Document Type

Post-Print

Publication Date

7-2021

Abstract

Ecological momentary assessment (EMA) is a burgeoning area of research, and several clinical applications of the resulting data have been identified by researchers, suggesting potential benefit to psychotherapy practice. However, practitioners often do not use traditional empirically-supported tools for diagnosis and outcome monitoring (e.g., validated interview measures and questionnaires). Thus, it is not clear how readily practitioners will take up newer technology-enhanced assessment methods, despite current enthusiasm among researchers. The current study aimed to explore the perceived usefulness of EMA-based tools for clinical assessment and outcome monitoring of difficult psychotherapy cases, as well as to identify correlates of attitudes about the usefulness of these tools. Clinical psychologists in active therapy practice with adults (n = 375) completed an internet survey including the Attitudes toward Standardized Assessment scale and the Attitudes toward Standardized Assessment Scales-Monitoring and Feedback. Respondents characterized their current diagnostic and outcome monitoring practices and rated how helpful they would find several assessment and outcome monitoring resources for a difficult case, including both traditional instruments and EMA-based methods. EMA-based tools had lower perceived usefulness than existing instruments. Attitudes toward standardized assessment and outcome monitoring predicted the perceived utility of these methods, as did several professional variables. Practicing psychologists may not adopt EMA for clinical assessment more readily than traditional assessment tools. Recommendations for facilitating the uptake of new technologies by psychotherapists are offered.

Identifier

PMID: 33047277

DOI

10.1007/s10488-020-01093-4

Publisher

Springer Nature

Publication Information

Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research

Download

Included in

Psychology Commons

Share

COinS