is recursive in nature. Therefore, if the gap has not been removed and problems still exist, an individual will progress through the CASVE cycle again (Sampson et al., 2004).

 

Negative Thinking

     Several studies have found that negative thoughts are related to career decision-making difficulties (Kleiman et al., 2004; Sampson, Peterson, Lenz, Reardon, & Saunders, 1996; Sampson et al., 2004). Kleiman et al. (2004) examined the relationship between dysfunctional thoughts and an individual’s degree of career decidedness in a sample of 192 college students enrolled in an undergraduate career-planning course. The researchers found that dysfunctional thinking during the decision-making process can negatively influence rational decisions. Assessing for dysfunctional career thoughts and working with individuals to reduce negative career thinking can have a positive impact on the knowledge and decision-making skills domains of the pyramid of information processing. More importantly, utilizing a theoretical approach can provide a structure in which to address the needs of student veterans.

 

Needs Assessment Survey

 

     In order to address the needs of student veterans, counselors must first assess what these needs are. Student veterans offer a unique subset of our veteran population in that they operate within an educational environment while possessing diverse life experiences, and are therefore often unique in relation to their peers (Cook & Kim, 2009). Given the aforementioned employment difficulties for younger veterans (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014b), a need for career-focused interventions designed to assist this population is apparent.

 

     While various supportive services for veterans are available, determining an appropriate allocation of resources and time to address the needs of this population can enhance the quality of services. To match intervention with need, the authors created a needs survey designed to inform the development of a theoretically based career intervention, the purpose of which is assisting student veterans in developing skills in career decision making and problem solving.

 

Sample

     The sample for this needs assessment was collected from a sample of student veterans attending a large southeastern university (n = 92). Currently, this university has approximately 317 student veterans enrolled and receiving educational benefits through either the Montgomery GI Bill or post-9/11 GI Bill. This means of identifying veterans is imperfect, as there may be student veterans attending the university who do not utilize educational benefits. However, this is a common method of identifying veterans within university settings (University of Arizona, 2007). The participants were asked to complete the needs survey by both the university veterans association and the veterans benefit officer. Both social media and e-mail were used to elicit participation.

 

     All 317 identified members of the population receiving education benefits were provided the opportunity to respond to the survey, via both an e-mail request with the electronic survey attached and a post on the student veteran organization’s social media Web page. A total of 92 (29%) completed surveys were collected. Of the 92 respondents, a majority identified as graduate students (47; 51%). The remaining respondents indicated their classifications as undergraduate students with the classifications of junior (25; 23%), senior (18; 20%), and sophomore (2; 2%). No students classified as freshmen responded to the survey.

 

Instrument

     The research team constructed the Veterans Needs Survey after examining the common career-development needs of both veterans and nonveterans encountered in the university’s career center. The instrument was created via a Qualtrics survey management system and attached to an electronic communication addressed to the potential respondents, as well as embedded in a social media thread of the university’s student veteran organization. The measure inquired about whether respondents had heard of the university career center; whether they had previously visited the university career center; what they would like to learn more about related to the career-development process; what modalities of treatment they were most interested in attending (e.g., group counseling, workshop series); how likely they were to attend the option indicated; education status; major/field of study; additional comments related to their career development; and an opportunity to participate in an intervention (an e-mail address was requested). The authors did not collect significant demographic information, instead focusing on variables like utilization of services (e.g., contact with the career center) and students’ academic classification, as these factors appear directly connected with career-development concerns.

 

Results

 

     The survey examined utilization and perceptions of career-development needs. The majority of respondents (80; 87%) indicated that they had heard of the career center, but a smaller number indicated actually visiting the career center (66; 73%). The question pertaining to perceived career-development needs provided a multiple-option response set in which one could indicate several options. The most frequently indicated response was transferring skills gained in the military to the workplace (49; 55.06%). The second most frequently indicated response was preparing a résumé/CV (46; 51.69%), followed by negotiating a job offer (45; 50.56%). Table 1 provides a detailed description of additional responses regarding the career-development process.

 

     A significant majority (54; 61%) indicated that they would be most interested in attending a group format, and fewer respondents selected the workshop series as their first choice (24; 27%). Respondents indicating the other category specified that they would attend career fairs, take advantage of individual counseling, and utilize online workshops. Following up on the previous question, one item inquired how likely a respondent would be to attend the option indicated. The most frequently indicated response was somewhat likely (42; 47%) followed by very likely (34; 38%) with unlikely (14; 16%) being the least frequently indicated response. The majors/fields of study with a significant number of responses were law (9), business-related (undergraduate and graduate; 9), social work (7), and criminology (8).

 

Participants provided diverse general comments related to their career development. One student veteran stated, “I have an associates [sic] degree in Laboratory Technology from the military and would also like assistance building a résumé trying to find employment now.” Another shared, “As a distance learner, it is possible to feel out of reach when it comes to on-campus resources. But, I know we can overcome that. I may be a combat disabled veteran. But, I won’t let disabilities stop my self-actualization quest.”

 

   The information obtained from the needs survey can be utilized to inform an intervention designed to assist student veterans in their career development, which will provide a grounded approach in addressing these issues. The following section offers a proposal for meeting student veteran needs with a career-development intervention.

 

Table 1

 

Perceived Career-Development Needs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Proposed Theoretically Based Career Intervention

 

     Based upon the CIP theoretical framework (Sampson et al., 2004) and the feedback received from the needs assessment, psychoeducational groups will be conducted in order to achieve the following goals: expanding student veteran self-knowledge and career options through the CIP approach, exploring transferable skills gained through military experiences, gaining knowledge of resources that can assist student veterans in the job search and application processes, and identifying and decreasing negative metacognitions and dysfunctional career thoughts.

 

     The psychoeducational group will meet once a week for 4 weeks. The group is open to all student veteran members attending the university through a campus-wide recruitment effort. Considering the tight connections between each CIP component, the group will be conducted in a closed-group format. The group facilitators will be graduate students pursuing doctoral degrees in counseling psychology or school psychology, and/or master’s students studying career counseling.

 

     The group activities will center on the student veterans’ needs obtained through the needs assessment survey and the CIP components that have been proposed to serve the needs of veterans (Bullock et al., 2009; Clemens & Milsom, 2008). The structure of the psychoeducational group is based on the CIP model and five stages of the CASVE cycle diagram: communication, analysis, synthesis, valuing, and execution.

 

     During the first session (communication), the group leader(s) will help to identify gaps between where group members are currently and where they aspire to be. Group members’ baseline information will be obtained by completing the Career Thoughts Inventory (CTI; Sampson, Peterson, Lenz, Reardon, & Saunders, 1996/1998) and My Vocational Situation (MVS; Holland, Daiger, & Power, 1991). The group leader(s) will explain the CIP Pyramid, CASVE Cycle Diagram, Self-Directed Search (SDS; Holland 1985) and assessment procedures. Group members will have an opportunity to interact with each other and complete one section of the Guide to Good Decision Making (Sampson, Peterson, Lenz, & Reardon, 1992). As a part of the homework assignment listed on the Individual Learning Plan (ILP), a document designed to identify career-related goals and associated action steps, group members will complete the SDS, and bring a copy of their current résumé to the next session.

 

     During the second session (analysis/synthesis), the group leader(s) will help the student veterans examine and identify their interests, values, and skills (including transferable skills). The group leader(s) will assist group members in interpreting their SDS results, and examine any potential dysfunctional career thoughts that may be impacting group members’ career choices and decision-making abilities. To expand their career options, group members will be exposed to career-related resources such as the Occupational Outlook Handbook (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014c) and the Military Crosswalk Search via O*Net Online (National Center for O*NET Development, n.d.). In addition to gaining self-knowledge and occupational information in the analysis process, group members will have opportunities to practice synthesis skills. Group members will improve their résumé-writing skills through practice and feedback from peers and the group leader(s). Exploring and highlighting transferable skills is another important component. As part of their assignment listed on the ILP, group members will enhance their career networking skills by accessing supportive professionals via an alumni network and the Student Veterans Association, among other resources. Group members will also conduct an informational interview to gain firsthand experiences for their chosen career options. They will bring updated versions of their résumés and cover letters for the next session to obtain feedback from the group.

 

     During the third session (valuing and execution), group members will present reflections on their informational interviews and provide feedback on their peers’ résumés and cover letters. In addition, group members will be exposed to various career resources such as VetJobs (VetJobs, Inc., 2014), Feds Hire Vets (U.S. Office of Personnel Management, n.d.), Job-hunt.org (NETability, Inc., 2014), the Riley Guide (Riley Guide, 2014), and the National Resource Directory (U.S. Departments of Defense, Labor and Veterans Affairs, n.d.). The group leader(s) will explain the “elevator speech” exercise and ask group members to practice this exercise in order to maximize their interview skill development. The group will also enhance members’ ability to use social networking to optimize their job search and applications. All activities aim to help members weigh their career options and execute their career decision making through careful planning. The group leader(s) will encourage members to initiate career networking and start exploring job and career opportunities.

 

     During the last session (communication), group members will share what they originally included in their ILPs and what they have achieved, and offer suggestions and feedback to one another. They will retake the CTI and MVS and compare their new and initial results. Group leaders will help group members examine whether the gaps identified at the communication stage have successfully been closed, and suggest further measures to close gaps if necessary.

 

Discussion

    

     The information gathered from the needs survey provides a thorough description of student veterans’ career-development needs. Interventions designed to support this population by determining appropriate interventions are often constructed using anecdotal information rather than objective needs. Student veteran responses to the survey indicate that veterans are concerned about transitioning their military experiences to civilian employment opportunities. In addition, student veterans appear to desire assistance with practical elements of the career-development process such as creating a résumé, negotiating a job offer, and networking. The purpose of this study is to develop a theoretically based intervention, and the study offers a framework in which to create effective career-development interventions for student veteran population.

 

     Student veterans appear to engage in a wide array of academic programs, with a significant portion of veterans selecting majors within the realm of business, law, sociology, social work and criminology. These survey results provide a snapshot of the majors/fields of study that student veterans seem to gravitate toward. These preferences could be attributed to the hierarchical and meritocratic nature of some of these fields, which are somewhat analogous to the culture of the military.

 

     Responses to the survey also provided a glimpse into the preferred modality of receiving career-related assistance. Oftentimes, military transition programs are designed to serve a large number of people, using seminar or workshop modalities in which to provide information. Student veterans indicated a strong preference for a smaller group counseling format that would provide more individual career-development support.

 

     An additional important consideration for future interventions is the high number of respondents who identified themselves as distance learners in the needs assessment (some of them may have been on active service, whereas others were simply enrolled in the university from a remote location). Given the technological capabilities that allow online learning environments, it is reasonable that student veterans could utilize e-learning opportunities. Designing online interventions could be helpful in determining appropriate modalities by which to deliver services.

 

     The student veterans’ comments and responses regarding their desired areas of focus for career development indicate a preference for a balanced approach of skill development. Ensuring that interventions focus on practical elements such as résumés and networking skill development, while also addressing broader topics such as transitioning from the military to the civilian workforce, appears to be a desired method for addressing the career-development needs of student veterans.

 

Limitations

     The needs survey is limited in generalizability, as the results were collected from one educational institution, confining interpretations to the student veterans in this institution. Despite this limitation, the career-development concerns of student veterans provide a snapshot of the needs of this unique subset of the veteran population. Given the paucity of research in this area, it seemed necessary to facilitate an in-depth examination of this population’s career-development concerns, allowing the development of an informed intervention and establishing replicable protocol for future needs surveys.

 

     The low response rate to the online survey also limits the application of findings. Though the response rate of 29% may be considered reasonable for an online assessment, having a large portion of the sample disregard the assessment presents a gap in fully substantiated information on this topic. Developing methods for collecting more information would enhance the validity of the data.

 

     Finally, the high rate of graduate students who responded to the survey presents a challenge in applying the results to a primarily undergraduate institution. While there may be analogous experiences between graduate and undergraduate students, specific aspects of undergraduate student veterans’ career development may need additional evaluation.

 

Implications for Practice and Research

     In this needs assessment, collaborative efforts between career services professionals at the institution and the university veterans’ center resulted in informative data on the career concerns of student veterans. Co-sponsored initiatives targeting these expressed needs could increase the number of student veterans impacted by career services. Survey respondents, along with group or workshop participants, could be recruited to provide feedback as part of a career-development focus group, further informing research and application for student veterans’ career concerns. Survey results could also be useful for marketing career services to student veterans. In addition, career centers or university libraries could acquire career resources such as books and print materials on topics that survey respondents considered desirable, especially those specifically tailored for veterans.

 

     At the larger university level, major data on their students’ career-development concerns would be valuable information for college and department academic advisors and other university stakeholders. Career center staff members focus on various academic units as part of their career outreach, but further research regarding the unique career concerns of student veterans in specific majors could allow career center liaisons to impact veterans more effectively in their designated areas. As previously stated, since the survey was conducted at one higher education institution, duplicating the needs survey across a larger sample of colleges and universities would provide additional data sets for analysis, as well as broader application possibilities. Survey data could also be applied outside the institution to identify the most optimal partnerships in order to meet the comprehensive needs of student veterans. For example, career counselors might collaborate with mental health professionals, school counselors, and rehabilitation professionals to identify challenges and provide resources in order to maximize development for student veterans.

 

     The results of this survey also support future research on the efficacy and suitability of online career-development options. There are many online programs designed to provide veterans the opportunity to pursue their education while in active duty. While the convenience of remote educational options for a mobile population is understood, ensuring that universities also provide career-development resources to distance learners is an important consideration in addressing the needs of veterans. Career-development opportunities such as webinars and online workshops offer the flexibility of distance learning. For example, online formats could provide veterans an opportunity to participate in such workshops collaboratively. Possible areas of research would include effective use of distance learning for veterans and comparative benefits and costs of in-person versus distance formats.

 

     Based on the information collected, in future needs surveys, adjusting the survey items to detail reasons for certain item selections could allow greater understanding of both the responses and student veterans’ career thinking in general. Resulting career interventions would provide additional opportunities for further research to investigate aspects of career decision making and CIP theory, including relationships between student veterans’ self-knowledge, options knowledge, decision-making skills and metacognitions.

 

Conclusion

 

     While veterans’ needs receive significant attention, programs are often created based on anecdotal and intuitive information. Developing needs assessments to solicit veterans’ perceptions of career development can inform interventions. Specifically regarding career development, utilizing a theoretically based, researched approach offers a framework to guide practice and research. Ongoing assessment of needs and services that utilizes established approaches will ensure quality services for those who have sacrificed greatly in service of their country.

 

References

Bullock, E. E., Braud, J., Andrews, L., & Phillips, J. (2009). Career concerns of unemployed U.S. war veterans: Suggestions from a Cognitive Information Processing approach. Journal of Employment Counseling, 46, 171–181. doi:10.1002/j.2161-1920.2009.tb00080.x

Buzzetta, M., & Rowe, S. (2012, November 1). Today’s veterans: Using Cognitive Information Processing (CIP) approach to build upon their career dreams. Career Convergence Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.ncda.org/aws/NCDA/pt/sd/news_article/66290/_self/layout_details/false

Clemens, E. V., & Milsom, A. S. (2008). Enlisted service members’ transition into the civilian world of work: A cognitive information processing approach. The Career Development Quarterly, 56, 246–256. doi:10.1002/j.2161-0045.2008.tb00039.x

Cook, B. J., & Kim, Y. (2009). From soldier to student: Easing the transition of service members on campus. Retrieved from http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Documents/From-Soldier-to-Student-Easing-the-Transition-of-Service-Members-on-Campus.pdf

Engels, D. W., & Harris, H. L. (2002). Career counseling with military personnel and their dependents. In S. G. Niles (Ed.), Adult career development: Concepts, issues, and practices (3rd ed., pp. 253–266). Tulsa, OK: National Career Development Association.

Green, L., & Hayden, S. (2013). Supporting student veterans: Current landscape and future directions. Journal of Military and Government Counseling, 1, 89–100.

Hayden, S., Green, L., & Dorsett, K. (in press). Perseverance and progress: Career counseling for military personnel with traumatic brain injury. VISTAS. Retrieved from http://www.counselingoutfitters.com/vistas/vistas_2013_TOC-QR3-section_01.htm

Holland, J. L. (1985). Making Vocational Choices: A theory of vocational personalities and work environments. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Holland, J. L., Daiger, D. C., & Power, P. G. (1991). My Vocational Situation. Mountain View, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Kleiman, T., Gati, I., Peterson, G., Sampson, J., Reardon, R., & Lenz, J. (2004). Dysfunctional

thinking and difficulties in career decision making. Journal of Career Assessment, 12,

                312–331. doi:10.1177/1069072704266673

National Center for O*NET Development. (n.d.). Military crosswalk search [Database]. O*NET Online. Retrieved from http://www.onetonline.org/crosswalk/MOC/

NETability, Inc. (2014). How to succeed in your job search today. Job-hunt.org. Retrieved from http://www.job-hunt.org

Phillips, J., Braud, J., Andrews, L., & Bullock, E. E. (2007, November 1). Bridging the gap from job to career for U.S. veterans. Career Convergence Magazine. Retrieved from

http://associationdatabase.com/aws/NCDA/pt/sd/news_article/5412/_PARENT/layout_details_cc/false

Reardon, R. C., Lenz, J. G., Peterson, G. W., & Sampson, J. P., Jr. (2012). Career development and planning: A comprehensive approach (4th ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt Publishing.

Riley Guide. (2014). The Riley Guide. Retrieved from http://www.rileyguide.com/

Sampson, J. P., Jr., Peterson, G. W., Lenz, J. G., & Reardon, R. C. (1992). A cognitive approach

to career services: Translating concepts into practice. The Career Development Quarterly, 41, 67–74.

Sampson, J. P., Jr., Peterson, G. W., Lenz, J. G., Reardon, R. C., & Saunders, D. E. (1996). Career Thoughts Inventory: Professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Sampson, J. P., Jr., Peterson, G. W., Lenz, J. G., Reardon, R. C., & Saunders, D. E. (1998). The design and use of a measure of dysfunctional career thoughts among adults, college students, and high school, students: The Career Thoughts Inventory. Journal of Career Assessment, 6, 115–134. doi:10.1177/106907279800600201

Sampson, J. P., Jr., Reardon, R. C., Peterson, G. W., & Lenz, J. G. (2004). Career counseling & services: A cognitive information processing approach. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Sander, L. (2012, July). Colleges expand services for veterans, but lag in educating faculty on veterans’ needs. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://chronicle.com/

Sander, L. (2013, January). Veterans tell elite colleges: ‘We Belong’. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://chronicle.com/

Stein-McCormick, C., Osborn, D. S., Hayden, S. C. W., & Van Hoose, D. (2013). Career development for transitioning veterans. Broken Arrow, OK: National Career Development Association.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014a). Employment situation of veterans – 2012 [News release]. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/vet.pdf

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014b). Table A-5. Employment status of the civilian population 18 years and over by veteran status, period of service, and sex, not seasonally adjusted [Economic news release]. Retrieved from http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/print.pl/news.release/empsit.t05.htm

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2014c). 2014–2015 Occupational outlook handbook. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/ooh/

U.S. Departments of Defense, Labor and Veterans Affairs. (n.d.). National resource directory. Retrieved from https://www.nrd.gov/

U.S. Office of Personnel Management. (n.d.). Feds hire vets. Retrieved from http://www.fedshirevets.gov/Index.aspx

University of Arizona. (2007). Student veteran needs assessment survey. Retrieved from https://studentaffairs.arizona.edu/assessment/documents/VETS_Needs7-2012FINAL.pdf

VetJobs, Inc. (2014). VetJobs: Veterans make the best employees. Retrieved from https://www.vetjobs.com/

 

Seth Hayden, NCC, is the Program Director of Career Advising, Counseling and Programming at Florida State University. Kathy Ledwith, NCC, is the Assistant Director for Career Counseling, Advising and Programming at Florida State University. Shengli Dong is an Assistant Professor at Florida State University. Mary Buzzetta, NCC, is a doctoral student at Florida State University. Correspondence can be addressed to Seth Hayden, 100 S. Woodward Avenue, Tallahassee, FL 32308, scwhayden@fsu.edu.