Doctor of Psychology degree: From hibernation to reality.

Abstract

Since the beginning of the American Psychological Association (APA), there have been three explicit models of psychologists: scientist, scientist-professional, and professional. In the late 1940s there was a need for a model of clinical training that the scientist-professional, or Boulder Model, fulfilled. Over the years the emphasis on training in the science of psychology seemed to increase at the expense oftraining in the applied aspects of psychology. The need was increasingly voiced for a service-oriented training program with a clear professional identity. These pressures culminated in the most recent training conference convened by APA at Vail, Colorado, in 1973. The Vail conferees asserted that the development of psychological science had sufficiently matured to justify creation of explicit professional programs. The Doctor of Psychology model and rationale are explicated and essential ingredients of currently operating PsyD programs are covered. Future developments in professional programs, credentialing and designation, and the critical interface with societal needs are explored.

If there really were a specialty of psychotherapy: Standards for postdoctoral training in psychotherapy.

“…Holt (1965) saw this as precious for psychotherapists, and McConnell (1984) regards this sense of identity and recognition as fuelling the trend toward doctor of psychology programs. For the postdoctorally trained psychotherapist, the implications are friendly.…”

Doctor of Professional Counseling

“…After World War II, several universities and the Veterans Administration encouraged the development of clinical training program standards (Donn, Routh, & Lunt, 2000; McConnell, 1984). The American Psychological Association (APA, 1947) formed a committee to study clinical training needs resulting in the development of the scientist–practitioner model which was adopted in 1949 in Boulder, Colorado.…”

Training Models in Counseling Psychology

“…McConnell (1984) noted that professional training programs were not intended to replace scientist-professional training; rather, "The Vail Conference said that psychologists should be trained as thoroughly as possible for that they are to do-whether this be research or practice-and not what others wish they would do" (p. 366). Nevertheless, there are circumstances and purposes for which the practitioner-scholar model should be considered for training in counseling psychology.…”