Commentary: An Extension of the Australian Postgraduate Psychology Education Simulation Working Group Guidelines: Simulated Learning Activities Within Professional Psychology Placements

A Commentary on The use of simulated patients in medical education: AMEE Guide No 42 by Cleland, J. A., Abe, K., and Rethans, J. J. (2009). Med. Teach. 31, 477–486. doi: 10.1080/01421590903002821 Simulation based education by Cleland, J. A. (2017). Psychologist 30, 36–40. Building Academic Staff Capacity for Using eSimulations in Professional Education for Experience Transfer by Cybulski, J., Holt, D., Segrave, S., O'Brien, D., Munro, J., Corbitt, B., et al. (2010). Sydney, NSW: Australian Learning and Teaching Council. Student and staff views of psychology OSCEs by Sheen, J., McGillivray, J., Gurtman, C. and Boyd, L. (2015). Aust. Psychol. 50, 51–59. doi: 10.1111/ap.12086 The Australian Postgraduate Psychology Education Simulation Working Group (APPESWG) recently published guidelines titled "A new reality: The role of simulated learning activities in postgraduate psychology training programs" (Paparo et al., 2021). The document was developed in the context of COVID 19-related disruption to practica within professional psychology training. As a consequence, many training providers adopted simulated training activities as a way to support course progression during the pandemic. Paparo and colleagues' stated aims were to provide comprehensive guidance for the use of simulation as a competency-based training tool and in the interests of public and student safety, both during and after COVID 19. The guidelines included nine criteria for best practice in simulated learning activities in training, for example, that activities should be competency-based, should mirror real-life practice situations and should provide opportunities for active participation and trainee reflection (see Paparo et al. for detail). The document provided helpful guidance on the use of simulated learning activities (SLA) as part of course content within an Australian professional psychology training context, however the guidelines did not cover simulated placement experiences. Considerations especially around supervision and the development of professional and ethical practice within a simulated learning environment need to be made to effectively apply the APPESWG Guidelines within a placement context. Here, we extend these guidelines for provision of simulated professional psychology placements based on our successful development and implementation of large-scale simulated placements at an Australian University (2020-current). Previously, all professional psychology placements in Australia were limited to in-vivo options, however the latest version of the Accreditation Standards for Psychology Programs (Australian Psychology Accreditation Council, 2019) now make provision for simulated learning within required placement experiences at Level 3, Professional Competencies. This extension of the Paparo et al. (2021) article provides guidelines specifically for the use of simulation with professional psychology placements, with a focus on the Australian context

Cognitive Control: Modulating Conflict Between Competing Responses

This thesis investigated modulation of cognitive conflict using variants of the face/name Stroop task and electroencephalogram (EEG) measures. Behavioural analyses throughout four experiments focused on reaction times (RT) and accuracy (%). EEG analyses focused on evoked upper alpha event related desynchronisation (ERD) and event related synchronisation (ERS) to assess facilitation and inhibition effects respectively. The principal focus of investigation was whether cognitive conflict is resolved through facilitation, inhibition or both. ... EEG evidence suggested that the temporal resolution of cognitive conflict involves both facilitatory and inhibitory processes in a context dependent manner. Control processes in the simple Stroop compared to the Gratton effects appear to operate independently. Study design parameters (event related versus blocked paradigm) and the temporal resolution of neurophysiological measures (EEG versus fMRI) are critical in detecting specific 'within task set' or 'between task sets' cognitive control effects. Cognitive control cannot be viewed as a singular central resource which is applied in the same way across diverse contexts with differing, specific processing demands