International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology

Job Satisfaction of Mental Health Professionals

Job Satisfaction of Mental Health

Professionals Providing Group Therapy
in State Correctional Facilities
Sean W. Ferrell
Robert D. Morgan
Carrie L. Winterowd

Abstract: The primary purpose of this research was to explore the job satisfaction levels of
mental health professionals providing group therapy services in state correctional institutions.
Participants (162 providers from 78 adult male state correctional facilities) completed a sur-
vey examining perceptions about a range of job responsibilities. Further analysis investigated
the relationship of demographic variables, administrative support variables, and security
issues to satisfaction levels. Professionals appeared especially satisfied with aspects of their
jobs that involved the direct provision of psychological services (i.e., facilitating group and
individual psychotherapy services, providing crisis intervention services, and conducting for-
mal assessments). They appeared relatively less satisfied with nondirect services including
administrative responsibilities, report writing, case notes, and receiving individual supervi-
sion. The findings also revealed that these professionals disagreed that they receive adequate
funding from administration or that rehabilitation was an overall goal of their correctional
institution. Implications of these findings and suggestions for future research are highlighted.

The ever-increasing presence of managed health care is forcing mental health pro-
fessionals (e.g., counselors, psychologists, and social workers) to seek employ-
ment in established institutions where job security is more stable. The prison busi-
ness is booming; therefore, more mental health professionals are needed to work
in correctional environments. In fact, mental health professionals are being
encouraged to seek employment in prison settings (Murray, 1998) due in part to
the increased need for their skills. One impetus that has increased demand for
mental health services in correctional settings is the large proportion of prisoners
who have serious mental disorders (Abram, 1990; Snow & Briar, 1990; Teplin,
1990). Correctional facilities have been forced to deal with larger numbers of
mentally ill inmates in part because of the decades-long move away from placing
the mentally ill in psychiatric institutions. Serious mental disorders and mental ill-
ness, as operationally defined in this literature base, referred to major psychiatric
diagnoses (i.e., mood, anxiety, or psychotic disorders) and generally excluded
substance abuse disorders. According to recent statistics (Bureau of Justice Statis-
tics, 1999), mentally ill patients are disproportionately common in state prisons
and local jails where they account for 16% of the population. Another study, using

International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44(2), 2000 232-241
 2000 Sage Publications, Inc.
232
Job Satisfaction of Mental Health Professionals 233

a less narrow definition of mental illness, placed the number of mentally ill
inmates at approximately 70% of all inmates (Teplin, 1990). Levinson (1985)
pointed out that to effectively navigate the demands required of them while work-
ing in a prison setting, psychologists need special preparation above and beyond
their standard education and training. Mental health providers are called on to per-
form a variety of roles and functions in this demanding work environment includ-
ing assessment, screening, crisis intervention, program administration, and the
provision of direct services (Smith & Sabatino, 1990).
One assumption of this study is that mental health workers represent a unique
subspecialty with distinct job stressors and occupational variables within the cor-
rectional environment (Fry, 1990; Levinson, 1985; Smith & Sabatino, 1990). Cor-
rectional mental health workers occupy an identity somewhere between the
administrative executives and correctional officers. For instance, these profes-
sionals, similar to all prison staff, must conform to the overall institutional goals
of security and management of prisoners. Mental health professionals are like-
wise exposed on a daily basis to the violent prison culture that is typically identi-
fied as a factor that influences job satisfaction and work attitudes of all prison
employees (Dignam & Fagan, 1996; Innes, 1997). However, research also indi-
cates that correctional psychologists perceive themselves as playing a more thera-
peutic and helping role (Smith & Sabatino, 1990).
The majority of occupational research in the correctional environment has
examined correctional officers’ stress reactions (Cheek & Miller, 1982; Gross,
Larson, Urban, & Zupan, 1994; Lindquist & Whitehead, 1986). Correctional
executives (i.e., wardens) tend to be highly satisfied as an occupational group, with
staff relations and support being the highest correlates of job satisfaction (Flana-
gan, Johnson, & Bennett, 1996). Research regularly suggests that correctional
officers are at least moderately satisfied with their jobs (Jacobs, 1978; Lind-
quist & Whitehead, 1986). One recent study, however, found that correctional
officers showed the lowest levels of organizational commitment and job satisfac-
tion compared to other employees (Robinson, Porporino, & Simourd, 1996). There
are few published studies that examine mental health professionals in the correc-
tional setting (Eisenman, 1990; Fry, 1990; Levinson, 1985; Smith & Sabatino,
1990; Tewksbury, 1993), and these studies are concerned indirectly with how dif-
ferent parts of correctional work may influence job satisfaction. The available
studies were usually qualitative in nature, and some suffered from methodological
problems including restriction to one or a few prisons and a lack of random sam-
pling (Fry, 1990). Preliminary empirical work in one prison system suggested that
correctional counselors, defined as those at the bachelor or master’s level, had
higher job satisfaction levels than psychologists or psychiatrists (Fry, 1990). To
date, there are no published studies that have attempted to directly assess job satis-
faction among correctional mental health professionals in terms of specific job
duties and in relation to institutional demands. Moreover, no studies have included
234 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology

a comprehensive inquiry into prisons randomly sampled from different regions of

the country.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the job satisfaction of mental
health professionals who provided group therapy services in state correctional
institutions. Specifically, the study was concerned with how satisfied mental
health professionals from around the United States were with different aspects of
their jobs. The current research, for example, examined how satisfied profession-
als were with duties including (a) individual therapy, (b) group therapy, (c) formal
assessments, (d) crisis intervention, (e) case management/rounds, (f) report writ-
ing/case notes, (g) administrative responsibilities, (h) receiving individual super-
vision, (i) supervising other professional staff, and (j) providing consultation
services to professionals outside prison. This study also closely examined the
relationship of administrative support, security, and demographic variables as
they relate to satisfaction with group therapy as a job duty. Gender and ethnicity
were examined because of the homogeneity of the male inmate population and the
fact that prisons are commonly associated with racial tensions (Haney & Zim-
bardo, 1998). Previous research (Fry, 1990) also indicated that there may be dif-
ferences between the job satisfaction levels of mental health providers at differing
educational levels. Hence, the researchers felt it prudent to include these demo-
graphic variables given their potential influence on professional identity and the
incipient stage of this research. The overall goal of this research is to add to the
body of knowledge of mental health professionals as workers in the correctional
settings by exploring their attitudes and perceptions about key issues related to
their occupational satisfaction.

METHOD

PARTICIPANTS
Participants for this study consisted of 162 mental health professionals provid-
ing group therapy services from 79 randomly selected state penitentiaries and cor-
rectional facilities for male inmates in the United States. Of the 50 states, 48 are
represented by at least one participating correctional facility. The participants
included 100 men and 60 women with a mean age of 44.8 years (SD = 10.14).
They were predominantly Caucasian (n = 139); however, other ethnic groups
were represented in this sample including African American (n = 11), biracial (n =
3), Hispanic/Latino(a) (n = 1), Native American (n = 2), Asian American (n = 1),
and other (n = 1). Of the 162 participants, 22 had obtained a doctoral degree, 99
obtained a master’s degree, and 38 participants obtained a bachelor’s or other
degree. The majority of these professionals were from the specialty areas of clini-
cal psychology (n = 48), counseling psychology (n = 31), social work (n = 31), or
Job Satisfaction of Mental Health Professionals 235

counseling (n = 27). Cognitive-behavioral (n = 51; 31.5%) and eclecticism (n =

50; 30.9%) were identified as the most common counseling theoretical orienta-
tions. Finally, the respondents were employed in state correctional facilities rang-
ing in inmate population of 46 to 20,0001 with a median of 1,162.5 and a mode of
900 inmates.

SURVEY
A survey was developed to assess a wide range of areas related to job satisfac-
tion in myriad duties performed by mental health professionals within the correc-
tional system including: (a) individual psychotherapy, (b) group psychotherapy,
(c) formal assessments, (d) crisis intervention, (e) receiving individual supervi-
sion, (f) supervising other professional staff, (g) administrative responsibilities,
(h) case management/rounds, (i) report writing/case notes, and (j) providing con-
sultation services to professionals outside the prison. In addition, the survey
included information about the demographics of the group facilitators, level of
administrative support, and security issues. Participants were asked to rate their
level of job satisfaction using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = very dissatisfied, 7 = very
satisfied). Participants rated their level of agreement in terms of administrative
support and security issues using a 7-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 7 =
strongly agree). A cover letter explaining the purpose of this study and a self-
addressed stamped return envelope were provided with each survey.

PROCEDURE
For this study, 113 state penitentiaries (correctional facilities) were randomly
selected from the 1994 American Correctional Association’s directory that
includes a listing of current institutions (American Correctional Association,
1994). The director of the psychology department or its equivalent at each site was
called by one of the researchers to explain the nature and purpose of the study and
to assess their interest and willingness to participate in the study. If the director
verbally committed to participate in this study, copies of the cover letter and sur-
vey were mailed to the department.
Of the 113 facilities randomly selected, 79 state correctional facilities partici-
pated in this study. Three hundred and eighty-six surveys were sent to these 79
facilities. One hundred and sixty-two surveys were completed and returned for a
return rate of 41.97%.
Thirty-four state correctional facilities did not participate in this study for a
variety of reasons: 25 facilities did not offer group psychotherapy services, 6
facilities were unable to be reached by phone (and thus surveys were not mailed),
1 facility was in the process of closing, 1 facility required a lengthy proposal
review process and therefore the researchers of this study did not pursue data col-
lection with this site, and only 1 facility declined to participate in this study.
236 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology

TABLE 1
MEAN, MODE, AND STANDARD DEVIATION SCORES OF
OVERALL SATISFACTION RATINGS OF VARIOUS JOB RESPONSIBILITIES

Overall Satisfaction
Type of Job Responsibility Mean Mode Standard Deviation

Group therapy (N = 148) 5.58 6.00 1.40

Individual therapy (N = 147) 5.30 6.00 1.54
Crisis intervention (N = 148) 5.28 6.00 1.42
Supervising other professional staff (N = 81) 5.08 6.00 1.66
Formal assessments (N = 145) 5.01 6.00 1.44
Providing consultation services to
professionals outside the prison (N = 77) 4.77 6.00 1.95
Case management/rounds (N = 128) 4.67 5.00 1.54
Report writing/case notes (N = 151) 4.51 5.00 1.50
Receiving individual supervision (N = 124) 4.48 5.00 1.72
Administrative responsibilities (N = 112) 4.41 4.00 1.61

RESULTS

The purpose of this study was to investigate how satisfied mental health profes-
sionals providing group therapy services were with different aspects of their jobs
in state correctional institutions and to examine the relationship of demographic
variables, administrative support variables, and security variables with partici-
pants’ satisfaction with group therapy as a job duty. Table 1 presents the descrip-
tive statistics for the participants’ratings of satisfaction for the 10 job responsibili-
ties (e.g., group therapy, individual therapy, and administrative responsibilities).
As can be seen in Table 1, participants indicated a general satisfaction with the
various aspects of their job responsibilities. The participants reported they are sat-
isfied with a variety of job responsibilities including the facilitation of group and
individual psychotherapy services, providing crisis intervention services, super-
vising other professional staff, and conducting formal assessments. Participants
are less satisfied with administrative responsibilities, the individual supervision
they receive, and writing reports and case notes (i.e., progress notes). Therefore,
in relative terms, the participants in this study do not appear dissatisfied with any
particular job responsibility within the prison setting; rather, they appear more
satisfied with certain aspects of their jobs.
As this is an exploratory study with group psychotherapy providers, further
analyses were conducted to assess the impact of therapists’characteristics and job
factors on mental health professionals’ satisfaction with their group psychother-
apy responsibilities. To evaluate if differences in gender, level of professional
training, and ethnicity led to differences in participants’ satisfaction with group
Job Satisfaction of Mental Health Professionals 237

therapy service provision, t tests were performed. Due to multiple comparisons,

the Bonferroni correction was used to adjust the alpha level to .016, and pooled
variance estimates were incorporated to account for unequal groups. There was
not a significant difference between males (M = 5.48, SD = 1.49) and females (M =
5.75, SD = 1.24), t(145) = – 1.12, p = .265, on levels of satisfaction. Doctoral level
professionals (i.e., Ph.D., M.D., and Ed.D.) had similar levels (M = 5.67, SD =
1.32) of satisfaction to master’s- and bachelor-level providers (M = 5.57, SD =
1.42), t(146) = .28, p = .782. Finally, Caucasians (M = 5.49, SD = 1.46) were not
significantly different from other ethnic groups (M = 6.33, SD = .72), t(140) =
–2.21, p = .029, on group psychotherapy satisfaction ratings when the Bonferroni
adjustment was implemented; however, there did appear to be a trend that ethnic
minority therapists were more satisfied with their group psychotherapy job
responsibilities than Caucasian therapists. Thus, gender and education do not
contribute to differing levels of satisfaction with the provision of group psycho-
therapy services, but the trend suggests that non-Caucasian groups may be more
satisfied with this aspect of their job.
Further correlational analyses were conducted to specifically examine group
therapists’ ratings of satisfaction with their group psychotherapy job responsibili-
ties. These satisfaction ratings were correlated with security issues, administra-
tive support, and years of experience conducting group psychotherapy in correc-
tional settings (see Table 2 for a list of the means, standard deviations, and
correlations for these variables). Participants rated their level of agreement with
issues related to administrative support for group programming and research as
well as security issues when facilitating psychotherapy groups with inmates. On
average, the participants who provided group psychotherapy services to male
inmates in correctional settings felt fairly secure about security issues related to
facilitating group psychotherapy (e.g., feeling safe and security personnel
nearby). They perceived having responsibility and flexibility with regard to their
group programs but indicated a relative level of disagreement with the level of
funding they received to help implement groups. As can be seen in Table 2, several
of the items assessing administrative support were significantly related to satis-
faction with group psychotherapy responsibilities were statistically significant at
the p < .05 level, and one security issue (i.e., therapist safety when facilitating
groups) was significantly correlated with level of satisfaction at the p < .01 level.
Table 2 shows that group therapists’ satisfaction with group psychotherapy work
was significantly correlated with (a) having responsibility for developing group
programs, (b) having flexibility with regard to new or innovative group therapies,
(c) consulting with other departments, (d) receiving adequate support from prison
administration, (e) perceiving rehabilitation as an institutional goal, and (f) feel-
ing safe when facilitating groups. Therapists’ perceptions of administrative sup-
port and their feelings of safety when providing their group psychotherapy ser-
vices are significantly correlated with their group psychotherapy satisfaction
ratings.
238 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology

TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE
SUPPORT, SECURITY ISSUES, YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN A CORRECTIONAL
SETTING, AND CORRELATION WITH PARTICIPANTS’ SATISFACTION RATING
WITH PROVIDING GROUP THERAPY

Satisfaction With
Group Therapy
Variable M SD Duties-Correlations

Years of experience with group therapy

in the correctional setting 6.54 6.05 .14
Institutional variables
Responsibility for developing groups 5.90 1.65 .21*
Flexibility with regard to new and
innovative groups 5.47 1.76 .19*
Adequate funding for group programming 3.45 1.87 .11
Consultation with other departments 4.04 2.06 .20*
Adequate support from prison
administration 4.19 1.89 .19*
Rehabilitation as an overall
institution goal 3.64 1.87 .18*
Security issue variables
Feeling safe when facilitating groups 5.73 1.48 .32**
Security personnel in nonintrusive areas
during group facilitation 5.03 2.07 .08
*p < .05. **p < .01.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study indicate that prison mental health employees are gen-
erally satisfied with the various aspects of their jobs in correctional settings. They
appear especially satisfied with aspects of their jobs that involve the provision of
psychological services (i.e., facilitating group and individual psychotherapy serv-
ices, providing crisis intervention services, and conducting formal assessments).
They appear relatively less satisfied with nondirect services including administra-
tive responsibilities and report writing and case notes. This finding makes intui-
tive sense as one would expect service providers to be more satisfied with aspects
of their jobs that include the provision of services to clientele. The results were
consistent with those of Smith and Sabatino (1990) who found that correctional
psychologists wanted to spend less time in diagnostics and program administra-
tion and more time in counseling and psychotherapy.
The current investigation indicated that the ethnic composition of group lead-
ers does not parallel the prison population at large. Statistics estimate that
although African American men represent approximately 6% of the general U.S.
population, they constitute 48% of inmates confined in state correctional facilities
Job Satisfaction of Mental Health Professionals 239

(Haney & Zimbardo, 1998). Overall, there were many more White individuals
providing group psychotherapy services in state correctional facilities. In spite of
this discrepancy, there was a statistical trend possibly suggesting that minority
participants were more satisfied with their group therapy work than White partici-
pants. Although this issue warrants further investigation, the active recruitment of
minorities for these positions should be considered.
The finding that mental health professionals emerged as less satisfied with the
individual supervision they receive when compared to some of the other job
responsibilities is a concern. This may be the result of a lack of opportunities for
supervision activities in the prison setting considering some 20% of group thera-
pists do not receive supervision regarding their group psychotherapy services
(Morgan, Winterowd, & Ferrell, 1999). However, this finding could also be an
indication of the quality of supervision or the fact that mental health professionals
in correctional settings do not like to be supervised. Nevertheless, this finding is
disconcerting considering that the stress of working in a correctional environment
will task even the most experienced clinician (Brodsky, 1982; Inwald, 1982). Eis-
enman (1990) reported that immediate supervision was one of the major problems
he encountered in his 2 years as a prison psychologist. This personal account
included an example of when a supervisor demanded unethical behavior from his
or her supervisee by asking them to alter a test report (Eisenman, 1990). Further-
more, he believed this problem would likely characterize most prisons (Eisen-
man, 1990). Perhaps the supervisory role as it occurs in a prison milieu is more
adversarial than supportive. The practice of supervision of mental health workers
in the correctional setting is worthy of more investigation, especially given the
exceptional demands imposed on professionals operating in these environments.
Whereas the results of this study provide preliminary evidence of mental
health professionals’ job satisfaction in correctional settings, some limitations of
this study should be noted. First, this survey was developed to assess group ther-
apy services, and the participants consisted of group therapy providers and depart-
ment directors (i.e., psychology and mental health). Therefore, the sample may
not be representative of correctional mental health providers in general. Secondly,
this study does not address the particular aspects of the job responsibility or duty
the mental health professionals were or were not satisfied with. For example,
although the participants tend to be relatively less satisfied with the individual
supervision they receive, the authors do not know, as indicated previously, what
they are dissatisfied with. Therefore, the authors do not know whether more
supervision is desired, if the quality of supervision needs improvement, or if the
participants do not like to receive individual supervision. Future studies need to
address this limitation before modifications can be applied to those job responsi-
bilities found to be less satisfying.
In conclusion, as expected, administrative support variables seemed to play a
key role in mediating job satisfaction. Mental health professionals generally did
not agree that they received adequate funding for group programming efforts.
They slightly disagreed that rehabilitation efforts were an important overall goal
240 International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology

of their institution. Furthermore, their job satisfaction levels were significantly

associated with adequate support from prison administration. These findings
reflect the prevailing zeitgeist in prison policy: Rehabilitative activities are gener-
ally not considered a major component of prison life (Haney & Zimbardo, 1998).
On the contrary, in reality, prisons can be psychologically damaging to staff and
prisoners (especially those with concomitant mental illness); although supported
by research (Lovell & Jemelka, 1998; Zimbardo, Haney, Banks, & Jaffe, 1974),
this does not seem to be reflected in commensurate funding for rehabilitation pro-
gramming and services. In spite of the findings regarding administrative support,
the current findings showed that mental health professionals remain largely satis-
fied with positions and job duties in correctional settings.

NOTE

1. The authors believe that the respondents reporting an inmate population of 20,000 worked in a
prison complex that included several separate correctional institutions.

REFERENCES

Abram, K. M. (1990). The problems of co-occurring disorders among jail detainees: Antisocial disor-
der, alcoholism, drug abuse, and depression. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 333-345.
American Correctional Association. (1994). Directory: Juvenile and adult correctional departments,
institutions, agencies and paroling authorities. Laurel, MD: Author.
Brodsky, C. M. (1982). Work stress in correctional institutions. Journal of Prison and Jail Health, 2,
74-102.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1999, July 11). Mental health and treatment of inmates and probationers
(NCJ-174463) [Press Release]. Washington, DC: Department of Justice.
Cheek, F., & Miller, M. (1982). Prisoners of life. Washington, DC: American Federation of State,
County, and Municipal Employees.
Dignam, J., & Fagan, T. J. (1996). Workplace violence in correctional settings: A comprehensive
approach to critical incident stress management. In G. R. Vandenbos & E. Q. Bulato (Eds.), Vio-
lence on the job: Identifying risks and developing situations (pp. 367-384). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
Eisenman, R. (1990). Six problems of a prison psychologist: A personal account. Psychological
Reports, 67, 755-761.
Flanagan, T. J., Johnson, W. W., & Bennett, K. (1996). Job satisfaction among correctional executives:
A contemporary portrait of wardens of state prisons for adults. The Prison Journal, 76, 385-397.
Fry, L. J. (1990). Counselor reactions to work in prison settings. Journal of Offender Counseling, Serv-
ices, and Rehabilitation, 14, 121-132.
Gross, G. R., Larson, S. J., Urban, G. D., & Zupan, L. L. (1994). Gender differences in occupational
stress among correctional officers. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 18, 219-234.
Haney, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1998). The past and future of U.S. prison policy: Twenty-five years after
the Stanford prison experiment. American Psychologist, 53, 709-727.
Innes, C. A. (1997). Patterns of misconduct in the federal prison system. Criminal Justice Review, 22,
157-174.
Job Satisfaction of Mental Health Professionals 241

Inwald, R. E. (1982). Research problems in assessing stress factors in correctional institutions. Inter-
national Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 26, 250-254.
Jacobs, J. (1978). What prison guards think: A profile of the Illinois force. Journal of Crime and Delin-
quency, 24, 185-196.
Levinson, R. B. (1985). The psychologist in the correctional system. American Journal of Forensic
Psychology, 3(2), 41-43.
Lindquist, C. A., & Whitehead, J. T. (1986). Burnout, job stress, and job satisfaction among Southern
correctional officers: Perceptions and causal factors. Journal of Offender Counseling, Services,
and Rehabilitation, 10(4), 5-26.
Lovell, D., & Jemelka, R. (1998). Coping with mental illness in prisons. Family and Community
Health, 21, 54-66.
Morgan, R. D., Winterowd, C. L., & Ferrell, S. W. (1999). A national survey of group psychotherapy
services in correctional facilities. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 30, 600-606.
Murray, B. (1998, January). PhDs apply talents to emerging careers. APA Monitor, p. 28.
Robinson, D., Porporino, F. J., & Simourd, L. (1996). Do occupational groups vary on attitudes and
work adjustment in corrections? Federal Probation, 60, 45-53.
Smith, R. R., & Sabatino, D. A. (1990). Roles and functions of psychologists in American correctional
institutions. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 16, 163-174.
Snow, W. H., & Briar, K. H. (1990). The convergence of mentally disordered and the jail population.
Journal of Offender Counseling, Services, and Rehabilitation, 15, 147-162.
Teplin, L. A. (1990). Detecting disorder: The treatment of mental illness among jail detainees. Journal
of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 58, 233-236
Tewksbury, R. (1993). On the margins of two professions: Job satisfaction and stress among post-
secondary correctional educators. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 18, 61-77.
Zimbardo, P. G., Haney, C., Banks, C., & Jaffe, D. (1974). The psychology of imprisonment: Priva-
tion, power, and pathology. In Z. Rubin (Ed.), Doing unto others: Explorations in social behavior
(pp. 61-73). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Sean W. Ferrell, Ph.D.

Postdoctoral Psychology Fellow
University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences
PO Box 26901, G. Rainey Williams Pavilion, 3rd Floor
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 73190
USA

Robert D. Morgan, Ph.D.

Forensic Psychology Fellow
Department of Psychiatry
University of Missouri–Kansas City, School of Medicine
Kansas City, Missouri
USA

Carrie L. Winterowd, Ph.D.

Associate Professor, Counseling Psychology
School of Applied Health and Educational Psychology
Oklahoma State University
434 Willard Hall
Stillwater, Oklahoma, 74078
USA