Scientist versus Practitioner–An abridged meta-analysis of the changing role of psychologists

Chang, Kirk; Lee, I.-Ling; Hargreaves, Terri Ann

doi:10.1080/09515070802479859

Cited by 14 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This definition captures the inherent purpose of the S-P model and highlights the positive results of a model that works efficiently. Since its inception, however, a debate has ensued regarding the degree to which the model actually results in integrated training and whether this final product can be deemed effective or adequate (Chang et al, 2008). Skeptics argue that one's interest in, and talents for, research may be incompatible with their interest and talent for clinical work (Frank, 1983).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a result, the goal was to establish an educational model that would integrate both science and practice within student's training experience (McFall, 2006;Raimy, 1950). The proposed outcome was to create an environment where equal emphasis was given to both the research (science) and applied (practice) aspects of clinical psychology, in order to develop a more well rounded clinical psychologist (Chang, Lee, & Hargreaves, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Clinical PhD Graduate Student Views of Their Scientist‐Practitioner Training

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesThe goal of the scientist‐practitioner (S‐P) training model is to produce clinical psychologists equipped to integrate and utilize both science and practice in the clinical and research domains. However, much has been written regarding the possible shortcomings of S‐P training and whether clinical psychology graduate students are actually gaining the knowledge and skills to integrate science and practice during graduate training and beyond (Chang, Lee, & Hargreaves, 2008; Gelso, 2006; Merlo, Collins, & Bernstein, 2008; Phillips, 1993).MethodsAs such, the present study assessed ratings of satisfaction, perception of ability, and use of the S‐P training model within 653 clinical psychology graduate students enrolled in programs that are members of the Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology.ResultsFindings suggest that students are consistently trained in the integration of science and practice and have confidence in their abilities to apply the S‐P integration to research and clinical work. However, despite understanding the ways in which science can influence practice, over one third of students reported that they rarely use science‐based decisions when informing clients of the clinical services they will be providing.ConclusionsThe implications of these results support the need for a more detailed evaluation of clinical psychology graduate students as well as the use of research‐informed practice and the process of providing clients with information they need to make informed choices about treatment.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical PhD Graduate Student Views of Their Scientist‐Practitioner Training

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although training at many institutions implicitly or explicitly accepts the tenets of the SP model, the ideals of Boulder did not exactly realise as envisaged (Chang et al, 2008). A number of papers argue for a stronger emphasis on the SP model, and recently in a series of journal special issues, the matter was seriously interrogated for clinical and counselling training (Mellott, 2007;Overholser, 2007;Vespia, Sauer, & Lyddon, 2006).…”

Section: The Sp Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These pressures will force us to reconsider how we present practitioner training, but the assumption for many years was that we mostly comply with the SP model of training professionals. Many training institutions internationally have faced this issue and the debate about the SP model is still strong (Chang, Lee, & Hargreaves, 2008;Chwalisz, 2003;Clegg, 2007;Floersch, 2004;Gelso, 2006;Horn et al, 2007;Jones & Mehr, 2007;Lilienfeld, Ritschel, Lynn, Brown, et al, 2013;Lowman, 2012;Maddux & Riso, 2007;Petocz, 2011;Rice, 1997;Sauer, 2006;Stoltenberg & Pace, 2007;Stoltenberg et al, 2000;Tanner & Danielson, 2007). …”

Section: Training Demandsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A realist approach to science and practice in psychology

Maree

2014

South African Journal of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The possibility of uniting science and practice in psychology is considered. The main aim is to explore the ability of a realist approach to address the various dichotomies prevalent in psychology. The multileveled demands of the society, government, and tertiary training are briefly discussed. The multitude of mental health needs in South African society is addressed by government with a number of policies and legislative processes. In addition, training of psychologists is under pressure because of the changing demands within higher education institutions. The pressure to function as research institutions necessitates a revisioning of the scientist-practitioner model. This model perpetuates bipolarity because of a scientistic understanding of what it means to be scientific. This article describes a realist model of science that avoids some of the more serious dichotomies so prevalent in South African psychology departments, namely, the quantitative-qualitative divide, the positivist-constructionist split, and possibly also the scientist-practitioner model. A realist image of science might achieve this integration because of the simple fact that both science and practice involve critical enquiry. Two examples of a realist psychology from neuropsychology are discussed. Keywords Constructionist, critical enquiry, quantitative-qualitative, realism, scientist-practitioner modelThis article discusses the implications for relooking the scientist-practitioner (SP) model. First, the multileveled demands of society, government, and training are briefly discussed. It is shown that South African society is drenched in a multitude of mental health needs, which the government wants to address by a number of policies and legislative processes. Training of psychologists is under pressure because of the changing higher education landscape. The pressure to function as research institutions moves the reappraisal of the SP model to the top of the agenda. The bipolarity

show abstract

“…Despite the intention of the Boulder Conference more than 65 years ago (Raimy, 1950) and the American Psychological Association (APA) guidelines mandating that all accredited training programs in psychology emphasize the integration of science and practice when training would-be psychologists (American Psychological Association, 2013), the day-to-day integration of science and practice remains elusive for most psychologists (Frank, 1984). Although the majority of psychologists practicing today are trained in the scientist-practitioner model, in which they have been specifically trained to both utilize and produce scientific research (Chang, Lee, & Hargreaves, 2008), most clinical psychologists work in private fee-for-service settings with little, if any, opportunity to engage in psychological research. The bulk of psychological research is produced by a small minority of psychologists working primarily in academic settings removed from clinical practice (Norcross & Karpiak, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The integrated scientist-practitioner: A new model for combining research and clinical practice in fee-for-service settings.

LeJeune¹,

Luoma²

2015

Professional Psychology: Research and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

American Psychological Association (APA) guidelines require that all psychologists be trained to integrate science and practice in their work. The majority of psychologists have been trained in a scientist-practitioner model to both utilize and produce scientific research. However, the day-to-day integration of research and clinical practice is rare for most psychologists. Changes in the health care system, increased emphasis on evidence-based practices, diminished funding for psychosocial research, and decreases in tenure track faculty positions mean that new models are needed for both clinical practice and research productivity. Although this rapidly changing professional landscape poses significant challenges, these changes may also create new opportunities to fulfill the ideal of an integrated psychological science. Some fee-for-service settings could be restructured based on social business models to promote research productivity among clinicians, improve clinical outcomes, and provide a new home for psychological researchers who would like their work to be more connected to the applied aspects of their science. In this paper, we outline some of the reasons why, to this point, psychosocial research has never occurred in a robust fashion in private fee-for-service settings. We then outline some potential ways of overcoming barriers to conducting research outside of academia, including how to carve out and fund dedicated research time within a clinical practice setting. Finally, we provide a case example of a new business model to support this research, called the clinical-research social business model, in which profits from the income-generating activities of the business serve as a stable, internal funding source for in-house research endeavors.

show abstract

Scientist versus Practitioner–An abridged meta-analysis of the changing role of psychologists

Cited by 14 publications

References 25 publications

Clinical PhD Graduate Student Views of Their Scientist‐Practitioner Training

Clinical PhD Graduate Student Views of Their Scientist‐Practitioner Training

A realist approach to science and practice in psychology

The integrated scientist-practitioner: A new model for combining research and clinical practice in fee-for-service settings.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About