P reli m i n a ry I nve sli g ali o n s

A preliminary investigation provides an opportunity toobtain more information from the respondent in order todetermine whether to close an investigation or open aformal case. A preliminary investigation is opened if theEthics Office and the chair or vice chair of the EthicsCommittee agree that more information is needed. Theprocess of asking questions and obtaining additional infor-mation also provides an opportunity to educate the respon-dent about the areas of possible ethical concern.

Table 2 presents data on preliminaty investigationsfrom 2006 through 2010. Thirty-five preliminary investi-gations (29 complainant, 5 sua sponte, and 1 show cause)were carried into 2010 from 2009, and 9 new preliminaryinvestigations were opened (all from complainant matters).Twenty complaints were closed at that stage (19 complain-ant and 1 sua sponte), and 2 were opened as formal cases(l show cause and I sua sponte matter). Therefore, 22preliminary investigations were carried into 2011 (19 com-plainant, 3 sua sponte, and no show cause). Of the 20investigations closed at the preliminary investigation stage,5 resulted in a nondisciplinary educative letter being sent tothe respondent along with the closing letter.

Preliminary investigations continue to be primarily,although not exclusively, focused on complainant matters.Of the 104 preliminary investigations opened between2006 and 2010, 92 werc complainant matters. Of the 12preliminary investigations that were opened as cases duringthat same time frame, 10 were complainant matters. Oneshow cause and one sua sponte preliminary investigationresulted in a case being opened.

Formal Cases

A formal case is opened in a complainant matter if theEthics Office and chair of the Ethics Committee determinethat cause for action exists to charge the respondent with anethical violation. A formal case rs also opened in a showcause matter when the Ethics Office and vice chair of the

Toble 2P19ljry i n^a 11 hve sti g o ti o n s O p e n ed o n d C I o sed,2006-20t 0

Toble 3Coses Opened ond Closed, 2006-2010

Yeor Cqrried in OpenedTotolqctive Closed

200620072008200920r 0201 1

465564675856

2932l8*l5*20

7587B28278

2023l524*22

Yeor Corried in OpenedTotoloctive Closed

Opened oscose

Nofe. Those figures in this toble morked with on osterisk hove been corrected!9m previous reports. Additionol informotion con be obtoined by contocting theEthics Office.

Ethics Committee determine the notice received by theEthics Office involves a felony conviction or serious actiontaken against the respondent's license (a predicate) andbehavior that is expellable. A formal case is opened in asua sponte matter when the Ethics Office and vice chairdetermine that cause for action exists and that the noticereceived involves behavior that is expellable in spite of thelack of a serious sanction by a licensing board.

Table 3 presents data for cases from 2006 through2010. Fifty-eight cases (7 complainant, 7 sua sponte, and44 show cause) were carried into 2010 from 2009, and 20new cases were opened (none from complainant matters, 3from sua sponte matters, and 17 from show cause matters).The number of cases active during the year was 78 (7complainant, 10 sua sponte, and 61 show cause), a rela-tively stable number compared with the average number ofcases active since 2006. Twenty-two cases were closed in2010 (4 complainant, 2 sua sponte, and 16 show cause).Therefore, 56 cases (3 complainant, 8 sua sponte, and 45show cause) were carried into 2011. Of the 114 casesopened between 2006 and 2010, 1l were complainantmatters, 19 were sua sponte matters, and 84 were showcause matters.

Previous reports of the Ethics Committee have dis-cussed primary and multiple categories of cases openedduring the year that included both the source of a case (e.g.,licensing board disciplinary action) and underlying behav-ior (e.g., sexual misconduct). In this report, Table 4 pro-vides information regarding the source of the case, andTable 5 provides information regarding the underlyingbehavior.

Table 4 demonstrates that cases initiated on the basisof disciplinary actions or felony convictions continue to bethe most frequent type of case being opened. In 2070, 79out of 20 cases opened (957o) were such matters. This is thefirst year in which this analysis has been used, but thepercentage is similar to the average percentage for 2006through 2010 (937o). Show cause cases in 2010 (17 out of20) were based on the following types of actions againstprofessional licenses or felonies: 1l from loss of licensure,3 from conviction of a felony, and 3 from other disciplinary

200620072008200920102011

5247575044

28223r303522

24252620*9

26l623l320

40422

Note. "Opened os cqse" indicotes thot the preliminory investiqotion hqsended. "Corried in" is reduced by the number clbsed ond ihe numbler openedos coses. The figure in this toble morked with on osterisk hos been correctedfloqlhe previous report. Additionol informotion con be obtoined by contoctingthe Ethics Office.

July-August 2011 . American Psychologist 399

Toble 4Sources of Coses Opened in 2010

Toble 5Cofegories of Cose s Opened in 2010

New coses Coses with cotegoryos o foctor

No.Cotegory

Felony convictionLoss of l icensureExpulsion from stote ossociotionMolprocticeOther odiudicot ionComploinont f i ledOtherTotol coses

actions. No complainant cases and 3 Sua sponte cases were

opened in 2010.The types of allegations resulting in newly opened

cases in 2010 are shown in Table 5. It is important to note

that these are not findings of violation but allegations. A

case may have up to two categories of behavior assigned'

Of the 11 cases (show cause and sua sponte combined)

opened following loss of licensure in 2010, sexual miscon-

duct was the underlying behavior in 4 cases (36Vo).

For purposes of data analysis, the category of dual

relationship is subdivided into four categories: sexual mis-

conduct, which is further subdivided into adult and minor

client categories; sexual harassment; and nonsexual dual

relationship. Of all cases involving dual relationshrp,36Vowere nonsexual in 2010, compared with 36Vo,29Vo, ll%o,

and 387o in 2006 through 2009, respectively. Four cases

were opened regarding sexual dual relationships involving

male psychologists with female clients, and one case was

opened involving a female psychologist with a male client;

one case was opened involving a male psychologist with a

minor female client, and one case was opened involving a

male psychologist with a minor male client. One case

involved sexual harassment by a male psychologist of a

female client. Two nonsexual dual relationships involved

male psychologists with female clients, and two nonsexual

dual relationships involved female psychologists with male

clients.If a respondent does not provide a substantive re-

sponse to a show cause case within a specified period of

time, he or she is automatically expelled from APA. One

automatic expulsion occurred in 2010. Since this automatic

expulsion provision was added to the "Rules and Proce-

duies" in 2001, 15 respondents have been automatically

expelled.The length of time to process cases has typically been

reported in terms of cases closed during the year under

t"po.t. Accordingly, this figure may include substantialprbcessing time that occurred in previous years. In addi-

iion, ptocessing time may include lengthy periods in which

the cases were stayed pending the outcome of other pro-

ceedings, such as pending licensing board actions, appeals,

Duol re lot ionshipSexuol misconduct, odultSexuol misconduct, minorSexuol horossmentNonsexuol duol relotionshiP

lnoppropriote professionolproctice

Child custodyHospitolizotionHypnosisOutside competenceControl l ing c l ientInoppropriote response to crisisConfidentiolityInoppropriote

fol low-u p/term i notionTest misuseInsuronce/fee problemsI no ppropriote professionol

relotionsOther

Inoppropriote reseorch, teoching,or odministrotive Proctice

Authorshipcontroversi es/c red its

lmproper reseorch techniquesPlogior ismBiosino dotoGrodiXg/violotion of student

rightsTerm i notion/su pervisionAbsence of t imely evoluotionsDiscr iminot ionAnimol reseorch subiects'

welforeOther

lnoppropriote public stotementsMisuse of medioFolse, froudulent, or

misleodingDid not correct

misrepresentotionPubl ic ol legot ion obout

colleogueOther

Foilure to uphold stondords of theprofession

Response to APA EthicsCommittee

Adherence to stondordsOther

Totol coses

Note. The dosh indicotes thot o percentoge is not opplicoble here becouse

eoch cose moy be counted in multiple cotegories. APA : Americon Psycholog-

icol Associotion.

6215

2I02II0

000

0I

41200310

20

2060

00

t550

100

30t05

25

1050

t0550

000

05

0000

0000

00

0

0

0

00

0

00

0000

0000

00

0

0

005

00I

20

July-August 2011 . American Psychologist