Invoking history to teach about the scientist-practitioner gap.

Abstract

The scientist-practitioner gap refers to the division between psychologists who believe that clinical practice should be heavily informed by empirical studies and those who believe clinical judgment and intuition should be paramount. Although the gap widened in the late 1980s and early 1990s, owing to the recovered memory controversy, the intradisciplinary schism between scientists and practitioners significantly predates this particular debate. Without an appreciation of the historical context of the term's emergence, however, students may come to regard the scientist-practitioner gap as a discrete and recent phenomenon. In this paper, the historical and philosophical roots of the gap are described, and it is argued that an appreciation of the historical circumstances from which the term emerged can enable students to better appreciate the past, present, and future of the discipline.

Perspectives of internship training directors on the use of progress monitoring measures.

“…Unfortunately, there is a well-documented gap between research findings and practice in psychology (e.g., Cautin, 2011; Kazdin, 2008). Despite evidence supporting the benefits of continual client monitoring, surveys suggest that the majority of clinicians in North America have not incorporated this practice into their clinical work on a routine basis (Hatfield & Ogles, 2004; Ionita & Fitzpatrick, 2014; Phelps, Eisman, & Kohout, 1998).…”

Superando la ‘duda crónica’: Historia de la Psicología y formación de psicólogos argentinos en el contexto de la psicología latinoamericana

“…La incorporación de estas temáticas en cursos introductorios y a la luz de la historia de la disciplina fomentan la revisión y crítica de asertos sobre la faz profesional de la disciplina (Vande Kemp, 2002), en este caso axiomas psicoclínicos que los psicólogos argentinos han concebido como dogmas durante décadas y que pueden concebirse como problemas teóricos, filosóficos y metodológicos de la denominada 'scientist-practitioner gap' (Cautin, 2011).…”

The identification of students with emotional disturbance: Moving the field toward responsible assessment practices

“…In particular, school psychologists possess the knowledge and skills necessary to engage in data‐based decision‐making for the purposes of identifying students’ strengths and weaknesses as well as developing and delivering effective services at the individual, group, and systems levels (National Association of School Psychologists, , ). These issues aside, concerns have been noted within the field of school psychology and related disciplines regarding the apparent disparity between documented evidence‐based (i.e., “best”) practices and the daily practices reported by school psychologists (e.g., Cautin, ; Lilienfeld et al., ). The assessment and identification of students under the ED category have certainly not been immune to such questions or concerns.…”