Board of Directors Approved Minutes: June 8-10, 2001
Present: Norine G. Johnson, PhD; Patrick H. DeLeon, PhD, JD; Ronald F. Levant, EdD; Gerald P. Koocher, PhD; Raymond D. Fowler, PhD; Laura H. Barbanel, EdD; Charles L. Brewer, PhD; ; Katherine C. Nordal, PhD; J. Bruce Overmier, PhD; Ruth Ullmann Paige, PhD; and Nathan W. Perry, PhD.
Absent: Philip G. Zimbardo, PhD
I. Minutes of meeting
A.(1) The Board voted to approve the minutes of the February 21 & 22, 2001, meeting of the Board of Directors.
II. Elections, awards, membership and human resources
A.(2) The Board discussed the proposal for online voting for board and committee elections and was informed that a “mock” election would be set up during the August Council meeting.
B.(3) The Board discussed the preliminary summary of issues and recommendations of the Task Force on Membership Retention and Recruitment. The Board was asked to submit comments regarding the report to Drs. Brewer and Paige. The Board will review the final report of the Task Force at its August 2001 meeting.
C. In executive session, the Board approved slates of nominees for APA standing and continuing boards and committees after receiving the report from the Nominations Subcommittee.
D. In executive session, the Board made the following appointments:
The Board voted to appoint Gary R. Brooks, PhD, and Ilene Serlin, PhD, for three-year terms (1/1/02-12/31/04) to the Committee on Division/APA Relations.
The Board voted to appoint Ronald E. Fox, PhD, and Ruth Ullmann Paige, PhD, for three-year terms (1/1/02-12/31/04) as Trustees on the APA Insurance Trust (APAIT) and to reappoint Mr. Bruce L. Boyd for a one-year term (1/1/02-1/1/03) as the Trustee from the Insurance Industry on APAIT.
E. In executive session, the Board received information on the preliminary decisions of the Membership Committee regarding Fellow nominees considered for election commencing January 1, 2002.
A.(26) The Board received an update on work by the Ethics Code Revision Task Force in the ongoing revision of the Ethics Code.
B. In executive session, the Board took action on seven Ethics cases.
C. In executive session, the Board was informed that the Ethics Committee will be providing the Board at its August 2001 meeting with a response regarding the proposals for reforming the adjudication process.
D. In executive session, the Board received information on a revised policy regarding notification of final actions.
E. In executive session, the Board received information on stipulation resignations with admission of violation.
IV. Board of Directors
A.(4) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion:
Request the Committee on the Structure and Function of Council to fashion a more streamlined and "user friendly" method of presenting information on agenda items, and new and ongoing business to members of Council in preparation for Council meetings.
B.(5) The Board discussed the Research Office plan for assessing APA priorities. The Board provided suggestions, to be implemented by the Director of the Research Office, for sharpening the survey and determining focus groups. The Board requested that the survey be sent to divisions, states/provincial and regional associations and graduate psychology departments.
C.(5A) The Board discussed the item “APA Guidelines Policy” and requested that the Executive Directors of Science, Practice and Education consult regarding the development of a criteria for guidelines other than practice guidelines and a method for sunsetting guidelines.
D.(5B) The Board voted to allocate $2,000 from its 2001 contingency fund to support the cost of a reception for ethnic minority students at the 2001 APA Convention to be co-sponsored by APA and Division 45.
E.(27) The Board received information regarding new business items to be forwarded for Council’s withdrawal in August 2001.
F. In executive session, the Board took action on the following Psychology Defense Fund Case (PDF):
#2001-3: On recommendation of the EMG, the Board voted to grant $10,000 to C. Alan Hopewell, PhD, to help defray legal expenses arising from a wrongful discharge action he has filed against his former employer, Lakeview Neurorehabilitation Center, Inc. (“Lakeview”), and to defend against a resulting counter-claim.
G. In executive session, the Board discussed the item “APAGS Member on the Board of Directors.” A subcommittee of the Board was appointed [Drs. Levant (Chair), Barbanel, Koocher, Paige; and Derek Snyder, APAGS representative to the Board] to work with Carol Williams, Associate Executive Director for APAGS, to draft a new business item to be submitted to Council in August 2001. An information item regarding this issue will be placed on Council’s August 2001 agenda. (Subsequent to the meeting it was determined by the subcommittee that a new business item would not be necessary and that an information item to Council would suffice.)
H. In executive session, the Board discussed the item regarding governance reporting lines for the Commission for the Recognition of Specialties and Proficiencies in Professional Psychology (CRSPPP) and the Committee on Psychology and AIDS. The Board requested that an item come back to the Board in August 2001 which includes staff recommendations on reporting lines for these groups.
V. Divisions and state and provincial associations
A.(6) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion:
That APA Bylaws Article VI, Section 3 be amended (bracketed material to be deleted; underlined material to be added):
3. A Division shall be established whenever one percent or more of the Members of the Association petition for it and Council approves. A two-thirds vote of those present at a [the mid-winter] meeting of Council is required for the establishment of a new Division…
B.(7) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the following motion:
That the Council of Representatives endorse the development of mechanisms through the combined efforts of the Committee on Division/APA Relations and any interested APA groups that will promote the use of division expertise in APA activities.
C.(8) The Board approved funding for the following interdivisional grants project as recommended by CODAPAR: Gathering Effectiveness: A Conference on Best Practices in Assessment in Psychology Education ($5,000); Sexual Orientation and Mental Health: Toward Global Perspectives on Practice and Policy ($2500); and Guidelines for Counseling and Psychotherapy with Women ($2500).
The Board noted the fact that there were a low number of grant proposals received this year. The Board requested that an item be put on the Board’s agenda in August 2001 providing an opportunity for the Board to review the Interdivisional Grants Project.
D.(9) The Board reviewed the 2000 division annual reports. The Board requested that Dr. Brewer contact those divisions who haven’t yet submitted their annual reports to make sure they are aware that they’re legally obligated to submit their reports.
VI. Organization of the APA
A.(10) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve Article V, Section 6, of the APA Bylaws and Association Rule 40-2 as follows (bracketed material to be deleted; underlined material to be added);
Article V – Composition of the Council of Representatives
The number of [r]Representatives from [a]Divisions [or] and State/Provincial Associations shall be [determined annually as follows:] 162. The number of Representatives from Divisions shall correspond to the percentage of total votes allocated to all Divisions (Division Pool) and the number of Representatives from State/Provincial Associations shall correspond to the percentage of total votes allocated to all State/Provincial Associations (State/Provincial Association Pool) each year.
[A Division or State or Provincial Association shall receive one Council seat for each 1% of the allocated votes, calculated as follows:]
Each Division shall be allocated one seat from the Division Pool and each State/Provincial Association shall be allocated one seat from the State/Provincial Pool. The awarding of additional seats allocated to each Pool shall be based on the percentage of allocated votes received by a Division or State/Provincial Association and calculated as follows:
[Less than 0.5%………………….0
0.5% to less than 1.5%………….1
1.5% to less than 2.5%………….2
2.5% to less than 3.5%………….3]
1.5% to less than 2.5%……….1 additional seat
2.5% to less than 3.5%……….2 additional seats
3.5% to less than 4.5%……….3 additional seats
[An Additional 48 seats shall be divided among Divisions and State or Provincial Associations in the following manner. The proportion of the 48 seats to be assigned to Divisions and the proportion to be assigned to State and Provincial Associations shall correspond to the percentage of total votes allocated to each of these two groups each year. Seats thus proportionately assigned shall be awarded to the units within each group which received less than 0.5% of the allocated votes, with one seat being awarded to each such unit, in the order in which they came closest to a 0.5% allocation. If, after all units in a group have been awarded at least one Council seat, there remain seats proportionately assigned to the group which have not been awarded, these remaining seats shall be awarded to other units in that group in the order in which the units came closest to being awarded another seat as a result of the allocated votes.]
Additional seats will be allocated to those units in a Pool entitled to additional seats in the following manner. The unit with the highest percentage in the Pool will receive the first additional seat and an additional seat will be assigned to other units entitled to one or more additional seats in descending order of their percentages. If, after all units in a Pool entitled to one or more additional seats have received one additional seat, there remain units that are entitled to two or more additional seats, and if the seats allocated to the Pool have not been exhausted, the unit in the Pool with the highest percentage will receive a second additional seat and a second additional seat will be assigned to other units entitled to two or more additional seats in descending order of their percentages. This process shall be continued until either all additional seats allocated to the Pool have been assigned or until all units in the Pool entitled to additional seats have been assigned all of the seats to which their percentages of allocated votes entitle them.
If, after all units in a Pool have been assigned the additional seats to which they are entitled by virtue of their percentages, there remain seats allocated to a Pool which have not been assigned,
those remaining seats shall be assigned to the units in the Pool in the order in which the units came closest to being awarded another seat as a result of the allocated votes.
[40 2. Coalitions
40 2.1 Any units designated in Article V, Section 1 of the APA Bylaws may, by mutual agreement, associate themselves in a coalition as a voting unit for Council representation. Coalition representative(s) shall serve for the entire legislative year during which the coalition remains in effect. Coalitions may be formed prior to the Apportionment ballot in the manner described in 40-2.2. Coalitions formed after the apportionment ballot may only be formed in compliance with rule 40-2.3. Coalitions may be dissolved by the withdrawal of any unit from the coalition.
40 2.2 Seats on Council shall be allocated only on the basis of the apportionment ballot. Any voting unit may appear only once on the apportionment ballot. Thus, if a unit decides to enter into a coalition with another unit, it cannot appear independently on the same ballot. APA must be notified yearly of the existence of a coalition. Coalitions on record with the APA Recording Secretary prior to September 1 will appear on the next apportionment ballot. Voting members may cast votes for units within a coalition. The total number of votes for all units of a coalition will determine the number of representatives that a coalition will have. Notification of dissolution must be received by the APA Recording Secretary by September 1, that is before the apportionment ballot is mailed.
40 2.3 Any unit that does not receive a sufficient percentage of the allocated votes to attain at least one seat on Council may form a coalition with any other unit or units, including those that attained one or more seats on Council, for the purpose of achieving Council representation. If a unit that did not attain a seat on Council wishes to enter into a coalition with a unit that did attain one or more seats on Council, it may do so only if the combined percentages of allocated votes for the coalition members result in the addition of no more than one Council seat to the total seats allotted to the represented unit. A statement of coalition signed by the presidents of the organizations forming the coalition shall be filed with the APA Recording Secretary at least four months prior to the start of the February meeting of Council in the year in which the representative would take office and shall include notification of who the representative(s) will be.]
[40-3.] 40-2. Liasion/Observers
[40-3.1] 40-2.1 Any unit designated in Article V, Section 1 of the APA Bylaws that fails to secure a seat in the Council of Representatives may appoint a single Liaison/Observer to the Council. Liaison/Observers must be members of the APA. Said units shall make provision for representation from the diversity of American society.
[40-3.2] 40-2.2 Liaison/Observers shall be entitled to: (a) receive all except confidential materials provided to the Council of Representatives; (b) attend all Council sessions, workshops and caucuses with the exception of the Executive Sessions of Council; (c) be seated in a portion of the Council chamber designated for their use; (d) speak to agenda items of direct concern to their constituents, if specifically invited to do so by the Presiding Officer.
[40-3.3] 40-2.3 Liaison/Observers shall not be entitled to vote on matters before the Council, and shall not be eligible to secure reimbursement from general Association revenues of the expenses incurred for their attendance at Council.
The Board did not recommend that a pro/con statement be included with the Bylaws ballot. The Board noted it is not being suggested that the Association Rule providing for liaison/observers be removed so that opportunity will still be provided for those divisions or provincial associations which are newly established, but not yet included on the apportionment ballot, to send a liaison/observer to Council.
VII. Publications and communications
A. In executive session, the Board discussed the Publications and Communications (P&C) Board Report on the American Psychologist and approved the following statement to be sent to the Council of Representatives, with copies to Scott Lilienfeld, PhD, Richard McCarty, PhD, Nora S. Newcombe, PhD, the P&C Board and the Board of Scientific Affairs (BSA):
At its June 8-10, 2001, meeting, the APA Board of Directors discussed the recent controversy regarding a manuscript submitted to the American Psychologist (AP) by Dr. Scott Lilienfeld as well as a report from the Publications and Communications (P&C) Board on the overall editorial policies of the American Psychologist.
After its discussion, the Board of Directors voted to endorse and support the plan agreed to by the AP editor, Dr. Richard McCarty, the action editor, Dr. Nora Newcombe, and Dr. Lilienfeld. This plan allows for the publication of the manuscript together with commentaries on its content and the process by which it was peer reviewed. The Board believes that academic freedom and the integrity of the peer review process are of paramount importance and applauds the work of Drs. McCarty, Newcombe, and Lilienfeld in coming to this agreement. The Board anticipates that this plan will allow for full and open discussion of the entire matter.
In addition, in follow-up to the P&C Board recommendation, the Board of Directors voted to create a working group that will review and make recommendations to the Board of Directors regarding the role and function of the American Psychologist, its coverage domain, and the issues related to the editorial review process raised during this episode.
VIII. Convention affairs
IX. Educational affairs
A.(11) The Board voted to recommend that Council append Article II of the APA Bylaws and Section 10 of the Association Rules to establish a 2-Year College Teacher Affiliate membership category in APA (underlined material to be added):
Article II: Membership
15. There shall be a class of 2-Year College Teacher Affiliates who are not Members of the Association and who shall not represent themselves as such. They shall have such privileges as may be granted by Council, including special rates for subscriptions and publications. 2-Year College Teacher Affiliate status is limited to individuals who are not otherwise eligible for APA membership, although any APA member who teaches in a 2-year college is welcome to participate in 2-Year College Teacher Affiliate activities.
(Note: Current sections 15, 16 and 17 of Article II will be renumbered.)
Association Rule 10: Membership
10-15 2-Year College Teacher Affiliate
10.15.1. Applications for 2-Year College Teacher Affiliate status may be accepted at any time by the chief staff officer, who shall have discretion in determining what form of evidence is sufficient to meet the requirements for this application.
2-Year College Teacher Affiliates may subscribe to any of the journals published by the Association or purchase other APA publications at the same reduced rates charged to members.
The Board did not recommend that a pro/con statement be included with the Bylaws ballot.
The Board also voted to recommend that Council append Sections 50-5 and 120 of the Association Rules to establish a Committee of Psychology Teachers at Community Colleges (underlined material to be added):
50-5 List of Continuing Committees
50-5.1 The list below presents APA continuing committees and their reporting lines.
Reporting through the Board of Educational Affairs
Continuing Professional Education
Education and Training Awards
Committee of Teachers of Psychology in Secondary Schools
Committee of Psychology Teachers at Community Colleges
120. Educational affairs
120-6 Committee of Psychology Teachers at Community Colleges
120-6.1 There shall be an American Psychological Association Committee of Psychology Teachers at Community Colleges whose mission shall be to (a) represent community college psychology teachers; (b) promote, within the 2-year college community, the highest professional standards for teaching of psychology as a scientific discipline with applications to a wide range of human concerns; (c) cultivate a professional identity with the discipline of psychology among psychology teachers at 2-year colleges; (d) develop leadership qualities among psychology teachers at 2-year colleges and increase their participation and representation in professional psychology activities and organizations; (e) establish and maintain communication with all groups involved in the teaching of psychology and with the greater psychological community; (f) encourage psychological research on teaching and learning at 2-year colleges for the purpose of giving students the best possible educational opportunities.
The voting members of the Committee shall consist of 9 members, who serve three-year terms. All voting members of the Committee must be 2-Year College Teacher Affiliates or members of the Association.
Each year, a call for nominations for the three open positions that will become vacant in the following year shall be broadly disseminated. Following the call, the Committee shall prepare a slate of candidates for the vacancies and hold an election in which all 2-Year College Teachers who are Members, Associate members or Affiliates of the Association are eligible to vote. Following the election, the results of the election shall be forwarded to the Board of Educational Affairs and the Board of Directors for final approval.
The Committee shall report to Council through the APA Board of Educational
It was noted that additional Association Rule changes need to be included in the Council agenda item.
B.(12) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve 1) the recognition of Forensic Psychology as specialty in professional psychology; (2) the recognition of Psychopharmacology Psychology as a proficiency in professional psychology; (3) the recognition renewal of Psychological Treatment of Alcohol and Other Psychoactive Substance Disorders as a proficiency in professional psychology.
C.(12A) The Board voted to reject a request for the inclusion of $4,500 in the 2002 Preliminary Budget for one additional meeting in 2002 of the Commission for the Recognition of Specialties and Proficiencies in Professional Psychology (CRSPPP). The Board drafted a memo to CRSPPP expressing some concerns of the Board regarding plans to expand the scope of CRSPPP.
D.(12B) The Board voted to allocate $3,500 from its 2001 contingency fund to support a Children’s Health Issues Roundtable at the 2001 APA Convention.
E.(28) The Board received as information the Committee on Accreditation Executive Summary of Consumer Satisfaction Surveys.
F. In executive session, the item “National Associations of School Psychologists” was postponed to the Board’s August 2001 meeting.
G. In executive session, the Board voted to reject an amendment to Association Rule 90-6 which would change the terms for appointment of the public member of CRSPPP to provide that the public member not be limited to the same terms as the commissioners of CRSPPP. The current rules require all CRSPPP members to have a one-year hiatus in service after two consecutive three-year terms have been served.
X. Professional affairs
A.(13) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion:
That the Council of Representatives requests that the Board of Professional Affairs (BPA) develop a mechanism to: (1) secure and disseminate data about the activities of the central office, the divisions, and the state associations in the area of trauma and (2) enhance theory, practice, research, and training in the area of trauma by establishing an inter-divisional task force on the subject as well as a mini-convention on trauma. In order to develop such a mechanism, the motion states that BPA should consider proposing to the Board of Directors that a task force of 5 members be established for a single two-day meeting.
B.(14) The Board voted to approve, in principle, and refer to CAPP for its review, the following amendments to APA’s policy on challenges to the doctoral standard for psychology licensure (bracketed material to be deleted; underlined material to be added):
Encouragement and assistance to State Psychological Associations (SPAs) and state licensing boards to move to single level doctoral licensure.
Active consulting to SPAs in states that have dual level licensure.
Encourage the recognition of individuals holding terminal masters degrees in psychology under existing or new state statutes, provided that such statutes do not recognize, regulate or govern the title or practice of psychology[.] ,and do not use the term “psychological” in defining the title or scope of practice for such persons.
Convening exploratory meetings focusing on issues involving education, training and credentialling, at the Consolidated meetings with the Board of Directors, Committee for the Advancement of Professional Practice, Board of Professional Affairs, Board of Educational Affairs, American Psychological Association of Graduate Students, the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Boards and other relevant groups.
The Board requested that an item, along with CAPP’s recommendation, be brought back to the Board in August or December 2001.
C.(15) The Board discussed the item “Rural Training and Supervision.” The Board supported the work of the Task Force on Distance Education in Professional Psychology and requested that the Committee on Accreditation put the issue of distance education on its agenda. The Board will discuss this issue at its October 2001 retreat meeting. The Board requested feedback form the Task Force on Distance Education in Professional Psychology and the Committee on Accreditation to include as part of the Board’s retreat discussion.
D.(15A) The Board discussed the draft Criteria for Practice Guideline Development and Evaluation. The Board will review the final version of the draft Criteria at its August meeting and make a recommendation to Council at the August C/R meeting.
E.(15B) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve amending Association Rule 130-3.2 as follows (bracketed material to be deleted; underlined material to be added):
130 3. Professional awards
130 3.1 The Board of Professional Affairs shall announce its professional awards in a timely fashion in advance of the annual convention.
130 3.2 The APA may award annually up to three prizes of up to $2,000 each for outstanding contributions to psychology as a profession. The Board of Professional Affairs shall select as recipients for the awards those who have made outstanding contributions to the knowledge base of professional psychology, in technical applications in the applied practice of psychological knowledge, or in the use of the knowledge base or the practice base in psychology for the betterment of the general public. These contributions should be seminal or innovative in ways that are judged to have improved or changed significantly the conceptual understanding of behavior or the applied practice of such conceptual understanding of behavior, or to have accrued significant benefit to the public.
[1. The APA Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Knowledge. This category includes the discovery and development of new information, empirical or otherwise, to the body of knowledge in applied psychology. The new information would permit innovative applications in a wide variety of situations. These would be in such areas as assessment, consultation, instruction, and direct or indirect intervention. The new theories, or original integration of existing theories or knowledge, would provide direction so as to enable psychologists to better observe, define, predict, or control behavior. Also included in this category is actual research involving original development of procedures, methodologies, or technical skills that significantly improve the application of psychological knowledge in providing direct and immediate solutions to practical problem areas.
2. The APA Award for Distinguished Contributions to Applied Psychology as a Professional Practice. This category recognizes outstanding service delivery. It recognizes the psychologist who has provided leadership in changing the profession, its public image, and its public acceptance. Contribution in public and professional arenas involving legislative, political, and legal patterns of service delivery and reimbursement changes that contribute to the development of the profession are considered. Significant contributions of work done in professional or public organizations as a psychologist at the national, state and local level may be recognized.
3. The APA Award for Distinguished Professional Contributions to Public Service. Psychologists who have made outstanding contributions in serving the public through their knowledge and practical skills are recognized. Such contributions must be seen as directed to and on behalf of the public Consideration is given to psychologists whose professional involvement has resulted in a major benefit to the public as well as those who have made significant contributions to special populations such as the those who have disabilities, are disadvantaged or underprivileged, or are members of a minority group. Psychologists who are active in legislative, legal, political, organizational, and other areas that are directed at providing benefits to the public also are considered.]
1. The Distinguished Professional Contributions to Independent or Institutional Practice in the Private Sector Award. This award recognizes outstanding service delivery by a licensed psychologist who is primarily engaged in the practice of psychology in a private sector setting. The award is intended to recognize outstanding practitioners in psychology. Nominations will be considered for psychologists working in any area of clinical specialization, health services provision, or consulting, and services provided to any patient population or professional clientele in an independent or institutional practice setting will be considered. Contributions can be judged distinguished by virtue of peer recognition, advancement of the public’s recognition of psychology as a profession, relevant professional association honors, or other meritorious accomplishments denoting excellence as a practitioner including advancement of the profession.
2. The Distinguished Professional Contributions to Public Sector Practice Award. This award recognizes outstanding service delivery by a psychologist who is primarily engaged in the practice of psychology in a public sector setting (e.g., state hospital, military, veteran’s administration, etc.). The award is intended to recognize outstanding practitioners in psychology. Nominations will be considered for psychologists working in a wide variety of public sector settings. Services provided to diverse client groups or patient populations are eligible for consideration, including but not limited to children/adolescents/adults/older adults; urban/rural/frontier populations; minority populations; and persons with serious mental illness. Contributions can be judged distinguished by virtue of peer recognition, advancement of the public’s recognition of psychology as a profession, relevant professional association honors, or other meritorious accomplishments denoting excellence as a practitioner including improvement of public service delivery systems or development of psychologically informed public policy.
3. The Distinguished Professional Contributions to Applied Research Award. This award is given to a psychologist whose research has led to important discoveries or developments in the field of applied psychology. To be eligible, this research should have led to innovative applications in an area of psychological practice, including but not limited to assessment, consultation, instruction, or intervention (either direct or indirect). Research involving the original development of procedures, methodologies, or technical skills that significantly improve the application of psychological knowledge and provide direct and immediate solutions to practical problem areas will be considered, as will research that has informed psychologists on how better to observe, define, predict, or control behavior. Original integration of existing theories or knowledge is also eligible for consideration.
130 3.3 The Board of Professional Affairs shall seek diversity in selecting recipients, avoiding as far as possible the consecutive selection of more than one person representing a specialized topic, a specific material, a given method, a particular application, or a specific specialized service.
130 3.4 Ineligible for the awards are members serving currently on the Board of Professional Affairs and the current APA President and President elect. The following rules also apply: No person can receive a professional award in any two consecutive years; recipients are permitted to receive only one award in their lifetime per category of the professional awards; current members of the Board of Professional Affairs cannot vote for members of their own family; and those with a history of ethical violations at a state or national level or who have received disciplinary action from a state board of examiners in psychology are not eligible.
130 3.5 Nominations for these awards shall be solicited in the broadest possible manner, including announcements in appropriate publications. The category of the three awards in which the nomination is placed shall be based, insofar as possible, on a determination of the candidate's primary area of work. Deadlines for receipt of nominations shall be established by the Board of Professional Affairs each year. Nominators are responsible for providing the Board of Professional Affairs with an up to date resume and bibliography and a narrative statement detailing the nature of the contributions and focus of the nomination. Endorsements from other individuals and groups are also considered part of the record. All nominations are good for two years, after which nominators must reapply for another review. Nominators of the award recipients are also responsible for the wording of the awards' citation.
130 3.6 Award recipients shall be invited to be present at the annual convention to receive the awards and to address convention attendees in the year following the receipt of the awards.
The Board requested that the Board of Professional Affairs consider at its next meeting the possibility of having additional professional practice awards.
F.(29) The Board received information on the proposed amendment to Association Rule 130-3 to add the APA Award for Distinguished Contributions to Mental Health.
G. In executive session, the Board discussed the item “Listing of ABPP Credential in APA Directory.”
H. In executive session, the Board voted to recommend that Council reject the main motion and substitute motions of the item “Board Certification for Psychologists in Applied Fields of Specialization of Professional Psychology” which request that APA urge as many professional psychologists as possible to become board certified in their chosen field of specialization in professional psychology.
XI. Scientific affairs
A.(16) The Board discussed the Committee on Animal Research and Ethics (CARE) Guidelines for the Use of Behavioral Projects in Schools. The Board determined, with recommendation by the General Counsel’s Office, that the CARE Guidelines for the Use of Animals in Behavioral Projects in Schools should receive the same review as other guidelines and therefore requested that the CARE Guidelines be disseminated to divisions and state/provincial associations for review. The Board requested that the item come back to the Board in December 2001 after the Guidelines for the Use of Behavioral Projects in Schools has received full review.
B.(17) The Board authorized the production and dissemination of the remaining 6 videos as part of the CARE video series project, including the incurrence of costs beginning in 2001 with the understanding that the third party grant funds and sales of the videos will offset these production and dissemination costs over the upcoming years
XII. Public Interest
A.(18) The Board voted to recommend Council adopt the following resolution:
Resolution on the death penalty in the United States
WHEREAS recent empirical research reviewing all death penalty cases in the United States concluded that two thirds of the death penalty cases from 1973 to 1995 were overturned on appeal with the most common reasons cited as incompetent counsel, inadequate investigative services, or the police and prosecutors withholding exculpatory evidence. (Liebman, Fagan, & West, 2000); and
WHEREAS the recent application of DNA technology has resulted in, as of June 2000, 62 post-conviction determinations of actual innocence, with eight of these having been for persons sentenced to death at trial (Scheck, Neufeld, Weyer, 2000; Wells, Malpass, Lindsay, Fisher, Turtle, & Fulero, 2000); and
WHEREAS research on the process of qualifying jurors for service on death penalty cases shows that jurors who survive the qualification process (“death-qualified jurors”) are more conviction-prone than jurors who have reservations about the death penalty and are therefore disqualified from service. (Bersoff, 1987; Cowan, Thompson and Ellsworth, 1984; Ellsworth, 1988; Bersoff & Ogden, 1987; Haney, 1984); and
WHEREAS recent social science research reveals strong inconsistencies in prosecutors’ decisions to seek the death penalty in particular cases, based on factors other than the severity of the crime. The “prosecutor is more likely to ask for a death sentence when the victim is European-American, of high social status, a stranger to the offender, and when counsel is appointed” (Beck & Shumsky, 1997, p. 534); and
WHEREAS race and ethnicity have been shown to affect the likelihood of being charged with a capital crime by prosecutors (e.g., Beck & Shumsky, 1997; Bowers, 1983; Paternoster, 1991; Paternoster & Kazyaka, 1988; Sorensen & Wallace, 1995) and therefore of being sentenced to die by the jury. Those who kill European-American victims are more likely to receive the death penalty, even after differences such as the heinousness of the crime, prior convictions, and the relationship between the victim and the perpetrator are considered. This is especially true for African-Americans (e.g., Keil & Vito, 1995; Thomson, 1997) and Hispanic-Americans who kill European-Americans (Thomson, 1997); and
WHEREAS psychological research consistently demonstrates that juries often misunderstand the concept of mitigation and its intended application (e.g., Haney & Lynch, 1994, 1997; Wiener, Pritchard, & Weston, 1995; Wiener, Hurt, Thomas, Sadler, Bauer & Sargent, 1998), so that mitigation factors, e.g., the defendant's previous life circumstances, mental and emotional difficulties and age, have little or no relation to penalty phase verdicts (Beck & Shumsky, 1997; Costanzo & Costanzo, 1994); and
WHEREAS death penalty prosecutions may involve persons with serious mental illness or mental retardation. Procedural problems, such as assessing competency, take on particular importance in cases where the death penalty is applied to such populations (Skeem, Golding, Berge & Cohn, 1998; Rosenfeld & Wall, 1988; Hoge, Poythress, Bonnie, Monahan, Eisenberg & Feucht-Haviar, 1997; Cooper & Grisso, 1997); and
WHEREAS death penalty prosecutions may involve persons under 18 (sometimes as young as 14). Procedural problems, such as assessing competency, take on particular importance in cases where the death penalty is applied to juveniles (Grisso & Schwartz, 2000; Lewis et al., 1988); and
WHEREAS capital punishment appears statistically neither to exert a deterrent effect (e.g., Bailey, 1983; 1990; Bailey & Peterson, 1994; Cheatwood, 1993; Costanzo, 1997; Decker & Kohfeld, 1984; Radelet & Akers, 1996; Stack, 1993) nor save a significant number of lives through the prevention of repeat offenses (Vito, Koester, & Wilson, 1991; Vito, Wilson, & Latessa, 1991); Further, research shows that the murder rate increases just after state-sanctioned executions (Bowers, 1988; Costanzo, 1998; Phillips, 1983; Phillips & Hensley, 1984);
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Psychological Association:
Calls upon each jurisdiction in the United States that imposes capital punishment not to carry out the death penalty until the jurisdiction implements policies and procedures that can be shown through psychological and other social science research to ameliorate the deficiencies identified above.
Bailey, W. C. (1990). Murder, capital punishment, and television execution publicity and homicide rates. American Sociological Review, 55, 628-633.
Bailey, W. C. (1983). Disaggregation in deterrence and death penalty research: The case of murder in Chicago. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 74(3), 827-859.
Bailey, W. C., & Peterson, R.D. (1994). Murder, capital punishment and deterrence: A review of the evidence and an examination of police killings. Journal of Social Issues, 50, 53-74.
Beck, J. C. & Shumsky, R. (1997). A comparison of retained and appointed counsel in cases of capital murder. Law and Human Behavior, 21(5), 525-538.
Bersoff, D.N. (1987). Social science data and the Supreme Court: Lockhart as a case in point. American Psychologist, 42(1), 52-58.
Bersoff, D.N. & Ogden, D.W. (1987). In the Supreme Court of the United States Lockhart v. McCree: amicus curiae brief for the American Psychological Association. American Psychologist, 42 (1), 59-68.
Bowers, W. J. (1983). The pervasiveness of arbitrariness and discrimination under post-Furman capital statutes. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 74(2), 1067-1100.
Bowers, W.J. (1988). The effect of execution is brutalization, not deterrence. In K.C. Haas and J.A. Inciardi (Eds.). Challenging capital punishment: Legal and social science approaches (49-90). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Cheatwood, D. (1993). Capital punishment and the deterrence of violent crime in comparable counties. Criminal Justice Review, 18(2), 165-181.
Cooper, D. & Grisso, T. (1997). Five-year research update (1991-1995): Evaluations for competence to stand trial. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 15(3), 347-364.
Costanzo, M. (1997). Just revenge: Costs and consequences of the death penalty. New York: St. Martins Press.
Costanzo, S., & Costanzo, M. (1994). Life or death decisions: An analysis of capital jury decision-making under the special issues framework. Law and Human Behavior, 18, 151-170.
Cowan, C.L. & Thompson, W. & Ellsworth, P. C. (1984). The effects of death qualification on jurors' predisposition to convict and on the quality of deliberation. Law and Human Behavior, 8, 53-80.
Decker, S. H. & Kohfeld, C. W. (1984). A deterrence study of the death penalty in Illinois, 1933-1980. Journal of Criminal Justice, 12, 367-377.
Ellsworth, P.C. (1988). Unpleasant facts: The Supreme Court's response to empirical research on capital punishment. In K.C. Haas and J.A. Inciardi (Eds.). Challenging capital punishment: Legal and social science approaches (177-211). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Grisso, T. & Schwartz, R. G. (Eds.). (2000). Youth on Trial: A Developmental Perspective on Juvenile Justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Haney, C. (Ed.). (1984). Death qualification [Special issue]. Law and Human Behavior, 8 (1&2).
Haney, C. & Lynch, M. (1997). Clarifying life and death matters: An analysis of instructional comprehension and penalty phase closing arguments, Law and Human Behavior, 21(6), 575-595.
Haney, C. & Lynch, M. (1994). Comprehending life and death matters: A preliminary study of California’s capital penalty instructions, Law and Human Behavior, 18, 411-436.
Hoge, S. K., Poythress, N., Bonnie, R. J., Monahan, J., Eisenberg, M. & Feucht-Haviar, T. (1997). The MacArthur adjudicative competence study: Diagnosis, psychopathology, and competence-related abilities. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 15(3), 329-345.
Keil, T. J. & Vito, G. F. (1995). Race and the death penalty in Kentucky murder trials: 1976-1991. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 20(1), 17-36.
Lewis, D.O., Pincus, J.H., Bard B., Richardson, E. , Princher, L.S., Feldman, M. & Yeager, C. (1988). Neuropsychiatric, psychoeducational, and family characteristics of 14 juveniles condemned to death in the United States. American Journal of Psychiatry, 145(5), 584-589.
Liebman, J. S., Fagan, J., & West, V. (2000). A broken system: Error rates in capital cases, 1973-1995. [On-line]. Available: www.TheJusticeProject.org
Paternoster, R. & Kazyaka, A. (1988). Racial considerations in capital punishment: The failure of evenhanded justice. In K. C. Haas & J. A. Inciardi (Eds.), Challenging capital punishment: Legal and social science approaches (pp. 113-148). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Paternoster, R. (1991). Prosecutorial discretion and capital sentencing in North and South Carolina. In R. M. Bohm (Ed.), The death penalty in America: Current research (pp. 39-52). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
Phillips, D.P. (1983). The impact of mass media violence in U.S. homicides. American Sociological Review, 48, 560-568.
Phillips, D.P. & Hensley, J.E. (1984). When violence is rewarded or punished: The impact of mass media stories on homicide. Journal of Communication, 34, 101-116.
Radelet, M. L. & Akers, R. L. (1996). Deterrence and the death penalty: The views of the experts. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 87, 1-16.
Rosenfeld, B. & Wall, A. (1998). Psychopathology and competence to stand trial. Criminal Justice & Behavior, 25(4), 443-462.
Scheck, B., Neufeld, P., & Dwyer, W. (2000). Actual innocence. New York: Harper.
Skeem, J. L., Golding, S. L., Berge, G., & Cohn, N. B. (1998). Logic and reliability of evaluations of competence to stand trial. Law & Human Behavior, 22(5), 519-547.
Sorensen, J.R. & Wallace, D.H. (1995). Capital punishment in Missouri: Examining the issue of racial disparity. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 13(1), 61-81.
Stack, S. (1993). Execution publicity and homicide in Georgia. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 18(1), 25-39.
Thomson, E. (1997). Research note: Discrimination and the death penalty in Arizona. Criminal Justice Review, 22(1), 65-76.
Vito, G. F., Koester, P., & Wilson, D. G. (1991). Return of the dead: An update of the status of Furman-commuted death row inmates. In R. M. Bohm (Ed.), The death penalty in America: Current research (pp. 89-99). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
Vito, G. F., Wilson, D. G., & Latessa, E. J. (1991). Comparison of the dead: Attributes and outcomes of Furman-commuted death row inmates in Kentucky and Ohio. In R. M. Bohm (Ed.), The death penalty in America: Current research (pp. 101-111). Cincinnati, OH: Anderson.
Wells, G., Malpass, R., Lindsay, R., Fisher, R., Turtle, J., & Fulero, S. (2000). From the lab to the police station: A successful application of eyewitness research. American Psychologist, 55, 581-594.
Wiener, R., Hurt, L., Thomas, S., Sadler, M., Bauer, C., & Sarget, T. (1998). The role of declarative and procedural knowledge in capital murder cases. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 124-144.
Wiener, R., Pritchard, C., & Weston, M. (1995). Comprehensibility of approved jury instructions in capital cases. Journal of Applied Psychology, 80, 455-467
B.(19) The Board voted to grant approval for the Women’s Programs Office (WPO) to go forward with planning the Work, Stress and Health Conference to be held in 2003, while WPO staff raise the necessary funding for the conference expenses.
C.(19A) The Board voted to allocate $1,000 from its 2001 contingency fund to support additional expenses for the School Superintendents Forum being held in conjunction with APA’s 2001 annual convention in San Francisco.
D.(30) The Board received an update on the public education activities that will coincide with the PBS broadcast of the film on adolescent girls.
XIII. Ethnic Minority Affairs
A.(20) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the following statement to be sent to divisions and state and provincial associations with the call for nominations for slates for Council representatives:
In an effort to increase ethnic minority representation on Council, APA will reimburse any ethnic minority1 psychologist elected to Council in 2002-2004 for the expense incurred for his/her attendance at Council throughout the duration of his/her term. Reimbursement will be provided for transportation, hotel and meal expenses for both the February and August meetings of Council, thereby saving the representative’s division, state or province expense that it would otherwise incur.2
APA strongly encourages divisions and state and provincial associations to submit one or more slates of nominees comprised solely of ethnic minorities.
Council requests that the Board conduct a review of the effectiveness of this proposal and provide a recommendation to Council in August 2004 regarding funding its continuance beyond the 2004 election.
1 Ethnic minority identity is determined by self-identification and is limited to the following four U.S. ethnic minority groups: African American/Black, American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian American/Pacific Islander, and Hispanic/Latino(a).
2 Council representatives are currently reimbursed by APA as follows: transportation expenses for the February meeting; the cost of one night’s stay at the hotel where Council is housed at the August meeting.
B. In executive session, the Board discussed the item “Increasing Ethnic Minority Representation on the APA Board of Directors.” Dr. DeLeon noted that he would be more likely to approve adding an ethnic minority seat on the Board if the request came from an ethnic minority constituency.
XIV. International Affairs
A.(21) The Board took emergency action and voted to adopt the following resolution:
APA Resolution on Racism and Racial Discrimination
A Policy Statement in Support of the Goals of the 2001 World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance
WHEREAS during the past 52 years since the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the global community has enacted numerous international human rights instruments, including the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, and made important advances in the struggle against racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance;
WHEREAS psychologists and other social scientists have established that racism, racial discrimination and ethnic conflict and violence are pervasive and persisting challenges for the United States of America and the international community;
WHEREAS racism and racial discrimination threaten human development because of the obstacles which they pose to the fulfillment to basic human rights to survival, security, development, and social participation;
WHEREAS racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance have been shown to be attitudes and behaviors that are learned;
WHEREAS racism has been shown to have negative cognitive, behavioral, affective, and relational effects on both child and adult victims nationally and globally, historically and contemporarily;
WHEREAS racism has been shown to increase anxiety, depression, self-defeating thoughts and avoidance behaviors, and is linked to a host of medical complications in ethnic minority individuals;
WHEREAS racism has been shown to negatively affect ethnic minority children’s academic and social development, self-esteem, and personal feelings of efficacy;
WHEREAS racism and poverty are inextricably linked and both are risk factors for high levels of emotional distress;
WHEREAS racism intersects with gender in ways that result in different experiences of inequality by men and women, girls and boys;
WHEREAS racism negatively affects the cognitive and affective development of members of the dominant group by perpetuating distorted thinking about the self and members of marginalized or oppressed groups;
WHEREAS racism can promote anxiety and fear in the dominant group members whenever they are in the presence of, or anticipating the presence of, marginalized group members, often leading to acts of hostility and aggression toward ethnic minority individuals;
WHEREAS both active racism and passive acceptance of race-based privilege disrupts the mental health of both perpetrators and victims of racial injustice;
WHEREAS the United Nations General Assembly has proclaimed 2001 as the International Year of Mobilization against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance;
WHEREAS the purpose of the World Conference against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, to be held in South Africa, August 31 to September 7, 200, and the preparatory meetings which will precede it, is to raise public awareness of racism and racial discrimination globally and to mobilize political commitment to eliminate racism and promote full and effective social justice;
WHEREAS the American Psychological Association (APA) has shown its support for the struggle against racism by its: (1) support for the ongoing efforts of the United Nations to promote and defend human rights, (2) adoption of UN human rights instruments as standards for its boards, committees, and membership at large, (3) establishment of the Committee of Ethnic Minority Affairs within the central governance structure of the Association, (4) adoption of policies against various forms of discrimination, as well as policies in favor of increased access of racial/ethnic minorities in all aspects of the profession, (5) establishment of the Society for the Psychological Study of Ethnic Minority Issues, whose journal focuses on mental health issues of ethnic minorities, (6) support for interdivisional collaboration to convene a bi-annual National Multicultural Conference and Summit that addresses issues of racism, oppression and intolerance of social diversity, (7) dedication of the 1999 Annual Convention to Racial and other Diversity Issues in psychology, (8) sponsorship of the 1997 APA Miniconvention on Psychology and Racism, and (9) support, since 1997, of the APA National Conversation on Psychology and Racism;
WHEREAS the struggle against racism requires continuing active resistance against it at all levels and areas in the field of psychology and the use of psychological science and practice to promote social justice and human welfare nationally and globally;
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the American Psychological Association denounces racism in all its forms for its negative psychological, social, educational and economic effects on human development throughout the life span;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that APA further the objectives of the 2001 United Nations World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance through efforts focused on elimination of all forms of racism and racial/ethnic discrimination at all levels of the science and practice of psychology in the United States;
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that APA will: (1) pursue diverse racial representation at all levels of APA governance, (2) call upon all psychologists to eliminate processes and procedures that perpetuate racial injustice in research, practice, training and education, (3) call upon all psychologists to speak out against racism, and take proactive steps to prevent the occurrence of intolerant or racist acts, and (4) promote psychological research on the alleviation of racial/ethnic injustice.
American Psychological Association, Public Interest Directorate, Office of Ethnic Minority Affairs. (1999). Racism and psychology: Why we dislike, stereotype and hate other groups and what to do about it. Washington, DC: Author.
Anderson, N. (1989). Racial differences in stress-induced cardiovascular reactivity and hypertension: Current status and substantive issues. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 89-105.
Armstead, C., Lawler, K., Gorden, G., Cross, J., & Gibbons, J. (1989). Relationship of racial stressors to blood pressure responses and anger expression in Black college students. Health Psychology, 8, 541-556.
Axelson, J.A. (1993). Counseling and Development in a Multicultural Society (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Bell, D. (1992). Faces at the bottom of the well. New York: Basic Books.
Bentancourt, H., & Lopez, S.R. (1993). The Study of Culture, Ethnicity, and Race in American Psychology. American Psychology, 48, 629-637.
Bernard, N., Holliday, B.G. , Crump, S.L. and Sanchez, N. (1998). Psychology and Racism: Annotated Bibliography. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, Office of Ethnic Minority Affairs.
Clark, R., Anderson, N., Clark, V., & Williams, D. (1999). Racism as a stressor for African Americans: A biopsychosocial model. American Psychologist, 54, 805-816.
Corner, J.P. (1991) White Racism: Its root, form, and function. In R.L. Jones (Ed.) Black Psychology (pp. 591-596). Berkeley, CA: Cobb & Henry.
Cross, W. E. Jr. (1990). Shades of Black. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Galster, G. (1990). Racial steering in urban housing markets: A review of the audit evidence. Social Science Research, 18, 105-129.
Gibbs, J. (1998). African American Adolescents. In J. Gibbs and L. Huang (Eds.), Children of Color: Psychological Interventions with Culturally Diverse Youth. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
Ginorio, A., Guitierrez, L., Cauce, A.M., & Acosta, M. (1995). Psychological Issues for Latinas. In H. Ladrine (Ed.), Bringing Cultural Diversity to Feminist Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Harris, S. (1995). Psychosocial development and Black male masculinity: Implications for counseling economically disadvantaged African American male adolescents. Journal of Counseling and Development, 73, 279-287.
Helms, J., & Cook, D. (1999). Using Race and Culture in Counseling and Psychotherapy: Theory and Process. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Helms, J., & Talleyrand, R.M. (1997). Race is not Ethnicity. American Psychologist 52(11), 1246-1247.
Helms, J.E. (1992) A race is a nice thing to have: A guide to being a White person or understanding the White persons in your life. Topeka, KS: Content Communications.
Hooks, B. (1990). Yearning: Race, Gender, and Cultural Politic. Boston, MA: South End Press.
Hutnick, N. (1991) Ethnic Minority Identity: A social psychological perspective. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Jackson, J. S., Brown, T. B., Williams, D. R. Toress, M., Sellers, S. L. & Brown, K. B. (1996). Racism and the physical and mental health status of African Americans: A 13-year national panel study. Ethnicity & Disease, 6(1/2), 132-147.
Jackson, J. S., Brown, K. T., & Kirby, D. C. (1998). International Perspectives on Prejudice and Racism. In J. L. Eberhardt & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), Confronting Racism: The Problem & the Response. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAbbreviated
Jones, J. M. (1997). Prejudice and Racism (2nd ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill.
Kirschenman, J., & Neckerman, K. (1991). We'd love to hire them but..: The meaning of race for employers. In C. Jencks and P. Peterson (Eds.), The Urban Underclass. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Kozol, J. (1995). Amazing Grace. New York: Harper Perennial.
Krieger, N. & Sidney, S. (1996). Racial discrimination and blood pressure: The CARDIA study of young Black and White adults. American Journal of Public Health, 86, 1370-1378.
Ladrine, H. & Klonoff, E. (1996). The schedule of racist events: A measure of racial discrimination and a study of its negative physical and mental health consequences. Journal of Black Psychology, 22, 144-168.
LaFromboise, T., Choney, S.B., James, A., & Running Wolf, P.R. (1995). American Indian Women and Psychology. In H. Ladrine (Ed.), Bringing Cultural Diversity to Feminist Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Majors, R. & Billson, J. (1992). Cool pose: The dilemmas of Black manhood in America. New York: Lexington Books.
McNeilly, M., Anderson, N., Robinson, E., McManus, C., Armstead, C., Clark, R., Pieper, C., Simons, C., & Saulter, T. (1996). The convergent, discriminant validity of the perceived racism scale: A multidimensional assessment of White racism among African Americans. In R. Jones (Ed.), Handbook on Tests and Measurements for Black Populations. Richmond, CA: Cobb and Henry Publishers.
McNeilly, M., Robinson, E., Anderson, N., Pieper, C., Shah, A., Toth, P., Martin, P., Jackson, D., Saulter, T., White, C., Kuchibhatla, M., Collado, S., & Gerin, W. (1996). Effects of racial provocation and social support on cardiovascular reactivity in African American women. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 2, 331-338.
Mills, B. (1991). Emotional reactions of African Americans to viewing racist incidents. Dissertations Abstracts International, 52 (2A), 694.
Moritsugu, J. & Sue, S. (1983). Minority status as a stressor. In R. Felder (Ed.), Preventive Psychology: theory, research, and practice.
Nabokov, P. (1991). Native American Testimony: A chronicle of Indian-White relations from prophecy to the present. New York: Penguin Books.
Porter, N. (1995). Supervision of Psychotherapist: Integrating Anti-Racist, Feminist and Multicultural Perspectives. In H. Ladrine (Ed.), Bringing Cultural Diversity to Feminist Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Root, M. P. P. (1995). The Psychology of Asian American Women. In H. Ladrine (Ed.), Bringing Cultural Diversity to Feminist Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Sue, D.W., & Sue, D. (1990) Counseling the Culturally Different: Theory and Practice (2nd ed.) New York, NY: John Wiley.
Tatum, B. (1997). “Why are all the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Cafeteria?” And Other Conversations About Race. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Thomas, V., & Miles, S. (1995). Psychology of Black Women: Past, Present, and Future. In H. Ladrine (Ed.), Bringing Cultural Diversity to Feminist Psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Thompson, C. & Neville, H. (1999). Racism, mental health, and mental health practice. Counseling Psychology, 27, 155-223.
Thompson, V. (1996). Perceived racism as stressful life events. Community Mental Health Journal, 32, 223-233.
Utsey, S.O., & Ponterotto, J.G. (1996). Development and Validation of the index of the Race Related Stress (IRRS). Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 490-501.
Williams, D. (1999). Race, socioeconomic status, and health: The added effects of racism and discrimination. In N. Adler & M. Marmot (Eds.), Socioeconomic status and health in industrial nations: Social, psychological, and biological pathways. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 896, 173-188.
Williams, D. & Rucker, T. (1996). Socioeconomic status and the health of racial minority populations. In P. Kato & T. Mann (Eds.), Handbook of diversity issues in health psychology. The Plenum series in culture and health. (pp. 407-423). New York: Plenum.
Wilson, W.J. (1996) When work disappears. New York, NY: Knopf.
Worchel, S. (1999). Written in Blood: Ethnic Identity and the struggle for human harmony. New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
Wynn, S.T., Lopez, C.R. & Holliday, B.G. (Eds.) (1997). Abstracts: Papers presented at the American Psychological Association’s Public Interest Directorate Miniconvention on Psychology and Racism. Washington, DC: APA Office of Ethnic Minority Affairs.
Yee, A.H., Fairchild, H.H., Wizmann, E., & Wyatt, G.E. (1993). Addressing psychology’s problem with race. American Psychologist, 48, 1132-1140.
Zimmerman, M., Ramirez-Valles, J., & Maton, K. (1999). Resilience among urban African American male adolescents: A study of the protective effects of sociopolitical control on their mental health. American Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 733-751.
Zuckerman, M. (1990). Some dubious premises in research and theory on racial differences: Scientific, social, and ethical issues. American Psychologist, 45, 1297-1303.
Council will be informed at its August 2001 meeting of the emergency action taken by the Board.
XV. Central Office
XVI. Financial affairs
A.(22) The Board voted, on recommendation of the Finance Committee, to recommend that Council approve the following motion:
That the Council approve the 2002 Preliminary Budget in principle calling for a deficit of $502,400. This 2002 Preliminary Budget shall serve as the framework for the 2002 Final Budget that will be presented to Council for approval in February of 2002.
That, consistent with the action of Council in August 2000 to “institute the practice of increasing the APA dues annually by the amount linked to the consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U)”, Council specifically approve a $7 dues increase from $219 to $226 for the 2002 dues year. [Note: Although the August 2000 action calls for an annual dues adjustment based on the CPI-U, as a philosophical change, Association Rule 210-5 requires a specific action of Council to increase dues.]
The Board commended Gary B. VandenBos, PhD, Executive Director of Publications and Communications, for his foresight in budget matters and Jack McKay, Chief Financial Officer, for a job well done.
B.(23) The Board voted to recommend that Council approve the 2002-2004 Financial Forecast and Net Worth Allocation Plan as submitted by the Finance Committee.
C.(24) The Board voted to 1) accept the audited financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2000; the Report to Management dated March 2001, the Supplemental Financial Report (A-133) dated March 2001; and the G Place Limited Partnership Financial Statement for the year ended December 31, 2000; and 2) appoint Arthur Andersen LLP to conduct the 2001 audit.
D.(25) The Board discussed the item “APA Dues Mechanisms/Options.” The Board was informed that the Finance Committee will continue to explore options and gather data regarding installment dues payment options for members and come back to the Board with a recommendation.
E.(25A) The Board voted to recommend that Council reject the following motion:
That the Board of Directors and the Finance Committee develop, in general terms, a statement/analysis of organizational resources needed and organizational mechanisms needed to implement and maintain a technologies policy, implementation and operations program.
F.(31) The Board received information on the progress made to date on the association-wide operational review.
G.(32) The Board was informed that the Finance Committee postponed to its December 2001 meeting further consideration of the five-year plan of the Continuing Professional Education Office, requesting that additional information be provided to the Finance Committee by the CEO. The Finance Committee will provide an item to the Board for consideration at its December 2001 meeting.
H. In executive session, the Board took emergency action and voted to authorize the CEO and CFO to increase the revolving line of credit from $10 million to $15 million to fund the Association’s working capital needs as necessary over the next several years. Council will be informed in August 2001 of the emergency action approved by the Board.
I. In executive session, the Board of Directors discussed the update on the Compensation, Recruitment and Retention plan and thanked the CFO for the report.
J. In executive session, the Board of Directors voted to reject the creation of a group long-term care plan for employees at this time, noting that APA employees are eligible to participate directly in the APAIT individual long-term care plan.
K. In executive session, the Board voted to accept the report of the Personnel Subcommittee.