Ethical Attitudes of Russian Counseling Psychologists: Field of Disagreement and Potential Conflicts

• Main Authors: Garanian N.G., Zakharova Y.V., Sorokova M.G.
• Format: Article
• Language: Russian
• Published: Moscow State University of Psychology and Education 2020-03-01
• Series: Консультативная психология и психотерапия
• Subjects: ethical beliefs; russian counseling psychologists; expert assessment; discrepancies
• Online Access: https://psyjournals.ru/en/mpj/2020/n1/Garanian_Zakharova_Sorokova.shtml

The study is aimed at the identification of ethical beliefs in the group of Russian counseling psychologists. As a part of the anonymous online survey 217 counseling psychologists and psychotherapists completed the Inventory of Attitudes and Beliefs about Ethical Issues (Herlihy, Corey, 2014). Four experts (psychologists with advanced knowledge on counseling ethics) sorted out the inventory’s items into the categories of ethically indisputable (EID) and ethically disputable (ED). The findings indicate that about a fifth of the respondents are practicing without a degree in psychology, and 40% didn’t get psychotherapeutic approach-specific training. Low consistency in the ethical beliefs of Russian counseling psychologists has been demonstrated. Kohen’s cappa as a measure of inter-rater reliability among four experts was 0.512; this score is significantly lower than recommended. 44.7% of the respondents agreed with beliefs the experts attributed to EID, and 45.6% agreed with at least several ED beliefs about psychological counseling. Points of maximal disagreement between research participants were the possibility of dual relationships with clients, the obligation to conduct screening for potential counseling group members, the requirement to practice strictly within the scope of one’s license, and seeking for informal resolution in the case of a violation of an ethical standard by another counselor. Research findings are predictive of significant discrepancies in the ethical beliefs of Russian counselors and difficulties in collegial decision-making on ethical issues.