1. College Student’s Beliefs About Psychological Services: A replication of Ægisdóttir & Gerstein Louis A. Cornejo San Francisco State University

2. Aim of the study 1  Expand on the current research of attitudes that college students may have regarding psychologists.  Search for differences in attitudes based on sex, prior counseling experience, ethnicity, and family status.  Observe which groups of students hold more positive views.

3. Previous Research 2  An individual’s intention is predictive of future behavior. (Azjen, 1985)  Attitudes about receiving psychological services is correlated with the willingness to seek these services when needed (Vogel and Wester, 2003).  Females and those with prior counseling experience hold more positive views about psychologists and intention to seek their services. (Ægisdóttir & Gerstein, 2009)

4. Outcome Variables 3  The Beliefs About Psychological Services scale (BAPS)  Overall BAPS score and three subscale scores measuring Intent, Stigma Tolerance, and Expertness.  Scores are based on a 1-6 Likert scale. 1 = “Strongly disagree” 6 = “Strongly agree”

5. Predictors 4  Gender (male vs. female)  Prior counseling experience (yes vs. no)  Family status (divorced vs. intact)  Ethnicity (Caucasian, Latino, & Asian)

6. Hypotheses 5 H1: Women will have a statistically significant higher overall BAPS and intention score average. H2: Those with prior counseling experience will have a statistically significant higher overall BAPS and intention score average. H3: There will be no statistically significant average difference in overall BAPS score and subscale scores when comparing students according to family status. H4: There will be no statistically significant average difference in overall BAPS score and subscale scores when comparing students based on ethnicity.

7. Method 6  Quasi-experimental  Flyers, word-of-mouth, and an online ad  Analysis of BAPS, Intention, Stigma Tolerance, and Expertness averages: One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA)

8. Participants 7  Participants were recruited primarily from SFSU( N = 107) and 83% of the sample were college students.  The majority was female (70%) – most likely due to the general distribution of psychology students at SFSU.  Age ranged from 18 to 66 ( M = 26.11, SD = 10.41).  67% of students were from intact families (parents are currently married and have not separated, divorced).  34% of the sample reported as Caucasian, 28% as Latino, 24% as Asian, 8% as mixed ethnicity, & 6% as African American, Native American, African, or Middle Eastern.  51% Had no prior counseling experience.

9. Reliability 9  The order of the demographics section and BAPS scale was counterbalanced.  Similar to the original study, we found high reliability coefficients among the BAPS and three subscales.  Cronbach Alpha’s ranged from.70 -.90

10. Results 8  ANOVA indicated no significant differences based on gender and prior counseling experience in overall BAPS and Intent averages.  MANOVA indicated a statistically significant interaction between gender and counseling experience among the BAPS and Intent averages.  ANOVA indicated no significant differences based on family status in overall BAPS and subscale averages.  ANOVA indicated a significant difference based on ethnicity in the Stigma Tolerance subscale average.  MANOVA produced no statistically significant main effects or interactions based on family status and ethnicity among the BAPS and subscale averages.

11. Gender and Prior Counseling 10  One-way ANOVA: No statistically significant differences based on gender and prior counseling experience alone.  MANOVA: No main effects, but two interactions were significant BAPS:F(3, 90) 4.27, p =.042. Intent:F(3, 90) 7.06, p =.009.

12. BAPS Interaction 11

13. Intent Interaction 12

14. Family Status and Ethnicity 13  One-way ANOVA: Only Stigma Tolerance based on ethnicity was statistically significant. Stigma Tolerance: F (2, 86) 3.12, p =.050. Only one Tukey post-hoc comparison was significant, p =.043 Asians scored lower (4.28) than Caucasians (4.75)

15. Conclusion 14  Our findings for gender and prior counseling indicate opposite results from the original study such that we found an interaction among gender and prior counseling experience, but no main effects.  The sample is more ethnically diverse, however, not all groups are distributed equally.  With a larger and equal split between gender, ethnicity and family status, we might obtain different results.  We should further investigate why male students with prior counseling experience are less likely to seek out psychological services compared to females.  Future research studies should focus on developing programs that increase the student and general population’s awareness of available psychological services and emphasize that psychologists are able to assist all individuals, regardless of ethnicity or background.

16. Acknowledgements 15  Dr. Cookston from the Family Interaction Research Lab.  Dr. Gamba from City College of San Francisco who helped with the design.  Dr. Ægisdóttir from Ball State University who provided the BAPS scale.  All the students who participated in the survey.