{"id":{"repo_id":"ohiolink","oai_identifier":"oai:etd.ohiolink.edu:akron1365533457"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/ohiolink/oai:etd.ohiolink.edu:akron1365533457","repository":{"repo_id":"ohiolink","name":"OhioLINK","base_url":"https://etd.ohiolink.edu/acprod/odb_etd/ws/oai/oai"},"display":{"title":"Comparing the Utility and Reliability of Two Current Suicide-Related Nomenclatures","abstract":"This dissertation examined the reliability and perceived clinical utility of two current suicide-related nomenclatures. The language of suicidology has been confusing for the past half-century, thereby inhibiting effective study of the problem of suicide. This dissertation’s survey research compared two nomenclatures: the Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA; Posner, Oquendo, Gould, Stanley, & Davies, 2007) and the Silverman nomenclature (Silverman, Berman, Sanddal, O’Carroll, & Joiner, 2007a and 2007b). Hypothetical vignettes were constructed to represent the different terms and definitions of each of the two nomenclatures; ten vignettes were randomly selected to be presented to participants. The 131 participants were mental health clinicians who were currently seeing clients for at least five hours per week. The hypotheses were that the C-CASA would exhibit better reliability and significantly better perceived clinical utility than the Silverman nomenclature. Perceived clinical utility was measured by a new 13-item questionnaire constructed for the purposes of this study. An exploratory factor analysis indicated that the perceived clinical utility questionnaire had a stable one-factor structure and an alpha of 0.95. The data supported both hypotheses. C-CASA’s reliability, as measured by kappa statistics, was 0.59, while the Silverman nomenclature’s was 0.45; this was more than a 0.1 difference in C-CASA’s favor. On the 7-point Likert-type scale of the perceived clinical utility questionnaire, the Silverman nomenclature received positive scores that were a bit above neutral (4.62), while the C-CASA received scores almost a point higher (5.43), which were almost halfway between “neutral” (4) and “strongly agree” (7). These differences were statistically significant and represented a large effect size (Cohen’s d was 0.83). These differences suggested that the C-CASA was preferable to the Silverman nomenclature, both in terms of reliability and perceived clinical utility. If replicated by other researchers, this result would mean that the C-CASA showed more promise than the Silverman nomenclature for constructing a common language for suicide-related thoughts and behaviors among practicing clinicians.","abstract_html":"This dissertation examined the reliability and perceived clinical utility of two current suicide-related nomenclatures. The language of suicidology has been confusing for the past half-century, thereby inhibiting effective study of the problem of suicide. This dissertation’s survey research compared two nomenclatures: the Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA; Posner, Oquendo, Gould, Stanley, & Davies, 2007) and the Silverman nomenclature (Silverman, Berman, Sanddal, O’Carroll, & Joiner, 2007a and 2007b). Hypothetical vignettes were constructed to represent the different terms and definitions of each of the two nomenclatures; ten vignettes were randomly selected to be presented to participants. The 131 participants were mental health clinicians who were currently seeing clients for at least five hours per week. The hypotheses were that the C-CASA would exhibit better reliability and significantly better perceived clinical utility than the Silverman nomenclature. Perceived clinical utility was measured by a new 13-item questionnaire constructed for the purposes of this study. An exploratory factor analysis indicated that the perceived clinical utility questionnaire had a stable one-factor structure and an alpha of 0.95. The data supported both hypotheses. C-CASA’s reliability, as measured by kappa statistics, was 0.59, while the Silverman nomenclature’s was 0.45; this was more than a 0.1 difference in C-CASA’s favor. On the 7-point Likert-type scale of the perceived clinical utility questionnaire, the Silverman nomenclature received positive scores that were a bit above neutral (4.62), while the C-CASA received scores almost a point higher (5.43), which were almost halfway between “neutral” (4) and “strongly agree” (7). These differences were statistically significant and represented a large effect size (Cohen’s d was 0.83). These differences suggested that the C-CASA was preferable to the Silverman nomenclature, both in terms of reliability and perceived clinical utility. If replicated by other researchers, this result would mean that the C-CASA showed more promise than the Silverman nomenclature for constructing a common language for suicide-related thoughts and behaviors among practicing clinicians.","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Rankin, Thomas James"],"institution":"University of Akron","degree_name":"Doctor of Philosophy","degree_level":"doctoral","degree_discipline":"Counseling Psychology","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Levant, Ronald"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2013,"date_issued":"2013-05-10","date_published":"2013-05-10","updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:37:31Z","subjects":["Clinical Psychology","Counseling Psychology","Psychology","Psychological Tests","Psychotherapy","suicide","nomenclature","language","C-CASA","Silverman","vignette","clinical utility","reliability","clinicians","PCUQ","EFA","kappa","perceived clinical utility questionnaire","suicidology","suicide-related","common language"],"languages":["English"],"rights":["unrestricted","This thesis or dissertation is protected by copyright: all rights reserved. It may not be copied or redistributed beyond the terms of applicable copyright laws."],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=akron1365533457","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Levant, Ronald"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Rankin, Thomas James"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date","label":"Dc Date","values":["2013-05-10"]},{"key":"dc:publisher","label":"Institution","values":["University of Akron / OhioLINK"]},{"key":"dc:type","label":"Dc Type","values":["Electronic Thesis or Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Counseling Psychology"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["doctoral"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Doctor of Philosophy"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["University of Akron"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Clinical Psychology","Counseling Psychology","Psychology","Psychological Tests","Psychotherapy","suicide","nomenclature","language","C-CASA","Silverman","vignette","clinical utility","reliability","clinicians","PCUQ","EFA","kappa","perceived clinical utility questionnaire","suicidology","suicide-related","common language"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["English"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["unrestricted","This thesis or dissertation is protected by copyright: all rights reserved. It may not be copied or redistributed beyond the terms of applicable copyright laws."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=akron1365533457"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description","label":"Description","values":["This dissertation examined the reliability and perceived clinical utility of two current suicide-related nomenclatures. The language of suicidology has been confusing for the past half-century, thereby inhibiting effective study of the problem of suicide. This dissertation’s survey research compared two nomenclatures: the Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA; Posner, Oquendo, Gould, Stanley, & Davies, 2007) and the Silverman nomenclature (Silverman, Berman, Sanddal, O’Carroll, & Joiner, 2007a and 2007b). Hypothetical vignettes were constructed to represent the different terms and definitions of each of the two nomenclatures; ten vignettes were randomly selected to be presented to participants. The 131 participants were mental health clinicians who were currently seeing clients for at least five hours per week. The hypotheses were that the C-CASA would exhibit better reliability and significantly better perceived clinical utility than the Silverman nomenclature. Perceived clinical utility was measured by a new 13-item questionnaire constructed for the purposes of this study. An exploratory factor analysis indicated that the perceived clinical utility questionnaire had a stable one-factor structure and an alpha of 0.95. The data supported both hypotheses. C-CASA’s reliability, as measured by kappa statistics, was 0.59, while the Silverman nomenclature’s was 0.45; this was more than a 0.1 difference in C-CASA’s favor. On the 7-point Likert-type scale of the perceived clinical utility questionnaire, the Silverman nomenclature received positive scores that were a bit above neutral (4.62), while the C-CASA received scores almost a point higher (5.43), which were almost halfway between “neutral” (4) and “strongly agree” (7). These differences were statistically significant and represented a large effect size (Cohen’s d was 0.83). These differences suggested that the C-CASA was preferable to the Silverman nomenclature, both in terms of reliability and perceived clinical utility. If replicated by other researchers, this result would mean that the C-CASA showed more promise than the Silverman nomenclature for constructing a common language for suicide-related thoughts and behaviors among practicing clinicians."]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf","p.158","1.42 MB"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Comparing the Utility and Reliability of Two Current Suicide-Related Nomenclatures"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Levant, Ronald"],"dc:creator":["Rankin, Thomas James"],"dc:date":["2013-05-10"],"dc:description":["This dissertation examined the reliability and perceived clinical utility of two current suicide-related nomenclatures. The language of suicidology has been confusing for the past half-century, thereby inhibiting effective study of the problem of suicide. This dissertation’s survey research compared two nomenclatures: the Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA; Posner, Oquendo, Gould, Stanley, & Davies, 2007) and the Silverman nomenclature (Silverman, Berman, Sanddal, O’Carroll, & Joiner, 2007a and 2007b). Hypothetical vignettes were constructed to represent the different terms and definitions of each of the two nomenclatures; ten vignettes were randomly selected to be presented to participants. The 131 participants were mental health clinicians who were currently seeing clients for at least five hours per week. The hypotheses were that the C-CASA would exhibit better reliability and significantly better perceived clinical utility than the Silverman nomenclature. Perceived clinical utility was measured by a new 13-item questionnaire constructed for the purposes of this study. An exploratory factor analysis indicated that the perceived clinical utility questionnaire had a stable one-factor structure and an alpha of 0.95. The data supported both hypotheses. C-CASA’s reliability, as measured by kappa statistics, was 0.59, while the Silverman nomenclature’s was 0.45; this was more than a 0.1 difference in C-CASA’s favor. On the 7-point Likert-type scale of the perceived clinical utility questionnaire, the Silverman nomenclature received positive scores that were a bit above neutral (4.62), while the C-CASA received scores almost a point higher (5.43), which were almost halfway between “neutral” (4) and “strongly agree” (7). These differences were statistically significant and represented a large effect size (Cohen’s d was 0.83). These differences suggested that the C-CASA was preferable to the Silverman nomenclature, both in terms of reliability and perceived clinical utility. If replicated by other researchers, this result would mean that the C-CASA showed more promise than the Silverman nomenclature for constructing a common language for suicide-related thoughts and behaviors among practicing clinicians."],"dc:format":["application/pdf","p.158","1.42 MB"],"dc:identifier":["http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=akron1365533457"],"dc:language":["English"],"dc:publisher":["University of Akron / OhioLINK"],"dc:rights":["unrestricted","This thesis or dissertation is protected by copyright: all rights reserved. It may not be copied or redistributed beyond the terms of applicable copyright laws."],"dc:subject":["Clinical Psychology","Counseling Psychology","Psychology","Psychological Tests","Psychotherapy","suicide","nomenclature","language","C-CASA","Silverman","vignette","clinical utility","reliability","clinicians","PCUQ","EFA","kappa","perceived clinical utility questionnaire","suicidology","suicide-related","common language"],"dc:title":["Comparing the Utility and Reliability of Two Current Suicide-Related Nomenclatures"],"dc:type":["Electronic Thesis or Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Counseling Psychology"],"thesis:degree_level":["doctoral"],"thesis:degree_name":["Doctor of Philosophy"],"thesis:institution_name":["University of Akron"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T03:37:31Z"}