To apply or not to apply: That is the intern applicant's first question.

The historical context of the predoctoral internship system is contrasted with the current state of graduate training. The internship system emerged because psychology students often acquired insufficient clinical experience during graduate training in the mid-20th century. However, modern graduate training typically involves extensive supervised clinical contact prior to internship. Moreover, traditional internships exact significant financial, psychological, and personal costs from students. The authors conclude with a discussion of recent progress in the internship process, promising alternatives to traditional internship training (i.e., elective internship training, distributed clinical training, and the affiliated internship model), and implications for the profession. STEVEN R. THORP earned his PhD in clinical psychology from the University of Nevada, Reno, and was a postdoctoral research fellow at Duke University Medical Center. He is currently a research health science specialist in the Department of Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System. He is interested in posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) in older adults, treatment outcome research, dialectical behavior therapy, and couples research and therapy. WILLIAM T. O'DONOHUE received his PhD in clinical psychology from the State University of New York at Stony Brook. He is the Nicholas Cummings Professor of Organized Behavioral Health Care Delivery at the

Section: Problems With the Traditional Internship Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

The predoctoral internship: Is current training anachronistic?

Thorp¹,

O’Donohue²,

Gregg³

2005

“…Several studies Rodolfa, Haynes, & Kaplan, 1995: Solway et al, 1987Tedesco, 1979) attempted to assess the intern applicants' decision-making processes by considering variables important to students in selecting internship sites. These studies have all produced similar findings; specifically, these studies applicants.…”

Section: The Intern Selection Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

What we know about predoctoral internship training: A review.

Stedman

1997

Each year approximately 2,500-3,000 students, primarily from clinical and counseling psychology programs, seek internship programs. But what is known about this key educational event? This article attempts to answer that question by reviewing the internship-related literature of the last 22 years. Existing literature demonstrates that there is a substantial body of knowledge but also points to the need for updates of old data and for additional new investigations.The clinical psychology internship was inaugurated in 1949 at the American Psychological Association's (APA's) Boulder Conference (Raimy, 1950) when delegates recommended both a university experience and an internship sequence as essential in the training of clinical psychologists. In 1952, the Division of Counseling Psychology followed suit by recommending a predoctoral internship training sequence for its students. Later, in 1956, as quality control became an issue, the APA, through its Office of Accreditation, began accrediting clinical and counseling internships. In 1968, the Association of Psychology Internship Centers (now the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers [ APPIC]) was organized to respond to a growing array of internship issues that were beyond the scope of accreditation, and today APPIC stands as an essential organization concerned with all issues relevant to pre-and postdoctoral field training in clinical and counseling psychology.The internship has been and continues to be a required and essential ingredient in the training of clinical and counseling psychologists. But what is known about this key educational event? This article seeks to answer that question by reviewing internship-related literature generated over the past 22 years (1974 to 1996). A computer search of the PsycLIT database revealed over 269 entries during this period, including many

“…In a manner similar to the way you develop professional goals and priorities for the internship year, it is helpful for you to consider personal and practical variables that may affect you during the selection and completion of the internship. The existing literature and our own experiences with the internship process suggest that several variables are central (Rodolfa, Haynes, & Kaplan, 1995): internship location, finances, training versus service distinctions, concerns for academics, and dual-career couples. These variables, taken singly or in combination, may affect how you assign importance to particular internship sites.…”

Section: Establishing Personal and Practical Prioritiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personal and practical considerations in selecting a psychology internship.

Stewart¹,

Stewart²

1996

Although the internship literature contains many contributions regarding ways to approach the internship application, interview, and selection processes to satisfy professional goals, few contributions address personal and practical considerations of applicants. This article addresses personal and practical issues, such as benefits, financial costs of relocating and living, family responsibilities, partner relocation, and training and personal responsibilities outside of internship. For all issues discussed, concrete recommendations are provided for helping applicants evaluate internships according to their concerns. A paired-comparison ranking technique for comparing sites along multiple criteria is proposed. The need for updated professional developmental models that incorporate personal and practical variables is also discussed. Most existing guides for selecting an internship emphasize pursuing the best-fitting internship in terms of professional goals and objectives (e.g., medical-university settings, rotations offered, supervisory styles, didactics, and available career paths after internship), and they offer suggestions for evaluating sites along these dimensions (Belar&Orgel, 1980; Jacob, 1987;Megargee, 1992). Such guides focus less on the subjective, emotional, and practical aspects of the application and decisionmaking processes, such as benefits, relocation and living expenses, desired location, partner relocation, training and personal responsibilities outside of the internship, and interpersonal environment of the setting. To date, the way these variables ultimately can contribute to one's experience of the internship, one's emotional adjustment to it, and one's overall quality of life has not been examined. We believe a focus on personal and practical aspects of the internship is warranted because the length of time between beginning the internship and receiving psychology licensure appears to be increasing as a result of the additional practical experience required by state laws (Kaslow, McCarthy, Rogers, & Summerville, 1992; Stewart, 1994). One-year and sometimes 2-year postdoctoral and postinternship supervised work requirements have been written into many state licensure laws ALAN E. STEWART received his PhD in counseling psychology from the University of Georgia in 1994. He is currently a research postdoctoral fellow in clinical psychology at the University of Memphis. His interests include professional training and supervision, constructivism, Adlerian psychology, and mathematical psychology. ELIZABETH A. STEWART received her JD in 1986 and her MEd in 1992. She is completing requirements for her PhD in counseling psychology at the Univerity of Georgia. She is currently on her predoctoral internship at the Memphis Veterans Affairs Medical Center. Her interests include geriatrics, ethics, professional training, and psychological birth order.