American Psychological Association Ethics Research Articles

Cultural sensitivity: a critical examination

The construct of cultural sensitivity plays an increasing important role in psychology, including several key roles in the American Psychological Association's Ethics Code. We critically evaluate this construct. Problems associated with this construct are discussed including: (1) problems parsing and validly attributing cultural status; (2) lack of clarity concerning what constitutes sensitivity and the implications for ethically mandated behavior; and (3) unintended potential negative effects. We propose seven potential dimensions of cultural sensitivity which range from being able to accurately identify what culture(s) a person belongs to, to being able to implement appropriate action in a culturally sensitive manner. We call for an approach beyond a superficial acceptance of cultural sensitivity and counsel a more cautious stance toward cultural sensitivity.

Forensic standards in the American Psychological Association's new ethics code.

The 1992 revision of the American Psychological Association's ethics code includes, for the first time, a section devoted to forensic issues. This article examines the adequacy with which the Forensic Activities section addresses fundamental ethical issues inherent in forensic practices (i.e., being competent in forensic practice, dealing with requests for service, providing informed consent, providing services, and reporting findings). We conclude that the ethics code modestly addresses important forensic ethical issues and that it too often is characterized by inconsistencies, insufficient information, omissions, and the inappropriate application of the term forensic to general standards not uniquely related to forensic practice.

Teaching psychologists and the new APA ethics code: do we fit in?

The new American Psychological Association (APA) ethics code (APA, 1992) creates dilemmas of both image and substance for teaching psychologists. Items specific to teaching psychologists reflect housekeeping matters of lesser importance and situations over which teaching psychologists have little control. Teachers of psychology are sometimes inappropriately grouped with other types of psychologists. Freedom of inquiry and communication are curtailed in ambiguous ways, and the standards expected of teachers in the academy are set a mediocre level. Although the new code contains some improvements over the previous code (APA, 1990)--especially in the areas of multiple relationships, prohibitions against sex with students, respect for differences among students, and authorship rights retained by students--numerous recommendations for future revision are strongly recommended.