Predictors of doctoral student success in professional psychology: characteristics of students, programs, and universities

Abstract

In the face of the rising number of doctoral recipients in professional psychology, many have voiced concerns about the quality of nontraditional training programs. Past research suggests that, on a variety of outcomes, graduates from clinical PhD programs outperform graduates from clinical PsyD and, to a lesser extent, counseling PhD programs. We examine an aggregate archival dataset to determine whether student or university characteristics account for the differences in outcomes among programs. The data show meaningful differences in the outcomes of clinical PhD, PsyD, and counseling PhD programs. Furthermore, graduates from research-intensive universities perform better on the psychology licensure exam and are more likely to become American Board of Professional Psychology diplomates. The available data support the notion that the ability to conduct research is an essential component of graduate education. In this light, PsyD programs represent a unique opportunity to train students in the types of evaluation and outcomes assessments used by practicing psychologists. We discuss implications for graduate-level training in professional psychology.

Specialization in Psychology and Health Care Reform

“…Board certified psychologists also benefit from more efficient credentialing processes among state licensing boards, insurance companies, professional practice networks, and medical staff (Dattilio, Sadoff, & Gutheil, 2003). Board certification also eases interjurisdictional license and practice mobility (Cox, 2010;Graham & Kim, 2011;Hall & Lunt, 2005;Nezu et al, 2009) and the attainment of board certification increasingly will count toward continuing professional development requirements across jurisdictions (Webb & Horn, in press). Consistent with the fact that ABPP is designed to support a competency-based approach to specialization and board certification (Kaslow & Ingram, 2009), board certification processes create specific standards that articulate competence (Belar, 2008;Boake, 2008;Cox, Hess, Hibbard, Layman, & Stewart, 2010;Dowd, Clen, & Arnold, 2010;Flanagan & Miller, 2010;France et al, 2008;Jackson, Alberts, & Roberts, 2010;Molinari, 2011;Packer, 2008;Tharinger, Pryzwansky, & Miller, 2008;Thomas, 2010), inform the development of uniform training models for competence (Boake, 2008;Packer, 2008), and certify intra-professional regulation within specialized areas.…”

Doctoral training in clinical psychology across 23 years: Continuity and change

“…The amount of debt tends to be higher for PsyD graduates, due in large part to more limited funding during graduate training (Doran, Kraha, Marks, Ameen, & El‐Ghoroury, ; Michalski et al., 2011). PsyD students also tend to encounter more struggles securing an APA‐accredited internship, and earn lower average scores on the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (Schaffer et al., ; Graham & Kim, ; Templer et al., ; Templer & Tangen, ).…”

“…PsyD students also tend to encounter more struggles securing an APA-accredited internship, and earn lower average scores on the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (Schaffer et al, 2012;Graham & Kim, 2011;Templer & Tangen, 2013).…”

Pre-Entry Doctoral Admission Variables and Retention at a Hispanic Serving Institution

“…It is a fact that doctoral studies require a substantial commitment from the student (at least five to seven years' time) and some research shows that some students may be unaware of the demands that a doctoral program calls for (Golde & Dore, 2001). In the area of psychology, research, internships, and licensure examinations are each a part of the completion process and can prove daunting for students that are not prepared for the rigors of these milestones in their programs (Graham & Kim, 2011). Past research also shows that success in a doctoral program depends upon various factors that may be inter-related, such as academic preparation, age, work experience, type of program, previous research experience, type of institution, faculty-student relationships, and mentoring (Spaulding & Rockinson-Szapkiw, 2012;Vilkinas, 2007;Wao & Onwuegbuzie, 2011;Wasburn-Moses, 2008).…”