Multi- and Transdisciplinarity as a Challenge for Environmental Psychology (Symposium)

Since 2008 the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) has been funding ten transdisciplinary research projects within the thematic focus ‘From Knowledge to Action - New Paths towards Sustainable Consumption’. A particular challenge which is faced with the programm is the task to build a bridge between individual activities and ecological and social framework conditions. Environmental psychologists are involved in half of the ten transdisciplinary projects. The symposium gives an insight into the new thematic focus and the variety of psychological contributions. The presentations will focus on the specific competence of psychology within the broader research focus of the transdisciplinary projects. An invited discussant will reflect on the role of psychology within the field of sustainable consumption and about challenges of transdisciplinary research in general.

Sport psychology: Needs and perspectives for research, education and application

Sport psychology has shown an increasing development in the past 25 years. A first focus is laid on the growth of research output as indicated by the number of publications. A more detailed analysis shows that some mainstream topics are very dominant in the international research literature whereas other themes are completely lacking. Possible biases are discussed as well as consequences for the body of knowledge in sport psychology. The need for a sound training in sport psychology is discussed in relation with the progress in sport psychology research. Different concepts of education in sport psychology with their respective background are compared and their impact on the development of sport psychology is discussed. The field of application, mainly in top level sport, is presented with a focus on professional standards and deontological codes. Conclusions are drawn with the aim to open new perspectives for research, education, and application of sport psychology.

Illegitimate Tasks: Accumulating Evidence for a New Stressor Concept

INTRODUCTION: Task stressors typically refer to characteristics such as not having enough time or resources, ambiguous demands, or the like. We suggest the perceived lack of legitimacy as an additional feature of tasks as a source of stress. Tasks are “illegitimate” to the extent that it is perceived as improper to expect employees to execute them – not because of difficulties in executing them, but because of their content for a given person, time, and situation; they are illegitimate because a) they are not conforming to a specific occupational role, as in “non-nursing activities” (called unreasonable) or b) there is no legitimate need for them to exist (called unnecessary; Semmer et al., 2007). These features make illegitimate tasks a unique task-related stressor. The concept of illegitimate tasks grew from the “Stress-as-Offense-to-Self” theory (SOS; Semmer et al, 2007); it is conceptually related to role stress (Kahn et al., 1964; Beehr & Glazer, 2005) and the organizational justice tradition (Cropanzano et al., 2001; Greenberg, 2010). SOS argues that a threat to one’s self-image is at the core of many stressful experiences. Violating role expectations, illegitimate tasks can be regarded as a special case of role conflict. As roles shape identities, this violation is postulated to constitute a threat to one’s professional identity. Being assigned a task considered illegitimate is likely to be considered unfair. Lack of fairness, in turn, contains a message about one’s social standing, and thus, the self. However, the aspects discussed have not received much attention in the role stress or the justice/fairness tradition. OBJECTIVE: Illegitimate tasks are a rather recent concept that has to be established as a construct in its own right by showing that it is associated with well-being/strain while controlling for other stressors, most notably role conflict and lack of justice. The aim of the presentation is to present the evidence accumulated so far. METHODS AND RESULTS: We present several studies employing different designs, using different control variables, and testing associations with different criteria. Study 1 demonstrates associations of illegitimate tasks with self-esteem, feelings of resentment against one’s organization, and burnout, controlling for distributive justice, role conflict, and social stressors (i.e. tensions). Study 2 yielded comparable results, using the same outcome variables but controlling for distributive as well as procedural / interactional justice. Study 3 demonstrated associations between illegitimate tasks and feelings of stress, sleeping problems, and emotional exhaustion, controlling for demands, control, and social support among medical doctors. Study 4 showed that feeling appreciated by one’s superior acted as a mediator between illegitimate tasks and job satisfaction and resentments towards the military in Swiss military officers. Study 5 demonstrated an association of illegitimate tasks with counterproductive work behavior (Semmer et al. 2010). Studies 1 to 5 were cross-sectional. In Study 6, illegitimate demands predicted irritability and resentments towards one’s organization longitudinally. Study 7 also was longitudinal, focusing on intra-individual variation in multilevel modeling; occasion-specific illegitimate tasks predicted cortisol among those who judged their health as comparatively poor. Studies 1-3 and 6 used SEM, and measurement models that used unreasonable and unnecessary tasks as indicators (isolated parceling) yielded a good fit. IMPLICATIONS & CONCLUSIONS: These studies demonstrate that illegitimate tasks are a stressor in its own right that is worth studying. It illuminates the social meaning of job design, emphasizing the implications of tasks for the (professional) self, and thus combining aspects that are traditionally treated as separate, that is, social aspects and task characteristics. Practical implications are that supervisors and managers should be alerted to the social messages that may be contained in task assignments (cf. Semmer & Beehr, in press).

Expertise in Clinical Psychology. The Effects of University Training and Practical Experience on Expertise in Clinical Psychology

How do university training and subsequent practical experience affect expertise in clinical psychology? To answer this question we developed methods to assess psychological knowledge and the competence to diagnose, construct case conceptualizations, and plan psychotherapeutic treatment: a knowledge test and short case studies in a first study, and a complex, dynamically evolving case study in the second study. In our cross-sectional studies, psychology students, trainees in a certified postgraduate psychotherapist curriculum, and behavior therapists with more than 10 years of experience were tested (100 in total: 20 each of novice, intermediate, and advanced university students, postgraduate trainees, and therapists). Clinical knowledge and competence increased up to the level of trainees but unexpectedly decreased at the level of experienced therapists. We discuss the results against the background of expertise research and the training of clinical psychologists (in Germany). Important factors for the continuing professional development of psychotherapists are proposed.