+1 (208) 254-6996 essayswallet@gmail.com
  

open the files …..

Question

Discussion: Does Psychotherapy Have a Biological Basis?

Many studies have found that psychotherapy is as effective as psychopharmacology in terms of influencing changes in behaviors, symptoms of anxiety, and changes in mental state. Changes influenced by psychopharmacology can be explained by the biological basis of treatments. But how does psychotherapy achieve these changes? Does psychotherapy share common neuronal pathways with psychopharmacology? For this Discussion, consider whether psychotherapy also has a biological basis.

By Day 3

Post an explanation of whether psychotherapy has a biological basis. Explain how culture, religion, and socioeconomics might influence one’s perspective of the value of psychotherapy treatments. Support your rationale with evidence-based literature.

Learning Resources

American Nurses Association. (2014). Psychiatric-mental health nursing: Scope and standards of practice (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

· Standard 1 “Assessment” (pages 44 & 45)

Note: Throughout the program you will be reading excerpts from the ANA’s Scope & Standards of Practice for Psychiatric-Mental Health Nursing. It is essential to your success on the ANCC board certification exam for Psychiatric/Mental Health Nurse Practitioners that you know the scope of practice of the advanced practice psychiatric/mental health nurse. You should also be able to differentiate between the generalist RN role in psychiatric/mental health nursing and the advanced practice nurse role.

Wheeler, K. (Eds.). (2014). Psychotherapy for the advanced practice psychiatric nurse: A how-to guide for evidence-based practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company.

· Chapter 1, “The Nurse Psychotherapist and a Framework for Practice” (pp. 3–52)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4207360/

https://search-proquest-com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/docview/1660952739?accountid=14872

https://class.content.laureate.net/8214d0505c384da37d21a09998a8c5d0.pdf

https://waldenu.kanopy.com/video/clinical-interviewing-intake-assessment-ther

https://waldenu.kanopy.com/video/counseling-and-psychotherapy-theories-contex

Rubrics to follow

Outstanding PerformanceExcellent PerformanceProficient PerformanceRoom for Improvement
Main Posting: Response to the discussion question is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources.44 (44%) – 44 (44%)Thoroughly responds to the discussion question(s) is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. supported by at least 3 current, credible sources40 (40%) – 43 (43%)Responds to the discussion question(s) is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth supported by at least 3 credible references35 (35%) – 39 (39%)Responds to most of the discussion question(s) is somewhat reflective with critical analysis and synthesis representative of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. 50% of post has exceptional depth and breadth supported by at least 3 credible references31 (31%) – 34 (34%)Responds to some of the discussion question(s) one to two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. post is cited with fewer than 2 credible references0 (0%) – 30 (30%)Does not respond to the discussion question(s) lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module. contains only 1 or no credible references
Main Posting: Writing6 (6%) – 6 (6%)Written clearly and concisely Contains no grammatical or spelling errors Fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)Written clearly and concisely May contain one or no grammatical or spelling error Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Written concisely May contain one to two grammatical or spelling error Adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)Written somewhat concisely May contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors Contains some APA formatting errors0 (0%) – 4 (4%)Not written clearly or concisely Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style
Main Posting: Timely and full participation10 (10%) – 10 (10%)Meets requirements for timely and full participation posts main discussion by due date0 (0%) – 0 (0%)NA0 (0%) – 0 (0%)NA0 (0%) – 0 (0%)NA0 (0%) – 0 (0%)Does not meet requirement for full participation
First Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.9 (9%) – 9 (9%)Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings responds to questions posed by faculty the use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%)Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%)Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%)Response is on topic, may have some depth0 (0%) – 6 (6%)Response may not be on topic, lacks depth
First Response: Writing6 (6%) – 6 (6%)Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are fully answered if posed Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are answered if posed Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are mostly answered if posed Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources Response is written in Standard Edited English4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed Few or no credible sources are cited0 (0%) – 4 (4%)Responses posted in the discussion lack effective Response to faculty questions are missing No credible sources are cited
First Response: Timely and full participation5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Meets requirements for timely and full participation posts by due date0 (0%) – 0 (0%)NA0 (0%) – 0 (0%)NA0 (0%) – 0 (0%)NA0 (0%) – 0 (0%)Does not meet requirement for full participation
Second Response: Post to colleague’s main post that is reflective and justified with credible sources.9 (9%) – 9 (9%)Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings * responds to questions posed by faculty the use of scholarly sources to support ideas demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives8.5 (8.5%) – 8.5 (8.5%)Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings7.5 (7.5%) – 8 (8%)Response has some depth and may exhibit critical thinking or application to practice setting6.5 (6.5%) – 7 (7%)Response is on topic, may have some depth0 (0%) – 6 (6%)Response may not be on topic, lacks depth
Second Response: Writing6 (6%) – 6 (6%)Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are fully answered if posed Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English5.5 (5.5%) – 5.5 (5.5%)Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are answered if posed Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources Response is effectively written in Standard Edited English5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Communication is mostly professional and respectful to colleagues Response to faculty questions are mostly answered if posed Provides opinions and ideas that are supported by few credible sources Response is written in Standard Edited English4.5 (4.5%) – 4.5 (4.5%)Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication Response to faculty questions are somewhat answered if posed Few or no credible sources are cited0 (0%) – 4 (4%)Responses posted in the discussion lack effective Response to faculty questions are missing No credible sources are cited
Second Response: Timely and full participation5 (5%) – 5 (5%)Meets requirements for timely and full participation Posts by due date0 (0%) – 0 (0%)NA0 (0%) – 0 (0%)NA0 (0%) – 0 (0%)NA0 (0%) – 0 (0%)Does not meet requirement for full participation
Total Points: 100