Factors used to determine sanctions following professional misconduct of Australian psychologists: a thematic analysis

Abstract

ABSTRACT Objective The present study explored factors described in sanctions determined by disciplinary tribunals for professional misconduct by psychologists. Method Eight randomly selected tribunal decisions from 2014 to 2021, with findings of professional misconduct by psychologists, were analysed using an inductive approach to reflexive thematic analysis. Results Coincidentally, all tribunal decisions analysed included professional misconduct of a sexual or intimate nature. From our analysis, a clear superordinate theme was generated, which was the presence of aggravating and mitigating factors that tribunals described in the determination of sanctions. This superordinate theme was comprised of the following themes: (1) the degree to which power was exploited by a psychologist over a client, (2) the psychologist’s insight into their wrongdoing, and (3) the psychologist’s accountability to the tribunal for their actions. Conclusions Themes generated from our analysis show the use of aggravating and mitigating factors by tribunals in the determination of sanctions, however the use of these factors is not always clear. Guidance to tribunals may broadly support better use of aggravating and mitigating factors. It is important to note that our study was limited to 8 similar cases of a sexual or intimate nature and future research should continue to understand the use of aggravating and mitigating factors in more diverse tribunal case.