Considerable discussion has occurred through the years regarding models of training. With the recent accreditation of counseling psychology programs espousing the practitioner-scholar model, the importance of reexamining the merits of this as well as the traditional scientist-practitioner is now very important for the future of the field. This article consists of two positions: One pro practitioner-scholar and the other pro scientist-practitioner and con practitioner-scholar. The first position (first part of the article) by Biever, Patterson, and Welch argues for inclusion of the practitioner-scholar model as an alternative for training in counseling psychology. The second position (in the second part of the article) by Stoltenberg, Pace, and Kashubeck reviews concerns with two competing models. These authors conclude that the scientist-practitioner model is a better fit for training in counseling psychology. Recommendations for training within models are presented.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Psychological Association . (2000). Guidelines and principles for accreditation of programs in professional psychology. Washington, DC: Author.
2.
American Psychological Association, Division of Counseling and Guidance, Committee on Counselor Training . (1952). Recommended standards for training counseling psychologists at the doctoral level. American Psychologist, 7, 175-181.
3.
Barlow, D. H. (1994). Psychological interventions in the era of managed competition. Clinical Psychology, 1, 109-122.
4.
Barlow, D. H. , Hayes, S. C., & Nelson, R. O. (1984). The scientist-practitioner. New York: Pergamon.
5.
Belar, C. D. , & Perry, N. W. (1992). National conference on scientist-practitioner education and training for the professional practice of psychology. American Psychologist, 47, 71-75.
6.
Burns, D. D. , & Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1992). Therapeutic empathy and recovery from depression in cognitive-behavioral therapy: A structural equation model. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 441-449.
7.
Chambless, D. (1993). Task force on promotion and dissemination of psychological procedures. Unpublished manuscript, Division 12, American Psychological Association.
8.
Chambless, D. L. , Baker, M. J., Baucom, D. H., Beutler, L. E., Calhoun, K. S., Crits-Christoph, P., Daiuto, A., DeRubeis, R., Detweiler, J., Haaga, A. F., Johnson, S. B., McCurry, S., Mueser, K. T., Pope, K. S., Sanderson, W. C., Shoham, V., Stickle, T., Williams, D. A., & Woody, S. R. (1998). Update on empirically validated treatments, II. The Clinical Psychologist, 51, 3-16.
9.
Christensen, A. , & Jacobson, N. S. (1994). Who (or what) can do psychotherapy: The status and challenge of nonprofessional therapies. Psychological Science, 5, 8-14.
10.
Claiborn, C. D. (1987). Science and practice: Reconsidering the Pepinskys. Journal of Counseling and Development, 65, 286-288.
11.
Corliss, D. A. (1995). A comprehensive model of clinical decision making. Journal of the American Optometric Association, 66, 362-371.
12.
Cummings, N. (1996). Now we’re facing the consequences. The Scientist-Practitioner, 6, 9-13.
13.
Galassi, J. P. , & Brooks, L. (1992). Integrating scientist and practitioner training in counseling psychology: Practicum is the key. Counseling Psychology Quarterly, 5, 57-65.
14.
Gambrill, E. (1990). Critical thinking in clinical practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15.
Garb, H. N. (1998). Studying the clinician: Judgment research and psychological assessment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
16.
Guber, E. , & Lincoln, Y. S. (1996). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17.
Heppner, P. P. , & Anderson, W. P. (1985). On the perceived non-utility of research in counseling. Journal of Counseling and Development, 63, 545-547.
18.
Heppner, P. P. , Kivlighan, D. M. Jr., & Wampold, B. E. (1998). Research design in counseling (2nd ed). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
19.
Hibbs, E. D. , & Jensen, P. S. (Eds.). (1996). Psychosocial treatments for child and adolescent disorders: Empirically based strategies for clinical practice. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
20.
Hoshmand, L. T. , & Polkinghorne, D. E. (1992). Redefining the science-practice relationship and professional training. American Psychologist, 47, 55-66.
21.
Klaczynski, P. A. , & Narasimham, G. (1998). Development of scientific reasoning biases: Cognitive versus ego-protective explanations. Developmental Psychology, 34, 175-187.
22.
Korman, M. (1973). Levels and patterns of professional training in psychology: Conference proceedings, Vail, Colorado. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
23.
Kuhn, D. , Amsel, E., & O’Laughlin, M. (1988). The development of scientific thinking skills. San Diego: Academic Press.
24.
McConnell, S. C. , (1984). Doctor of psychology degree: From hibernation to reality. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 15, 362-370.
25.
Meara, N. M. , Schmidt, L. D., Carrington, C. H., Davis, K. L., Dixon, D. N., Fretz, B. R., Myers, R. A., Ridley, C. R., & Suinn, R. M. (1988). Training and accreditation in counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 16, 366-384.
26.
Nathan, P. E. , & Gorman, J. M. (Eds.). (1998). Treatments that work. New York: Oxford University Press.
27.
Nezu, C. M. , & Nezu, A. M. (1995). Clinical decision making in everyday practice: The science in the art. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 2, 5-25.
28.
Peterson, D. R. (1976). Need for the doctor of psychology degree in professional psychology. American Psychologist, 31, 791-798.
29.
Phillips, B. N. (1993). Challenging the stultifying bonds of tradition: Some philosophical, conceptual, and methodological issues in applying the scientist-practitioner model. School Counseling Quarterly, 8, 27-37.
30.
Popper, C. (1962). The open society and its enemies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
31.
Raimy, V. (Ed.). (1950). Training in clinical psychology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
32.
Rosen, G. M. , & Lohr, J. (1997, January-February). Can eye movements cure mental ailments?Newsletter of the National Council Against Health Fraud, 20. Retrieved from the World Wide Web on February 10, 1997. Available: http://www.ncafh.org.
33.
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
34.
Seidenstucker, G. , & Roth, W. L. (1998). Treatment decisions: Types, models and schools. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 14, 2-13.
35.
Stoltenberg, C. D. , Kashubeck, S., Pace, T. M., & Arbona, C. (1997, February). Counseling psychology and the scientist-practitioner model: An identity, not an option. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Council of Counseling Psychology Training Programs Conference, La Jolla, CA.
36.
Stoltenberg, C. D. , McNeill, B. W., & Delworth, U. (1998). IDM: The integrated developmental model of supervision. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
37.
Stricker, G. (1997). Are science and practice commensurable?American Psychologist, 52, 442-448.
38.
Thompson, A. S. , & Super, D. E. (Eds.). (1964). The professional preparation of counseling psychologists: Report of the 1964 Greystone conference. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University.
39.
Whitely, J. M. (1984). Counseling psychology: A historical perspective. The Counseling Psychologist, 12, 3-109.
40.
Wilson, G. T. (1995). Empirically validated treatments as a basis for clinical practice: Problems and prospects. In S. C. Hayes, V. M. Follette, R. M. Dawes, & K. E. Grady (Eds.), Scientific standards of psychological practice: Issues and recommendations (pp. 163-196). Reno, NV: Context.
