A developmental lag in the evolution of Doctor of Psychology programs.

Abstract

In 1973, the American Psychological Association (APA) sponsored the Conference on Levels and Patterns of Training. Conference members concluded that the education and training for the practice of psychology is different than for research and recommended that when emphasis is on preparing students for providing clinical services, the Doctor of Psychology (PsyD) degree should be awarded. Faculty information for APA-accredited PsyD programs was reviewed, as well as recruitment advertisements for PsyD faculty members. Overall, 21.0% of the faculties possess PsyD degrees, 76.2% possess PhD degrees, and 2.8% possess another degree. Thus, 40 years after recognition of the practice-oriented PsyD degree, academic faculties for PsyD programs are dominated by members with the PhD degree. Additionally, job ads for PsyD faculty positions are focused on research-oriented criteria; more practiceoriented criteria are mentioned rarely. We argue that in a mature profession, members assume responsibility for educating the students who will inherit positions within that profession. The data indicate that PsyD programs did not evolve in this manner. Instead, a developmental lag occurred and vestigial research-oriented program traits continued to influence the hiring criteria for PsyD program faculty. This may have deleterious implications, including potentially undermining PsyD students’ nascent professional identity, stifling an academic role as a vocational opportunity for PsyD graduates, and blurring distinctions between the degrees. Recommendations for undoing the lag are provided.