Examining Signer-Specificity Effects in the Perception of Words in American Sign Language

Variability in talker identity, which is commonly referred to as one type of indexical variation, has demonstrable effects on the speed and accuracy of spoken word recognition. In the current study, I conducted two experiments designed to examine whether talker variability has an effect on the perception of words in American Sign Language. Native and non-native signers participated in two long-term repetition-priming experiments in which they performed two separate blocks of lexical decision trials. In Experiment 1, all participants were native signers. In Experiment 2, all participants were late signers. In both experiments, all participants performed both an easy and a hard lexical decision task. In the easy lexical decision task, the non-signs did not resemble real signs, making the task relatively easy. In the hard lexical task, the non-signs resembled real signs, making the task relatively difficult. In both experiments, some of the signs (and non-signs) in the second block also appeared in the first block (primed conditions) and some were new stimuli that had not appeared in the first block (control condition). Half the primed stimuli were produced by the same signer in the two blocks (matched condition) and half were produced by a different signer (mismatched condition). Based on previous research in spoken word recognition, I made the following predictions: 1) primed stimuli would be responded to more quickly than unprimed stimuli, 2) signs in the match condition would be responded to more quickly than signs in the mismatch condition (i.e., a signer-specificity effect), and the signer-specificity effect was expected to be greater when processing was relatively slow, that is 3) in Experiment 2, with late signing participants, and 4) in the hard lexical decision task. The results inform theories and models of sign language perception, add to the knowledge of the circumstances in which variability is expected to have an effect on the recognition of words, and provide an opportunity to evaluate whether time

Racial Color Blindness in Counseling, Therapy, and Supervision

Race is perhaps one of the most difficult topics to discuss in contemporary society. Although race influences so many aspects of everyday life, we are often hesitant and sometimes afraid to broach, openly discuss or acknowledge the impact of racial issues in our daily lives. As such, race and how it affects society holds power over people in complex and sometimes insidious ways. Counselors feel this same tension. Some counselors believe that openly including discussions of racial concerns is vital to the counseling and therapy process (e.g., Burkard & Knox, 2004; Day-Vines et al., 2007). Others, however, have argued that such discussions are unnecessary (e.g., Abramowitz & Murray, 1983; Garb, 1997) and perhaps even a distraction from important clinical issues (e.g., Garb, 1997). The latter perspectives are consistent with color-blind racial ideology (CBRI), which has emerged as a critical variable in psychology and counseling (Neville, Awad, Brooks, Flores, & Bluemel, 2013). CBRI is the denial of racial differences and racism by emphasizing that everyone is the same or has the same life opportunities (Neville et al., 2013). We agree with others (e.g., Neville et al., 2013) that a growing body of evidence indicates CBRI is detrimental to clients and counseling processes as well as the overall supervision and education of future practitioners. As such, we contend that decreasing CBRI and working to directly address race and power in therapy has benefits in counseling, supervision, and preprofessional education. We address these issues in this chapter. We review conceptual associations between CBRI and other multicultural counseling constructs that are specific to counseling practitioners and trainees, examine the current empirical findings specific to racial color blindness in counseling and supervision processes, offer comment on possible implications for counseling and supervision, and conclude with suggestions for future research. Throughout this chapter, we use the terms counselor and counseling to refer broadly to mental health practitioners (e.g., counselors, psychologists, therapists) and their related clinical and counseling processes and practices

A Mixed-Method Study of Psychologists’ use of Multicultural Assessment

Despite practice guidelines and ethical standards that provide imperatives for clinicians to utilize multicultural assessment (MCA), little is known about how the average psychologist actually conducts MCA. The current mixed-method study was designed to investigate clinicians’ training and use of MCA practice strategies. Participants were 239 (107 male, 131 female, 1 other gender) licensed psychologists residing in the United States and Canada who were recruited from the American Psychological Association practice directory to complete an online survey. Quantitative items on the survey included questions about the number and utility of MCA-related graduate courses and supervision experiences, and strategies and frameworks used when conducting MCA. Open-ended questions provided expansion about factors that were helpful and not helpful in graduate training experiences. Findings suggested that only 75% of participants had taken a course that included MCA-related content, but almost all of those participants found the material they learned to be helpful. Graduate courses with MCA-related content were perceived as more helpful than graduate supervision, and the most helpful aspects of courses and supervision were related to increasing knowledge and awareness about MCA. Almost 40% of the sample reported using no theory or framework for conducting MCA, and participants differed in their use of MCA strategies. Findings are discussed in relation to the training and continuing education of clinicians and future directions for research