Clinical Interview - Vallentine et al. (2010) Flashcards
What was the aim of the Vallentine clinical interview? (2 points)
To determine the usefulness of psycho-educational material for offender patients*
*Provided by the Centralised Groupwork Service (CGS) at Broadmoor hospital, a high-security forensic psychiatric hospital
Who were the participants of the Vallentine clinical interview? (3 points)
42 male patients with a mean age of 40-41 years old - sectioned under the Mental Health Act (1983)
Classified using the ICD-10 - 80% of them had delusional disorders
64% of that group had paranoid Sz - they took part in semi-structured interviews
What was the procedure of the Vallentine clinical interview? (3 points)
The Understanding Mental Illness (UMI) psycho-educational support sessions for patients involved promoting awareness of:
+ Their illness
+ Strategies to manage their symptoms
Participants were split into 4 groups of 9 with a nurse therapist as the facilitator
20 sessions took place over 3 years, involving open discussions and group activities to explore personal experiences in a safe place
How was data analysed for the Vallentine Clinical Interview? (3 points)
The semi-structured interviews were analysed using content analysis - the presence of certain words and themes was highlighted to produce quantitative data
Participants were issued with SCQ and CORE-OM questionnaires pre and post-groupwork intervention - analysed using descriptive statistics SPSS paired t-test software
Patients’ medical records including medication dosage at 3,6, and 12 months after the group session were also analysed
What were the results of the Vallentine clinical interview? (2 points)
‘Completers’ of the 20-session programme had a shorter period of admission (6 years) compared to the non-completers (9 years)
Patients were found to value knowing about their mental illness, feeling a sense of hope and empowerment: ‘knowing about my illness is important for recovery’.
What were the 3 conclusions of the Vallentine clinical interview?
Psycho-educational workshops had a positive impact on patients’ agency and empowerment
Limited positive change for qualitative measures
Patients felt they:
+ Struggled to retain information
+ Would benefit from ‘booster’ sessions or other forms of therapy like CBT for psychosis
How generalisable is the Vallentine clinical interview? (4 points)
Low generalisability of the unique sample population - 42 male patients classified with delusional disorders and paranoid Sz
Androcentric and ethnocentric - based on the male experience of psychiatric illness in the Western world
These particular patients are also considered dangerous, having committed high profile crimes like serial murder
Makes it difficult to generalise the findings - not representative of female populations and non-dangerous mental health patients
How is the Vallentine clinical interview reliable? (4 points)
Reliable - number of standardised data collection methods used
Standardised procedure - same SCQ and CORE-OM questionnaires were issued to all participants
High inter-rater reliability - the interviews were audio-recorded and a ‘substantial’ level of agreement of 60% was calculated using Cohen’s Kappa coefficient
This suggests that other researchers could validate the coding for consistency, which supports the reliability
How is the Vallentine clinical interview unreliable? (2 points)
Unstandardised procedure - facilitators can deviate from schedule of questions in semi-structured interviews based on participants’ discussions
Content analysis is not reliable or replicable - results will be different each time a researcher does it
How applicable to real life is the Vallentine clinical interview? (4 points)
Findings may have strong applications for mental health patient therapies
‘Completers’ of the 20-session programme had a shorter period of admission (6 years) compared to the non-completers (9 years)
Conclusions could be used by other psychologists to provide a new understanding and insight into psycho-education when supporting Sz and mentally ill patients
Relevant application in real-life settings
How is the Vallentine clinical interview not internally valid? (3 points)
Selection and interpretation of qualitative comments are subject to the researchers’ subjective interpretation - researcher bias could influence the findings
The self-report measures used are subject to demand characteristics and the Hawthorne Effect - may explain the superficially positive responses the patients have reported after the CGS therapy
Difficult to establish cause and effect between the CGS therapy sessions and patient outcomes
How ecologically valid is the Vallentine clinical interview? (3 points)
Can be considered ecologically valid
Real-life patients who were sectioned under the Mental Health Act and who had committed a violent crime visited each other’s wards at the real psychiatric Broadmoor hospital
The activities involved group discussions of real-life experiences in a naturalistic setting - increased task validity and mundane realism
How ethical is the Vallentine clinical interview? (3 points)
Vallentine’s (2010) study has adequately followed ethical guidelines
There was no apparent deception of the purpose of the CGS groups and all participants were given the right to withdraw with - 7 dropped out, 3 refused and 1 leaving the hospital
Although discussing personal experiences could have caused short-term distress, the overall benefit is shown to outweigh the cost as patients learn more about their conditions
