Michael J. Asher Dissertation Award Winner 2017

Michael J. Asher Dissertation Award – First Annual Winner

The Michael J. Asher Dissertation Award is named in honor of our colleague, Michael, a clinical psychologist at Behavior Therapy Associates who passed away in 2016. He served as Coordinator of Consultation Services and was Board Certified in Cognitive and Behavioral Psychology by the American Board of Professional Psychology. Dr. Asher was an Adjunct Associate Professor with the Department of Psychiatry, Rutgers Medical School where he supervised Psychiatric Fellows and taught Child Cognitive Behavior Therapy, and he was a field supervisor for the Graduate School of Applied and Professional Psychology at Rutgers University. Dr. Asher co-authored several books on the topic of behavior disorders and children. He was passionate about his work, loved psychology, cognitive behavior therapy, and especially enjoyed learning about and practicing Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT). Dr. Asher greatly impacted the lives of many and his contribution to the field of psychology and education was significant. He will be remembered fondly.

The first annual Michael J. Asher Student Dissertation Award has been awarded to Danielle Moyer, Department of Psychology, North Texas State University, under the supervision of Amy R. Murrell, Ph.D. for her dissertation entitled, ​”Putting Bullying Into Perspective: Peer Victimization As A Function Of Perspective Taking, Empathy, and Psychological Willingness.” The monetary award will go toward supporting research, needed equipment, and travel to the ACBS annual conference. The funds for this award are provided by Behavior Therapy Associates, Steven B. Gordon, Ph.D., ABPP, Executive Director and Michael C. Selbst, Ph.D., BCBA-D, Director. The winners were announced by Joann Wright, Ph.D.,Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS) Award Committee Chair. On behalf of the ACBS Awards Committee and Behavior Therapy Associates, we wholeheartedly congratulate our first winners!

If you are interested in reading a summary of the dissertation proposal, please see below.

Moyer Dissertation Summary

1. Background. Bullying is an ongoing problem in U.S. public schools, with long-term negative effects on the mental health and wellbeing of everyone involved.1 Some school-wide interventions, such as the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program2, have evidenced success. However, these interventions require considerable resources and are not effective in all contexts, particularly in the U.S.3 Further, it is unclear which specific elements of the interventions are responsible for success.4 A better understanding of the psychological, interpersonal, and behavioral determinants of bullying is needed. Identifying childhood behaviors that can be easily targeted through teaching and classroom management may lead to more effective and economical interventions.

The ability to take another person’s perspective is associated with more prosocial and fewer aggressive behaviors.5 Historically studied under theory of mind (ToM6), recent research has examined perspective taking from a behavioral model, using relational frame theory (RFT7). Research suggests ToM and RFT measure similar phenomena8, but the RFT model has facilitated easier assessment and training of perspective taking skills.7 While specific ToM scenarios have been successfully taught, these skills did not generalize to other untrained tasks or deficits.9 Training children to take perspective using an RFT task led to improvements on perspective taking measures from both paradigms.10

While perspective taking is negatively associated with overall aggression, this skill alone may actually increase social anxiety11 and subsequent relational aggression.12 Research suggests relational bullying (i.e., controlling or damaging peer relationships) may be strengthened by the ability to take perspective and identify weaknesses. It may be that additional interpersonal coping skills are needed to successfully manage interpersonal interactions. Empathy is conceptualized as being comprised of a cognitive (perspective taking) and an affective (empathic concern) component, the latter of which may also be necessary for prosocial behavior.11 RFT suggests empathy involves both perspective taking and psychological flexibility to contact the painful emotions and experiences of others.13 Psychological flexibility is a model of adaptive coping characterized by willingness to experience thoughts, feelings, and sensations.14 Research suggests it is a critical component of healthy psychological functioning15, and deficits are associated with negative psychological outcomes.16 Psychological flexibility may also play a role in interpersonal aggression17, as well as bullying among adolescents specifically.18 Conversely, psychological flexibility is positively associated with adolescent prosocial behavior and wellbeing.19

1. Anticipated Results. The first research question will evaluate the theoretical model of empathy based on RFT. This model suggests empathy develops most strongly in children with well-developed perspective taking skills and high levels of psychological flexibility, which allow them to personally connect with the thoughts and feelings of others. The second research question will evaluate the predictive utility of perspective taking and psychological flexibility with regard to bullying behaviors. Perspective taking is expected to be associated with decreased bullying overall, and decreased overt bullying specifically, but not relational bullying. Psychological flexibility is further expected to moderate the relationship between perspective taking and relational bullying. The third research question will evaluate the utility of these relationships over and above other relevant correlates of bullying. Specifically, these constructs are expected to explain specific mediation and moderation relationships between bullying and (a) parental conflict, (b) social anxiety, and (c) social roles.
2. Method. Participants in this study are sixth (n = 33) and eighth (n = 52) grade students, recruited from public middle schools in North Texas. Participants are aged 11-14, and represent Hispanic, White, Black, Native American, and Biracial ethnic backgrounds. Informed consent will be obtained from parents prior to assessing any children in the classroom. All measures will be completed on tablet computers provided by the researchers in the following order: (1) child assent, (2) RFT perspective-taking protocol, (3) self-report surveys, (4) sociometric interview, and (5) demographic questionnaire. All measures are normed specifically in child populations, and Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level scores were calculated for each component. The assent narrative, all instructions written by the researcher, and all surveys, with one exception, were less than or equal to a grade 5 reading level.

The RFT perspective-taking protocol20 is a 34-trial behavioral task that measures three patterns of perspective taking (I-YOU, HERE-THERE, NOW-THEN) at three different levels of complexity (simple, reversed, and double-reversed).  Each trial consists of a statement and two questions, such as “I have a red brick and you have a green brick. Which brick do I have? Which brick do YOU have?” A trial is only considered correct if both questions are answered correctly. The Sociometric interview is a peer nomination tool used to identify which students (a) bully others the most, (b) bully others the least, (c) are bullied the most, (d) are bullied the least, (e) are the most popular, (f) are the least popular, (g) are liked the most, and (h) are liked the least. Teachers in participating classrooms will provide class rosters, with which the researchers will assign student numbers Research assistants will assist in individual administration of this measure so that only one copy of the roster is needed. This procedure will ensure confidentiality and maximize ethical administration of this measure. The Demographics questionnaire includes age, gender, ethnicity, disability status, and religion. Finally, several self-report measures are administered to assess self-reported perspective taking, empathy, bullying behaviors, psychological flexibility, parental discord, and social anxiety (See Table 1).

Table 1. Self-Report Measures
Instrument	Subscales	Sample Reliability
Reduced Aggression/Victimization Scale 21	Victimization   Aggression	α = .90   α = .83
Interpersonal Reactivity Index – Modified for Children11	Perspective taking   Empathic concern	α = .69   α = .78
Avoidance & Fusion Questionnaire for Youth-SF22		α = .84
Willingness & Action Measure for Children & Adolescents23		α = .83
Nonattachment Scale24		α = .76
Children’s Perception of Interparental Conflict Scale25	Frequency   Intensity	α = .83   α = .79
Revised Children’s Anxiety & Depression Scale26	Social anxiety	α = .82

1. Significance. This research project will contribute to the scientific field in three important ways. Previous research13 has begun to demonstrate a model of empathy that could be understood in terms of basic units of behavior. The first scientific goal of this study is to replicate this research in young children, at a developmental period when empathy is developing and in which greater differences in empathy can be explored. Second, this model of empathy includes a behavioral explanation of perspective taking based on RFT. Deficits in perspective taking, based on this model, have been seen in autism spectrum disorders27, schizophrenia28, and social anhedonia broadly.8,13 To our knowledge, perspective-taking deficits based on this model have not been explored in peer aggression. The second scientific goal of this study is to explore this phenomenon in interpersonal relationships among school-aged children.

Finally, theory of mind has provided the leading theoretical explanation of the development of perspective taking. Rather than contradict theory of mind, research suggests both models are measuring the same phenomenon8, and training children from this behavioral model can improve performance on tasks from both paradigms.10 In other words, this model provides a practical approach to improving perspective taking29, which has theoretical and practical implications for the prevention and intervention of bullying. The third scientific goal of this study is to use a computer version of the behavioral perspective-taking task to improve the accuracy and efficiency of measurement.

Current interventions for bullying require incredible resources, and it is unclear which components are the most effective. Importantly, the most successful interventions do not evidence equal effectiveness in the U.S.3 This research will set the foundation for efficient and cost-effective interventions by identifying specific, trainable skills that can predict and influence bullying behaviors. By evaluating the utility of an RFT-based, computerized perspective-taking task, the results of this project would support an efficient and cost-effective tool for peer aggression in schools.

References

1. Arseneault, L., Bowes, L., & Shakoor, S. (2010). Bullying victimization in youths and mental health problems: ‘Much ado about nothing’? Psychological Medicine, 40, 717-729.
2. Olweus, D., & Limber, S. P. (2010). Bullying in school: Evaluation and dissemination of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 80, 124-134.
3. Bauer, N. S., Lozano, P., & Rivara, F. P. (2007). The effectiveness of the Olweus Bullying Prevention Program in public middle schools: A controlled trial. Journal of Adolescent Health, 40, 266-274.
4. Smith, P. K., Ananiadou, K., & Cowie, H. (2003). Interventions to reduce school bullying. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 48(9), 591-599.
5. Fitzgerald, D. P., & White, K. J. (2003). Linking children’s social worlds: Perspective-taking in parent-child and peer contexts. Social Behavior and Personality, 31, 509-522.
6. Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness: An essay on autism and theory of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
7. Barnes-Holmes, Y., Foody, M., Barnes-Holmes, D., & McHugh, L. (2013). Advances in research on deictic relations and perspective taking. In S. Dymond & B. Roche (Eds.), Advances in relational frame theory research and application (127-148). Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.
8. Villatte, M., Monestes, J., McHugh, L., i Baque, E. F., & Loas, G. (2008). Assessing deictic relational responding in social anhedonia: A functional approach to the development of theory of mind impairments. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 4(4), 360-373.
9. Hadwin, J., Baron-Cohen, S., Howlin, P., & Hill, K. (1997). Does teaching theory of mind have an effect on the ability to develop conversation in children with autism? Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 27, 519-537.
10. Weil, T. M., Hayes, S. C., & Capurro, P. (2011). Establishing a deictic relational repertoire in young children. The Psychological Record, 61(3), 371-390.
11. Batanova, M. D., & Loukas, A. (2011). Social anxiety and aggression in early adolescents: Examining the moderating roles of empathic concern and perspective taking. Journal of Youth and Adolescent, 40, 1534-1543.
12. Renouf, A., Brendgen, M., Parent, S., Vitaro, F., Zelazo, P. D., Boivin, M., . . . Seguin, J. R. (2010). Relations between theory of mind and indirect and physical aggression in kindergarten: Evidence of the moderating role of prosocial behaviors. Social Development, 19, 535-555.
13. Vilardaga, R., Estevez, A., Levin, M. E., & Hayes, S. C. (2012). Deictic relational responding, empathy, and experiential avoidance as predictors of social anhedonia: Further contributions from relational frame theory. The Psychological Record, 62(3), 409-432.
14. Hayes, S. C., Luoma, J. B., Bond, F. W., Masuda, A., & Lillis, J. (2006). Acceptance and commitment therapy: Model, processes and outcomes. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 44, 1-25. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2005.06.006
15. Kashdan, T. B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010). Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 865-878.
16. Bond, F. W., Hayes, S. C., Baer, R. A., Carpenter, K. M., Guenole, N., Orcutt, H. K., . . . Zettle, R. D. (2011). Preliminary psychometric properties of the acceptance and action questionnaire-II: A revised measure of psychological inflexibility and experiential avoidance. Behavior Therapy, 42, 676-688.
17. Reddy, M. K., Meis, L. A., Erbes, C. R., Polusny, M. A., & Compton, J. S. (2011). Associations among experiential avoidance, couple adjustment, and interpersonal aggression in returning Iraqi war veterans and their partners. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 79, 515-520.
18. Theodore-Oklota, C., Orsillo, S. M., Lee, J. K., & Vernig, P. M. (2014). A pilot of an acceptance-based risk reduction program for relational aggression for adolescents. Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science, 3, 109-116.
19. Ciarrochi, J., Kashdan, T. B., Leeson, P., Heaven, P., & Jordan, C. (2011). On being aware and accepting: A one-year longitudinal study into adolescent well-being. Jouranl of Adolescence, 34, 695-703.
20. Gore, N. J., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Murphy, G. (2010). The relationship between intellectual functioning and relational perspective-taking. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy, 10(1), 1-17.
21. Orpinas, P., & Horne, A. M. (2006). Bullying prevention: Creating a positive school climate and developing social competence. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
22. Greco, L. A., Lambert, W., & Baer, R. A. (2008). Psychological inflexibility in childhood and adolescence: Development and evaluation of the avoidance and fusion questionnaire for youth. Psychological Assessment, 20, 93-102.
23. Larson, Christina (2008).  Stories: A revision of the willingness & action measure for children and adolescents (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of North Texas.
24. Sahdra, B., Ciarrochi, J., Parker, P., Marshall, S., & Heaven, P. (2015). Empathy and nonattachment independently predict peer nominations of prosocial behavior of adolescents.  Frontiers in Psychology, 6.
25. Grych, J. H., Seid, M., & Fincham, F. D. (1992). Assessing marital conflict from the child’s perspective: The children’s perception of interparental conflict scale. Child Development.
26. Chorpita, B. F., Moffitt, C. E., & Gray, J. (2005). Psychometric properties of the revised child anxiety and depression scale in a clinical sample. Behavior Research and Therapy, 53, 309-322.
27. Rehfeldt, R. A., Dillen, J. E., Ziomek, M. M., & Kowalchuk, R. K. (2007). Assessing relational learning deficits in perspective taking in children with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder. The Psychological Record, 57(1), 23-47.
28. Villatte, M., Monestes, J-L., McHugh, L., Feixa i Baque, E., & Loas, G. (2010). Assessing perspective taking in schizophrenia using relational frame theory. The Psychological Record, 60(3), 413-436.
29. McHugh, L., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Barnes-Holmes, D. (2004). Perspective taking as relational responding: A developmental profile. The Psychological Record, 54(1), 115-144.