Why This Book Is Needed
A conceptual introduction sets forth the book’s aim: to guide clinical social work students (and practicing clinicians) to explore assessment from a range of theoretical frameworks, each with its own emphasis, limitations, and form of evidence, and to think critically about what each perspective has to offer, takes for granted, omits, and counts as knowledge. It begins by exploring the meaning of the key terms “critical thinking,” “diagnosis,” and “assessment” and draws on both theory and research to trace how these concepts have been addressed in social work education and practice. Following an overview of the book’s structure and content, including introduction to the case of Ray (a case that will be used throughout the chapters and analyzed from each clinical perspective), the introduction concludes with specific suggestions for educators about ways to use the book to develop complex, reflexive, and critical thinking in their students.
Diagnosis in Social Work : New Imperatives
Contents * Chapter 1. Introduction * Chapter 2. The History of Diagnosis in Social Work * Chapter 3. What Led Us Astray? * Chapter 4. Diagnosis: What It Is Not! * Chapter 5. Diagnosis: What It Is * Chapter 6. Our Ethical Responsibility to Diagnose * Chapter 7. Our Ethical Responsibility to Label * Chapter 8. A Spectrum of Critical Judgments * Chapter 9. Diagnosis As a Process and a Record * Chapter 10. Diagnosis and Gut Reaction * Chapter 11. Diagnosis and Assessment * Chapter 12. Diagnosis and Theory * Chapter 13. Diagnosis and the Computer * Chapter 14. The Risks of Diagnosing * Chapter 15. Diagnosis and Research: A Contemporary Challenge * Chapter 16. Enhancing Diagnostic Skills * Chapter 17. Final Comments * Appendix: Some Examples of Social Work Diagnoses * Bibliography * Index * Reference Notes Included
The alcohol-aggression stereotype: a cross-cultural comparison of beliefs.
University students (N = 1,008) in eight countries participated in a survey aimed at mapping cross-cultural alcohol expectancies. Multisample structured means analysis was applied to compare changes in aggressive behaviors believed to occur in connection with drinking after "many" alcoholic drinks. Most subjects expressed the belief that intoxication was associated with greater aggressiveness, but there were significant national differences unrelated to self-reported alcoholic beverage preference, frequency of drinking to intoxication, or rates of personal involvement in episodes of alcohol-related aggression. Thus, the expectation that drinking leads to aggression may be determined to a significant extent by contextual factors and cultural traditions related to alcohol use.