Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
questionnaires, rating scales, etc.), tools that belong to the realm of psychological assess-
ment for evaluating personality function in the case of disability.
The psychological assessment, having the specific aim to investigate and know the per-
sonal factors (psychological ones) that can mediate the choice and, then, the efficacy of
the use of the AT chosen, will be conducted in a multimethod way (e.g., Hunsley and
Meyer 2003), thus by using a multimethod assessment battery, to maximize the validity of
individualized assessments (Meyer et al. 2001).
Moreover, in the area of psychological assessment, a relatively new way of conduct-
ing evaluation has recently emerged that has also been applied in different fields (e.g.,
McInerney and Walker 2002; Tharinger et al. 2009). It is called collaborative assessment and
is mainly based on collaboration between the subject(s) and the psychologist. According
to Finn and Fischer (1997; see also Finn 2003), in the collaborative approach to the assess-
ment the psychologist and the client work together to develop productive understanding,
ensuring that patients will get the most out of their assessment. In the last few years in
the field of therapeutic research a new paradigm called collaborative assessment has been
devised. This approach, first devised in 1982 by Fischer in the United States, is based on
the assumptions of collaboration between the psychologist and the client starting from
the testing session. Its major features are collaboration, individualization of the assess-
ment procedure (in the choice of assessment tools), and flexibility (different pathways for
different clients). In the assessment conducted with a collaborative approach, the client is
directly engaged: The psychologist asks for client feedback on the assessor's integrated
impressions. The findings are thereby tailored to the client's words (APA 2010). A recent
meta-analysis shows that psychological assessment procedures—when combined with
personalized, collaborative, and substantial test feedback—have positive, clinically mean-
ingful effects on treatment, especially regarding treatment processes, and improve the
impact (Poston and Hanson 2010).
We believe that this method of conducting assessment could guide the work of the clini-
cal psychologist in the ATA center with different clients.
•
Phase 1. Acceptance and evaluation of the user's request (see Figure 8.1,
ψ
hexagon 1)
:
•
Children
:
Children with disabilities do not arrive at the ATA center alone but
with their parents or caregivers. For this simple but important reason, it will be
necessary to involve the parents (caregivers) in the evaluation process because
they mediate the information with the child and because they will be respon-
sible for guaranteeing the sustainability and the use of the chosen assistive
solution. For this reason we think that, with children, the search for a suitable
assistive solution is a task that should involve the entire family (see Chapters
5 and 13 of this text). The clinical psychologist will meet the parents together
in a clinical interview, separately from the child, to give them the necessary
time and space for freedom of expression without reciprocal influence. After
the clinical interview and on the basis of what arises at that stage, tests will be
used for better understanding and objectively acknowledging aspects of the
parenting function that can support, or hinder, the ambition of the ATA center
for the child with a disability. In general, the use of psychological tests in this
phase will concern both parents and the child. This psychological assessment
phase, conducted with the use of a few tests and thus constituting a multi-
method approach (e.g., Hunsley and Meyer 2003), has the specific aim of inves-
tigating and ascertaining the personal factors (psychological ones) that can
mediate the choice and consequently the efficacy of the technical aid.
