Psychological Assessment of Cross-Cultural Mission Candidates in Australasia
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20332124 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Katherine N Thompson (0000-0002-6234-8390, Melbourne School of Theology, corresponding author), David Williams (0000-0001-8976-5760, Ridley College, Australia; Church Mission Society, Australia), David A Williams (0000-0002-5052-4895, Mission Australia), Thomas Kimber, Delle Matthews (Melbourne School of Theology), Mathis Grossmann (0000-0001-8261-3457, The University of Melbourne), Michael Bräutigam (0000-0002-8543-1808, Melbourne School of Theology) |
| Year | 2023 |
| Volume | 51 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 223-238 |
| Publication date | 2023-06-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Psychology and Theology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0091-6471 • E-ISSN: 2328-1162 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/00916471221143453 |
| OpenAlex | W4315702290 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 25 |
This study surveyed psychological assessment practice for cross-cultural mission candidates in Australasia. It hypothesized that there would be a difference in knowledge about assessments between mission chief executive officers (CEOs), member care specialists, and psychological assessors. Sixty-nine mission organization staff and nine independent assessors responded to an online survey about psychological assessment, compliance with Australian legislation and government recommendations, and the use of psychometric tests. The results suggested that pre-field psychological assessments were a vital part of member care. Assessors were more likely to report organizations struggled to apply the results to candidate selection, that assessments were used to screen out people with mental illness, and were looking for different key attributes in candidates compared with organizations. The key areas that were identified as being important to assess were strong interpersonal skills, physical and psychological resilience, and contentment with current relationship status. The study also identified several systemic problems in relation to the focus of assessments, payment, measurement, and whether reports complied with law and government recommendations, and previous recommendations in the mission literature. This study suggested a need for a more standardized purposeful approach to conducting pre-field psychological assessments for cross-cultural mission candidates
Government (linguistics) · Interpersonal communication · Legislation · Medical education · Political science · Public relations · Applied Psychology · Medicine · Organizational Strategy and Culture · Psychology · Religion, Society, and Development · Social Psychology · Workplace Spirituality and Leadership
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Depression Anxiety Stress Scales
Reliability, Validity, and Psychometric Development of the Pornography Consumption Inventory in a Sample of Hypersexual Men
Personality Characteristics of Evangelical Missionaries as Measured by the MMPI
The importance and the Difficulty of Doing Research with a Missionary Population
Organizational Commitment, Job Satisfaction, and Turnover Intention of Missionaries
The MMPI as a Predictive Tool for Missionary Candidates
Assessing Families (Not Just Individuals) for Missionary Service
A Suggested Prefield Process for Missionary Candidates
Traumatic Stress in a Missionary Population
Personality Disorders and Overseas Missions
The 16PF and Marital Satisfaction Inventory as Predictors of Missionary Job Success
A Brief History of Psychology and Missions in JPT
Candidate Selection Criteria
Psychological and Spiritual Predictors of Domains of Functioning and Effectiveness of Short-Term Missionaries
Mental Health of Cross-Cultural Healthcare Missionaries
Toward Normative MMPI-2 Profiles for Evangelical Missionaries in Candidate and Clinical Settings
Missionary Fit
Measuring Expatriate Cross-Cultural Stress
A principal-components analysis of the Narcissistic Personality Inventory and further evidence of its construct validity
| Highly cited | No |
|---|