On disposing of "straw people": or An attempt to clarify statutory recognition and educational requirements for psychologists.

Abstract

Descriptive terms and concepts used in the statutory recognition of psychologists are being interpreted and used in various ways by different writers. This variable usage of terms introduces confusion and misinformation into the psychological literature. The authors are concerned about this lack of common definition and apparent unfamiliarity with the actual licensing procedures in different states. This article presents statutory interpretations that are common in many boards of psychologist examiners. The article reflects the experience of both authors as past chairs of their respective states' Board of Psychologist Examiners and their firsthand experience with licensure procedures. Both authors have served on committees of the American Association of State Psychology Boards and continue their active involvement in issues surrounding statutory recognition of psychologists.Editor's Note. This is a solicited article. American Psychologist Associate Editor Peter E. Nathan asked Jack Menne and Art Wiens to write an article that would respond to the recent plethora of AP articles criticizing licensure and questioning its ultimate worth to society. Some of what has been said about licensing is criticized here; some is supported. The aim of the article overall, though, is to provide a balanced statement on licensure written by persons who have continuously and actively been involved in the licensing process in their own states.

Present credentialing and prospects for the future.

“…In contrast, APA advocates the doctoral degree as the minimum entry level for independent practice in psychology. Specialty licensure is opposed, primarily on the grounds that it will fragment the profession and serve as a "vocational license" focusing on delivery of service rather than professional license (Wiens & Menne, 1981). Although APA's (1987) new model-licensing bill does grant exemption to school psychologists practicing in public school settings, this does little to satisfy the desire of many school psychologists to practice independently in private practice and other nontraditional settings.…”

“…At its best, licensing represents an attempt to protect the public health, morals, safety, and general welfare (Hogan, 1979). Advocates of licensure claim it offers greater assurance to consumers of psychological services of the competency of the service provider (Lowman, 1981; Wiens & Menne, 1981). This is accomplished through two functions: gatekeeping and monitoring.…”

“…Several researchers have demonstrated that discipline from licensing boards is virtually nonexistent (Gross, 1978; Hogan, 1979). Lastly, advocates of licensing frequently note that licensing communicates to the public that they are entitled to administrative redress through the licensing board in the event of negligence, incompetence, or unethical practices on the part of the professional (Wiens & Menne, 1981), thus forming another means of protection.…”

Licensed psychologists on the increase, 1974-1979.

“…For example, in the data on the 1978/79 doctorates, the applied specialties of clinical and counseling psychology account for 1,371, or 44.5%, of the graduates (including the 90 PsyDs and PhDs of professional institutes not covered by the NRC surveys would bring the proportion to 46.1%). By contrast, 62.8% of those taking the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) in 1979 and the spring of 1980 claimed these specialties as their major area of graduate study (Wiens & Menne, 1981), illustrating the greater likelihood that applied specialty graduates trained to deal with men- tal health problems and problems in living will seek licensure.…”