#6 MALADAPTIVE SCHEMAS, BURNOUT, CLINICAL PSYC
Clinical Psychology Article Review
Lukas Otteson
Professor Svoboda
PSYC 436-7381 Introduction to Clinical Psychology
University of Maryland University College
July 14, 2019
April Kaeding, Christine Sougleris, Corinne Reid, Michael van Vreeswijk, Christopher Hayes, Jill Dorrian, and Susan Simpson recruited a large international sample of clinical psychology and counseling post-graduate students to study the relationship between 15 Early Maladaptive Schemas (EMS) and their relationship with burnout, as well as the associated effects on physical health (2017). Kaeding et al. hypothesized that mean scores for all EMS would be significantly higher in the high burnout group than in the lower, that self-reported EMS would significantly predict participants’ membership into the high burnout group better than chance can predict, and that the higher burnout group will have a significantly higher total score on the physical health symptoms questionnaire (2017).
1,172 participants (counseling or clinical post-graduate students) were recruited through email, social media, word-of-mouth, emails sent to Australian and international universities, emails sent to professional organizations that were listed on the Internet as providing accredited post-graduate counseling and clinical psychology programs, and recipients forwarding emails to others they know to be eligible (Kaeding et al., 2017). 82% of the participants were women, the average age of the participants was 28 years old, 78% of the participants were enrolled in clinical programs, and the highest percentage of participants came from the United States (with 62%, compared to the next closest at 12%) (Kaeding et al., 2017). Burnout was measured using the Maslach Burnout Inventory and its three scales (Emotional Exhaustion, Depersonalization, and Personal Accomplishment, EMS was measured using the Young Schema Questionnaire-Short Form (using Likert scales from “completely untrue of me” to “describes me perfectly”) with a lower benchmark than is used for non-clinical populations because they tend to under-report psychopathological traits and beliefs, and physical health was measured using a short six-item physical health questionnaire with Likert scales (measuring for frequency of symptom occurrence), used to assess the participants’ general physical health (with symptoms like cold/viruses, headaches, muscle pain, tiredness, back or neck pain, dizziness, and light headedness included) (Kaeding et al., 2017). Participants took their surveys online, gave their online consent, and finished within an average of 30 minutes over the course of 12 months in 2012 (Kaeding et al., 2017).
Kaeding et al.’s results were certainly thought provoking, with 49% (638 participants) scoring in the high burnout range (2017). Self-sacrifice (SS) and Unrelenting Standards (US) were the most highly endorsed EMS in both the high burnout and the low burnout groups (Kaeding et al., 2017). Tiredness and back/neck pain were the most commonly reported physical health symptoms by both high and low burnout groups (Kaeding et al., 2017). The mean ratings for US and SS were at clinically meaningful levels for both low and high burnout groups (Kaeding et al., 2017). Kaeding et al. report, “High burnout was associated with a higher level of physical health problems and greater endorsement of all EMSs,” (supporting their first hypothesis) (2017). Kaeding et al. added that only US was found to be a significant predictor of burnout, partially supporting their second hypothesis that all self-reported EMS would significantly predict membership into the high burnout group better than chance (2017). Their final hypothesis was supported by the significant difference in total physical health scores (Kaeding et al., 2017).
Although there were limitations in the study (like the disproportionate number of women in the study, the fact that the participants were all students rather than practicing licensed psychologists, and response bias), but there was certainly still valuable work done here. None of the results will be able to be generalized, but they can be used to inspire future research that can improve upon this foundation. The article is well-organized, presents all of the relevant information without fluff, asks important questions, gathers intriguing results, and proposes useful future research options.
It would be valuable to conduct this same research with practicing licensed psychologists to more adequately study counseling and clinical psychology burnout. However, there are interested avenues to take that do not deviate so far from this research design. It would be more difficult to gather such a large sample size, but if the participants were divided into groups for a longitudinal study over the course of their programs, then it could be used for some good. If there were half of the participants assigned to attending therapy and half that were not, would their rates of burnout be significantly different? Would therapy mediate EMS effects on burnout?
There is a lot here in this article. There is more that can be learned from this article and applied to future research. It may be a stepping stone toward greater findings regarding therapeutic burnout, EMS, and physical health.
References
Kaeding, A., Sougleris, C., Reid, C., Vreeswijk, M. F., Hayes, C., Dorrian, J., & Simpson, S. (2017). Professional Burnout, Early Maladaptive Schemas, and Physical Health in Clinical and Counselling Psychology Trainees. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 73(12), 1782–1796. https://doi-org.ezproxy.umuc.edu/10.1002/jclp.22485
