Students who self-harm: coping style, rumination and alexithymia

Counsellors working with students or other young adults may encounter individuals who have self-harmed, either with suicidal or non-suicidal intent. Recent US studies reported rates of self-injury of up to 37% of the student population, but studies in the UK have focussed primarily on younger adolescents. This study examined reported self-harm incidents (scratching, cutting, poisoning, overdose etc) from a sample of 617 university students. A total of 27% reported at least one incident of self-harm, with almost 10% having harmed themselves while at university. Gender differences were not significant but psychology students reported significantly more self-harm than other students. Participants reporting self-harm scored significantly higher on maladaptive coping styles, rumination, and alexithymia (specifically difficulty in identifying emotions) and these differences were most marked for students reporting repetitive and recent self-harm. Rumination and Alexithymia factor 1 (difficulty identifying feelings) emerged as the most robust factors predicting self-harm status. Comments from students who self-harmed at university highlighted the importance of accessible services and academic staff support. The implications of these findings for counselling interventions are discussed, including challenging negative rumination tendencies and developing mindfulness skills.

An integrated psychology virtual research ethics committee

Research and professional ethics are an integral part of every Psychology degree, as this is seen as a key graduate learning outcome for students leaving to become clinicians working with clients and patients. The development of these skills is embedded in teaching, but they culminate in the final year of a degree when final year students must gain formal ethical approval for their final research project. Decision as to the ethical appropriateness of research are made by a Departmental Research Ethics Committee, which considers all research project proposals submitted by staff and students within the department. One of the challenges of this practice is the scale of work involved for committee members (Doyle & Buckley, 2014) who are all faculty members, and the tracking of applications and decisions, alongside the quality assurance required to ensure that all applications are treated fairly and equally. The time involved in performing this work is often underestimated by Universities, and the variety and complexity of decisions requires extensive discussion and negotiation. Traditionally, these decisions are reached by committee discussions, however this presents logistical difficulties as it requires meetings with quorate attendance. The University of Westminster launched a virtual tool in 2014 to facilitate the management of the Research Ethics Committee, to help track the progress of applications and to allow discussions to occur and be managed virtually. The Department of Psychology adopted the tools in September 2014 to deal with all ethics applications. Here we report on how this virtual committee has affected the role and practices of a working committee that deals with over 300 applications per year, and how an online ethics procedure has facilitated an integrated developmental approach to ethical education.