https://app.impactmarkets.io/profile/cld7hvv6o0002opfcerwc7pki
Inga
Karma: 1,035
Thank you, Akash, for sharing these papers. They are fascinating! Here is another paper that I sometime cite when referring to the “retention”-problem. It is a systematic analysis of infield data, estimating that 90% of users trying unguided mental health apps drop out after 7 days (Baumel & Edan, 2019).
Here you can find the list of initiatives that aim to offer psychological support to EAs: Feel free to add more initiatives if you know of any other, so we can better collaborate.
First: I like the framework and the fact that you help to make impact vesting a viable option for the EA space. It indeed might open more opportunities for entering a multitude of markets and funding. Having a streamlined standard EA-aligned framework for this in the Global Health and Wellbeing Space could make the investment process more attractive (smooth), more efficient (options clearer and better comparable), and lead to better decisions (if the background analysis is high-quality).
Some points that jumped to my head for this specific case:
Might it be useful to add something like “neglectedness” of funding”? E.g. in the Mindease Case, I believe it was moderately likely (depending on the quality of the presented scaling strategy) that another investor would have jumped in to take the lead. There might be value in identifying and helping (1) ventures that have a promising impact prospect but low funding chances or (2) ventures that look like they might not have a promising impact prospect but since you have some rare specialists in the corresponding field, you know it is better than other options in the field. E.g. if Mindease had a really promising approach (evaluated by the specialists) to solve the low retention of users or the lack of sustainable effects of mental health interventions.
The evaluation of neglectedness (of the solution/problem) seemed partly confusing to me. It is correct that lots of people suffering from mental health issues do not receive treatment. This is also true in HIC where digital solutions are widely available. The real neglected problem seems to be the distribution of these interventions and this has been hard for all companies out there offering services like that and is only possible if you adapt your service to the specifics of the different cultures and countries and then also tailor the distribution strategy. This means, that currently Mindease just does something in HIC that other apps such as Sanvello are offering already (maybe no additional value for people that in this calculation is added to the DAILYs) and does not have product or market strategy for LMIC—where it would be neglected. Convincing providers like Sanvello to offer their services in LMIC, and then just specializing in tailoring the product for people in a specific large country (e.g. Nigeria) as well as nailing distribution there, might be much more impactful. E.g. the UK-based charity Overcome does something along the lines of this.
Having said this, maybe the impact evaluation should be done by an expert in the field: in this case an individual that knows the current state of research, practice, and industry and has a background in the field (here: mental health interventions).
Would it be useful also to add a “people’s time resources” needed to the equation? E.g. it is a difference if 10 or 30 EA spend their time working on this solution because they could also help to make an impact elsewhere.
High-Impact Psychology (HIPsy): Piloting a Global Network
That sounds great, Geoffrey! I will reach out to you.
Strong upvote! Thank you for making these important distinctions.
Here is an add-on from effectiveness research.
Some studies show that approaches integrating different types of techniques might be more effective than approaches using just one type, such as just CBT or just inner parts work. This makes sense if it is true that different individuals at different times in different situations benefit most from different methods.
These are exemplary meta-analyses:
* Integrative approaches even can help with very difficult problems and cases: such as Dialectical Behavioral Therapy and schema therapy can help people with Borderline Personality tendencies (Cristiea et. al, 2017); Mindfulness-based approaches can help with treatment-resistant depression (Chen, et. al, 2021).
* Integrating different evidence-based methods might work a little better in coaching for improving wellbeing (Wang et. al, 2021).
* Transdiagnostic (mostly also integrative) treatment approaches such as ACT or mindfulness-based treatments might work a little better for reducing depression than disorder-specific CBT (Newby, 2015)
Personal note: What might limit the effectiveness of IFS is the lack of evidence-based structure offered for separating the parts in a meaningful and helpful way. Both the approaches explained in this article do this well, drawing from what we already know from science about how the human mind works.
Thanks for writing and sharing this!
This is great content! Thank you for writing and sharing it. I added the tag “High Impact Psychology” because this is an example of how psychology can help to increase EA impact.
We will likely start with people who already have an EA-aligned job or donate effectively.
Yes!
Thanks for offering this!
Done.
Grow your Mental Resilience to Grow your Impact HERE—Introducing Effective Peer Support
There are different formats: just 1:1, just group, and a combination.
“Carefully chosen peers”: The peers are matched at the beginning and stay within the same group. People can change their group, if they are not entirely comfortable in their current one.
Goal granularity: We have categories of topics (e.g., self-esteem, perfectionism, productivity) but also ask for specific goals people have, i.e., what they would ideally achieve by attending. The type of support they prefer to get from peers will be taken into account as well (e.g. understanding, problem-solving, belonging).
Thank you, Peter, that is helpful!
Let us know how psychology can help increase your impact
Thank you for this useful content! It made me decide to listen to content instead of reading it and to increase the speed of the reading even more.
We are looking for an EA-aligned generalist who wants to help with our mission.
Our emerging organization aims to improve mental resilience and productivity in the EA community at scale. We plan to do so by developing an integrative stepped-care system that, among others, includes peers to train psychological skills together. We are funded by the Future Fund Regranting Program. You can find out more about our current main project “Effective Peer Support” here and here. The name of the organization will be chosen soon.
Ideally, the potential co-director has many years of relevant experience in operations, entrepreneurship, product, project, and people management. We can offer a potentially high-impact opportunity, a great team, and plenty of scope for shaping the future of the organization. Also: a team trip to Cyprus in December
The job opening is for someone with 50% FTE. Duration: 6 months for now (duration of funding), ideally starting in Dec, latest in Jan this year. The currently available budget for the salary: 2.200-3.500 USD / month for 20h/week.
We ask for applications until 9.11. (Wed). You can apply here.
Feel free to share this if you know someone who might be a fit.
Thank you, Jessy.
Thanks for sharing. Really insightful, especially the comparison of effect sizes. What would be great to follow up on some time:
(1) comparison of all relevant different substances with their effect sizes, medication but also supplements, e.g. I missed L-Dopa, Amphetamine, L-Carnitine, healthy diet, etc., e.g. Methylphenidate seems to help healthy adults https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0924977X20302145
(2) display of which substances do NOT work
(3) differentiation in terms of not only effect size but of how many people are likely to experience an effect by the substance.
(4) differentiation in terms of what helps whom better. E.g.
Lisdexamfetamine seems to work a little better than Methylphenidad and Modafinil for ADHD people: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1060028018795703
Exercise also seems to help more for people with ADHD:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022395619306168
(5) Cognitive “enhancement” can also happen by not eating certain things e.g. diverse toxins, sugar-fat, etc. Maybe that can be a good add-on as well.
Thanks again for sharing.