Differences in Competency and Qualification Requirements between APA and ACA Code of Ethics: A Reply to Gerson
Journal of Integrated Social Sciences, Vol: 9, Issue: 1, Page: 62-67
2019
- 24Usage
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage24
- Abstract Views24
Article Description
The present article is a reply to Gerson’s (2019; see this present issue of JISS) commentary regarding our article published in JISS: “Differences in Competency and Qualifications between APA and ACA Code of Ethics” (Firmin, DeWitt, Zurlinden, Smith, & Shell, 2019; see this present issue of JISS). I address six main issues related to Gerson’s commentary: (1) He seemingly interjects—or projects—his own suppositions onto the factually-based study that we conducted. (2) Gerson highlighted the aspirational “guidelines” that the APA promulgates for various specialties but such guidelines are completely and totally unrelated to the study that we conducted. (3) Gerson makes some factual errors of which I make note. (4) Our reasonable recommendation to compare two codes was without cause extended to suggest that undergraduates should compare all codes. (5) Gerson belittles the details between the two codes but I argue that it is the differences—and not the similarities—that are important for the argument we make in the article. (6) For an inexplicable reason, Gerson advocates that professional psychologists and counselors are not expected to obey 100% of their respective ethical codes. I argue that such reasoning is the result of ignoring the thesis of our present article and eventually will lead to ethical charges/allegations.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know