APIC guidelines: Are they really that helpful?

Carifio, Michael S.; Buckner, Kathryn; Grace, William C.

doi:10.1037/0735-7028.18.4.407

Cited by 10 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Recommendations for addressing internship selection issues are presented.The predoctoral internship selection process has often been viewed as stressful by many individuals involved in this experience. In particular, over the years internship applicants have consistently reported that they encounter a great deal of stress in their efforts to find a training site (Allen & Dressel, 1992;Carifio, Buckner, & Grace, 1987;Norcross & Wogan, 1987). The Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC) established guidelines on internship offers and acceptances to more clearly delineate the protocol associated with finding an internship site and to reduce the stress on applicants and APPIC members (APPIC, 1994).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite numerous attempts over the years by APPIC to clarify the selection process, some (e.g., Johnson, 1986) have asserted that the process is fraught with ethical problems and is in need of significant revision. Carifio et al (1987) assessed the helpfulness of APPIC guidelines in mitigating the stress that many graduate students experience during the selection process. They found that "both major and minor violations of [APPIC] guidelines were frequent MADONNA G. CONSTANTINE received her PhD in counseling psychology from the University of Memphis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Association of psychology postdoctoral and internship centers' guidelines and the internship selection process: A survey of applicants and academic and internship training directors.

Constantine¹,

Keilin²

1996

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC) established guidelines for internship offers and acceptances, the internship selection process has been viewed as stressful by many of its participants. The present study explored participants' experiences with the selection process to understand how certain behaviors may contribute to selection difficulties. Surveys were mailed to internship applicants, academic training directors, and internship training directors who participated in the 1994-1995 selection process. Results revealed some significant differences among these respondents with respect to their perceptions of potential internship selection behaviors. In addition, 40% of the internship applicants perceived that violations of the APPIC guidelines had occurred during the selection process. Recommendations for addressing internship selection issues are presented.The predoctoral internship selection process has often been viewed as stressful by many individuals involved in this experience. In particular, over the years internship applicants have consistently reported that they encounter a great deal of stress in their efforts to find a training site (Allen & Dressel, 1992;Carifio, Buckner, & Grace, 1987;Norcross & Wogan, 1987). The Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC) established guidelines on internship offers and acceptances to more clearly delineate the protocol associated with finding an internship site and to reduce the stress on applicants and APPIC members (APPIC, 1994). Despite numerous attempts over the years by APPIC to clarify the selection process, some (e.g., Johnson, 1986) have asserted that the process is fraught with ethical problems and is in need of significant revision. Carifio et al. (1987) assessed the helpfulness of APPIC guidelines in mitigating the stress that many graduate students experience during the selection process. They found that "both major and minor violations of [APPIC] guidelines were frequent MADONNA G. CONSTANTINE received her PhD in counseling psychology from the University of Memphis. She is an assistant professor in the counseling psychology program at Temple University. Her current professional interests are in the areas of multicultural counseling, psychology training and supervision, women's health issues, and college student development. W. GREGORY KEILIN received his PhD in counseling psychology from Colorado State University. He is currently a staff psychologist and the immediate past psychology internship training director in the Counseling and Mental Health Center at the University of Texas at Austin. His professional interests are in the areas of psychology training and group psychotherapy.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Association of psychology postdoctoral and internship centers' guidelines and the internship selection process: A survey of applicants and academic and internship training directors.

Constantine¹,

Keilin²

1996

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Laughlin and Worlay (1991) defended APPIC resolution of guideline violations but were countered by Carifio and Grace (1992), who stated that Laughlin and Worlay ignored documented complaints and gave a false impression of the adequacy of APPIC's ability to deal effectively with guideline violations. Two studies (Carifio, Buckner, & Grace, 1987; Constantine & Keilin, 1996) surveyed applicants and found frequent guideline violations. Plante (1987) argued that guideline problems could be improved by establishing a national application deadline date, guidelines regarding the time frame within which interviews are conducted, and stronger caveats against internship sites requiring feedback from applicants in advance of uniform notification day.…”

Section: The Intern Selection Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

What we know about predoctoral internship training: A review.

Stedman¹

2006

Training and Education in Professional Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Each year approximately 2,500 -3,000 students, primarily from clinical and counseling psychology programs, seek internship programs. But what is known about this key educational event? This article attempts to answer that question by reviewing the internship-related literature of the last 22 years. Existing literature demonstrates that there is a substantial body of knowledge but also points to the need for updates of old data and for additional new investigations.

show abstract

“…In fact, over the years, it has been observed that some participants have engaged in an increasingly varied set of behaviors in an attempt to gain an advantage over other participants (Keilin, 1998). These behaviors, many of which violated either the spirit or the letter of the APPIC guidelines, resulted in significant levels of stress and anxiety for many participants (Allen & Dressel, 1992; Carafio, Buckner, & Grace, 1987).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Internship selection in 1999: Was the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers' Match a success?

Keilin¹

2000

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article evaluates the 1st year of operation of the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers' (APPIQ Matching Program, a computer-based selection process for predoctoral internships, from the perspective of internship applicants, internship training directors, and directors of clinical training. Statistics from the APPIC Match are presented along with the results from surveys that were sent to participants to assess their experiences with the new system. Results revealed a generally high level of satisfaction with the new selection process, along with considerable evidence that the APPIC Match resulted in less stress for participants and a dramatic reduction in violations of APPIC policies. Some limitations and procedural difficulties are reviewed and recommendations for future APPIC Matches are provided.The 1998-99 predoctoral internship selection process, sponsored by the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC), marked the first time that applicants and internship sites were matched entirely by computer. How satisfied were internship training directors, internship applicants, and directors of clinical training with this new process? How successful was the APPIC Match in meeting its goals? Did this new system really help to alleviate the problems of the previous selection system? What changes should be made in future years?The previous internship selection process, in use for more than 25 years, used a "uniform notification day" (UND) system in which offers from internship training directors (ITDs) were tendered to internship applicants over the telephone within a specific time frame (most recently, a 4-hr period on (he second Monday in February), with all acceptances and rejections of offers occurring during this period. This process was governed by a set of guidelines (see Hall, Cantrell, Boggs, & Hercey, 1997) that delineated the process of making, accepting, and rejecting offers and restricted the communication of ranking information among participants.This UND-based system has been described as problematic, subject to bottlenecks and gridlock, encouraging the violation of W. GREGORY KEILIN received his PhD in counseling psychology from

show abstract

APIC guidelines: Are they really that helpful?

Cited by 10 publications

References 9 publications

Association of psychology postdoctoral and internship centers' guidelines and the internship selection process: A survey of applicants and academic and internship training directors.

Association of psychology postdoctoral and internship centers' guidelines and the internship selection process: A survey of applicants and academic and internship training directors.

What we know about predoctoral internship training: A review.

Internship selection in 1999: Was the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers' Match a success?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About