Wikiversity

Talk:Helping Give Away Psychological Science/Creating an Open Teaching Toolkit

< Talk:Helping Give Away Psychological Science
Latest comment: 2 years ago by Eyoungstrom in topic ABCT Dis-Sig Postconference Breakout Room

ABCT Dis-Sig Postconference Breakout Room

edit
Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Open Science Platforms and their Untapped Potential for Dissemination Science

2:00-5:00 PM Friday 1.21.2022

Presenters:

Emily Becker-Haimes, Ph.D. & Alayna Park, Ph.D.

Eric A. Youngstrom, Ph.D., The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill & HGAPS.org Presentation Slides

Facilitators:  Hannah Kim, B.S.1 | Emma Grace Choplin, B.S.2 | Colin Park2 | Caroline Vincent2 Questions during presentation

1NIAAA & HGAPS.org 2UNC-CH & HGAPS.org


What this is: A handout, instead of just slides and where you can post your questions and all of us can answer!

Why?: This will let us add links, keep a copy after the session is over, and share the good stuff with other people! Experts like Tufte (who hates Powerpoint!) suggest that a printed page lets us take away a lot more information.

How? Just start typing! The facilitators are going to use this during the breakout sessions, too.



Please subscribe to our YouTube Channel for HGAPS

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Learning Objectives:

At the end of this session, the learner will be able to:

  1. Identify three advantages to using Wiki for disseminating information about psychology resources
  2. Identify the different audiences and uses of Wikiversity versus Wikipedia
  3. State three advantages of linking OSF.io and Wiki
  4. Be able to use Creative Commons licenses

Breakout Room Discussions:

Emma G. Choplin’s Breakout Group

Priming the pump:

Here are some different web pages with information about CBT.

ABCT | WebMD | Wikipedia

  1. Look at them through the eyes of different stakeholders. What do you like and dislike? What do you wish was added? How credible is each of the three pages above?
    1. More clear and digestible statement of cost-effectiveness, length of treatment for CBT vs. other therapies to decide if it is worth investment over other treatments
    2. Clinicians in training coming to this page might want links to manuals, to learn how to treat people with CBT (<-- especially good fit for Wikiversity format)
    3. What is the point and elevator pitch of CBT and how is this going to impact the populations, increase productivity, education system, tangibles
      1. Create an infographic of the high level takeaways
      2. Create a graphic in ggplot summarizing the government tables
  2. If you were a patient, clinician, or policymaker, what would your impression of this content be? Please focus discussion on the perspective of your breakout room title – however, if you have additional time, feel free to move on to consider another perspective?

General public | Someone in distress | Graduate student | Private practitioner | Treatment researcher

  1. If you were given free rein to redesign this page, who are the stakeholders you would want to engage to talk about this?
  2. What information would you think is most important to include?
  3. What approach would you recommend for identifying the best information to include?
  4. HGAPS has explored ways of making Evidence-Based Assessment more accessible, including Wikiversity Pages about measures and implementation, and free administration and scoring. Could similar things be done with treatment materials? With prevention?
  5. What images or graphics would be good to add to the CBT Wikipedia page?
  6. Compare and contrast CBT page with Psychoanalysis page and the DBT page. What do these other pages have that you would like to see a version of on CBT?
  7. What citations should be included?
  8. What external links should be added?

STATS

  • Only 62 Top Psychology articles and 666 High importance articles
  • Psychoanalysis and CBT are both under Psychology and Medicine Wikiprojects but Psychoanalysis is listed in the Psychiatry subproject under Medicine.

Colin Park’s Breakout Group (Patient Perspective)

Priming the pump:

Here are some different web pages with information about CBT.

ABCT | WebMD | Wikipedia

  1. Look at them through the eyes of different stakeholders. What do you like and dislike? What do you wish was added? How credible is each of the three pages above?
    1. There’s a lot of information - it might feel like too much for patients.
      1. The criticisms may be more unhelpful for patients who may be just starting their search. It may be helpful to speak more to whether this is more or less effective than other treatments.
      2. It was difficult to find information. Organization information (e.g., in a table) could be helpful.
      3. Seeing that CBT works for everything may make a patient feel like this treatment isn’t appropriate for their specific problem.
  2. If you were a patient, clinician, or policymaker, what would your impression of this content be? Please focus discussion on the perspective of your breakout room title – however, if you have additional time, feel free to move on to consider another perspective?

General public | Someone in distress | Graduate student | Private practitioner | Treatment researcher

  1. If you were given free rein to redesign this page, who are the stakeholders you would want to engage to talk about this?
    1. Less detail in the opening paragraphs, information overload for a patient ust searching for information
    2. Figure at the beginning doesn’t seem very compelling/useful for people learning about CBT
      1. Maybe photos or images as an attention grabbing image that demonstrate thought bubbles or other
    3. A page for patients, the history, and practitioners
      1. How to present the faults of CBT without turning people off to the idea of it
        1. Maybe acknowledging concerns at the end? (like with side effects)
        2. CBT does not apply to all disorders, so if there is research supporting different kinds of intervention that would be more helpful
          1. By disorder support: first piece of information that is received by patient and something that could help a patient explore their specific circumstance
          2. Division 12 website: not friendly for the public, but organized by disorder
    4. Section for how to know if you are receiving CBT or another treatment
  2. What information would you think is most important to include?
    1. Tables to include how CBT could work for different disorders
    2. Link embedded in opening paragraph about a short video (1-2 min intro of this is what CBT is)
      1. For accessibility and simplicity
    3. Not a good opening picture buttt….
      1. Maybe a comic (or accessible format) demonstrating the processes of CBT
      2. Timeline of CBT
    4. For later in the article: use of language that is more understandable (i.e. not using cognition or psychological language, but more general terms)
  3. What approach would you recommend for identifying the best information to include?
    1. The incorporation of different groups when making this page is extremely important
  4. HGAPS has explored ways of making Evidence-Based Assessment more accessible, including Wikiversity Pages about measures and implementation, and free administration and scoring. Could similar things be done with treatment materials? With prevention?
  5. What images or graphics would be good to add to the CBT Wikipedia page?
  6. Compare and contrast CBT page with Psychoanalysis page and the DBT page. What do these other pages have that you would like to see a version of on CBT?
  7. What citations should be included?
  8. What external links should be added?
    1. https://effectivechildtherapy.org/therapies/cognitive-behavioral-therapy/
      1. A good definition of CBT

STATS

  • Only 62 Top Psychology articles
  • 666 High importance articles
  • Psychoanalysis and CBT are both under Psychology and Medicine Wikiprojects but Psychoanalysis is listed in the Psychiatry subproject under Medicine.

Caroline Vincent’s Breakout Group

Priming the pump:

Here are some different web pages with information about CBT.

ABCT | WebMD | Wikipedia

  1. Look at them through the eyes of different stakeholders. What do you like and dislike? What do you wish was added? How credible is each of the three pages above?
  2. If you were a patient, clinician, or policymaker, what would your impression of this content be? Please focus discussion on the perspective of your breakout room title – however, if you have additional time, feel free to move on to consider another perspective?

General public | Someone in distress | Graduate student | Private practitioner | Treatment researcher

  1. If you were given free rein to redesign this page, who are the stakeholders you would want to engage to talk about this?
  2. What information would you think is most important to include?
  3. What approach would you recommend for identifying the best information to include?
  4. HGAPS has explored ways of making Evidence-Based Assessment more accessible, including Wikiversity Pages about measures and implementation, and free administration and scoring. Could similar things be done with treatment materials? With prevention?
  5. What images or graphics would be good to add to the CBT Wikipedia page?
  6. Compare and contrast CBT page with Psychoanalysis page and the DBT page. What do these other pages have that you would like to see a version of on CBT?
  7. What citations should be included?
  8. What external links should be added?

STATS

  • Only 62 Top Psychology articles
  • 666 High importance articles
  • Psychoanalysis and CBT are both under Psychology and Medicine Wikiprojects but Psychoanalysis is listed in the Psychiatry subproject under Medicine.

Hannah Kim’s Breakout Group

Priming the pump:

Here are some different web pages with information about CBT.

ABCT | WebMD | Wikipedia

  1. Look at them through the eyes of different stakeholders. What do you like and dislike? What do you wish was added? How credible is each of the three pages above?
    1. Busy, confusing… scattered
      1. Organization of headers
      2. Difficult to determine what exactly it is/how it could be used
    2. Lot of information, not cohesive
      1. Not enough about provision and the training behind it
        1. Therapist is mentioned 35 times, psychologist is mentioned 7 times… no mention of social worker
      2. Not enough directly applicable information
    3. Not enough attention to different use cases
    4. Sociopolitical concerns section… rise of neoliberalism (?)
    5. Clinicians wouldn’t really get the most useful info from the page
      1. Motivation for looking at the page - less knowledge or making a decision; current trends/knowledge base
      2. Want patients to have a better quality source
    6. Triangle graphic is not the most helpful in practice
      1. Not the most informative
      2. Maybe put it in a relevant subsection?
      3. Is this really what we want people to take away from CBT?
    7. Would external links (i.e., APA, ABCT) be helpful or not?
      1. Maybe
  2. If you were a patient, clinician, or policymaker, what would your impression of this content be? Please focus discussion on the perspective of your breakout room title – however, if you have additional time, feel free to move on to consider another perspective?

General public | Someone in distress | Graduate student | Private practitioner | Treatment researcher

  1. If you were given free rein to redesign this page, who are the stakeholders you would want to engage to talk about this?
    1. Patients
      1. People with little/no knowledge looking for help
    2. Providers from different disciplines
      1. Social work, counseling, psychiatry
      2. Physicians - prescribing medications, more emphasis in primary care
      3. Broader “clinicians”
    3. Wiki editors!
      1. People who critique/review the info
  2. What information would you think is most important to include?
    1. Use in different populations
      1. Children
    2. Not enough emphasis on CBT for anxiety specifically
      1. Organize by what it’s most useful for/major uses
    3. First paragraph
      1. Rework the definition to be more skill-based, emphasis on preventative efforts
    4. “Standard length”
      1. Variability
    5. Info on referrals
      1. Do you need a referral? Self-referral?
    6. More about building rapport/therapeutic relationship
    7. History
      1. Minimize it or reorganize
      2. Still helpful to include for training/education
      3. Might not be able to reorder depending on the Wiki folks
  3. What approach would you recommend for identifying the best information to include?
    1. Look at how CBT is covered in other encyclopedias
  4. HGAPS has explored ways of making Evidence-Based Assessment more accessible, including Wikiversity Pages about measures and implementation, and free administration and scoring. Could similar things be done with treatment materials? With prevention?
  5. What images or graphics would be good to add to the CBT Wikipedia page?
  6. Compare and contrast CBT page with Psychoanalysis page and the DBT page. What do these other pages have that you would like to see a version of on CBT?
  7. What citations should be included?
  8. What external links should be added?

STATS

  • Only 62 Top Psychology articles
  • 666 High importance articles
  • Psychoanalysis and CBT are both under Psychology and Medicine Wikiprojects but Psychoanalysis is listed in the Psychiatry subproject under Medicine.

SUGGESTIONS FOR HGAPS

This could include links, resources, infographics, fundraising/grant opportunities, recommended papers to read, measures to add to the Assessment Center, etc. Eyoungstrom (discuss • contribs) 17:38, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic
Retrieved from "https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Helping_Give_Away_Psychological_Science/Creating_an_Open_Teaching_Toolkit&oldid=2370345"
Return to "Helping Give Away Psychological Science/Creating an Open Teaching Toolkit" page.