S.O.S on clinical psych

Hello everyone, I am quite confused on the list of clinical psych topics there are out there. I want to practise psychology in future and that would mean a clinical psych phd. Where do I find my area of interest?!

OR

Is there anyone out there kind enough to list some clinical "topic" which can really help me figure out what I really want?

Thats your job. Get involved with research at your school. Get some experience working with a clinical population. These things will let you know what u like and what you dont.

Hi Psychcs,
What made you interested in psychology in the first place?

Normally academic staff list their research interests on their university staff pages, which can be a good starting point for thinking what your research interests might be.

As you continue with your degree some things will appeal to you more than others. Also, you could start reading psych-related blogs, books and journal articles that seem interesting to you.

What helped me in narrowing down schools that had faculty with similar interests to mine (so I didn't have to scour countless faculty pages) was the Insider's Guide to Graduate Programs in Clinical and Counseling Psychology. It has lists in the back of the book breaking down the various focuses of clinical/counseling psych programs and which schools match with those. That could not only help you see the various areas and find one that interests you, but also show you which schools are doing work in that area.

What do you mean when you say that you want to practice psychology? If that means doing psychotherapy and psychological testing, then you may want to consider a PsyD (a university-based PsyD not a free standing professional school). First, a PhD program in clinical psychology is VERY VERY VERY difficult to get into. You have to have astronomical GRE scores (above 1200 at least), research experience and a close relationship with faculty (which is hard at a big state school where grad students teach most of the classes), and sometimes, publications (which is also hard to get as an undergrad). Many qualified applicants do not get in to clinical psychology PhD programs, especially if clinical practice outweighs research as a career goal. This is not because applicants are not qualified or deficient. There are so many interested students and so little spots in PhD programs. I chose a PsyD because 1150 is as good as I can do on the GREs, I want to be a clinician, and I have more clinical experience than research experience. University-based PsyD programs are competitive too, but they don't throw an application away based on a GRE score. The classes in a PsyD are also geared towards clinical practice like classes on testing and psychotherapy with less credit hours in research and statistics than a PhD. You still have to take research and stats, but they are not the bulk of your credit hours like in PhD programs. PhD programs for the most part are designed to train researchers in psychology. Many offer practice based classes, but research is the focus. PsyD programs are geared towards practice of psychology and training clinicians. You need to think about your career goals. Do you want to conduct research in a big university or research company and teach in academia? If so, then a PhD is a good fit. If you want to practice psychology, then a university-based PsyD (e.g. Rutgers, Baylor, IUP, Marshall U, Indiana State, Wright State, Xavier U, Pepperdine etc) is a better fit. If all you want to do is therapy, a masters in clinical psych, counseling psych, clinical social work, mental health counseling or marriage and family therapy will help you reach this goal. Explore your career goals and then find a grad program that will fit your needs. Hope this helps.

PsyDLICSW said:

What do you mean when you say that you want to practice psychology? If that means doing psychotherapy and psychological testing, then you may want to consider a PsyD (a university-based PsyD not a free standing professional school). First, a PhD program in clinical psychology is VERY VERY VERY difficult to get into. You have to have astronomical GRE scores (above 1200 at least), research experience and a close relationship with faculty (which is hard at a big state school where grad students teach most of the classes), and sometimes, publications (which is also hard to get as an undergrad). Many qualified applicants do not get in to clinical psychology PhD programs, especially if clinical practice outweighs research as a career goal. This is not because applicants are not qualified or deficient. There are so many interested students and so little spots in PhD programs. I chose a PsyD because 1150 is as good as I can do on the GREs, I want to be a clinician, and I have more clinical experience than research experience. University-based PsyD programs are competitive too, but they don't throw an application away based on a GRE score. The classes in a PsyD are also geared towards clinical practice like classes on testing and psychotherapy with less credit hours in research and statistics than a PhD. You still have to take research and stats, but they are not the bulk of your credit hours like in PhD programs. PhD programs for the most part are designed to train researchers in psychology. Many offer practice based classes, but research is the focus. PsyD programs are geared towards practice of psychology and training clinicians. You need to think about your career goals. Do you want to conduct research in a big university or research company and teach in academia? If so, then a PhD is a good fit. If you want to practice psychology, then a university-based PsyD (e.g. Rutgers, Baylor, IUP, Marshall U, Indiana State, Wright State, Xavier U, Pepperdine etc) is a better fit. If all you want to do is therapy, a masters in clinical psych, counseling psych, clinical social work, mental health counseling or marriage and family therapy will help you reach this goal. Explore your career goals and then find a grad program that will fit your needs. Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

I would actually disagree with your characterization of Ph.D. programs. While we are required to take a decent number of stats and methodology courses, the majority of our credits are nonetheless in clinically-oriented classes (psychopathology, psychotherapy, etc.). Additionally, in most Ph.D. programs, time is generally split evenly between research and clinical work, with some students focusing more on the former and some on the latter. Also, remember that even with Ph.D. holders, the majority will focus predominantly on clinical work in their careers.

Clinical-scientist programs, on the other hand, may be a closer fit in some respects to the statements you've made.

Hey everyone, thank you for your input.

I guess AcronymAllergy is right on what a phd program really is.
Afterall, this thread was started by me as I am still searching for my area of interest!

I think that 1200 GRE is pretty standard or average kind of score to gain entry for interview or at least get pass the first filter by the school.


After getting involve in the research I am in now, I suppose I am much clearer in knowing what I want and I shall just hunt for my POIs!

AcronymAllergy said:

I would actually disagree with your characterization of Ph.D. programs. While we are required to take a decent number of stats and methodology courses, the majority of our credits are nonetheless in clinically-oriented classes (psychopathology, psychotherapy, etc.). Additionally, in most Ph.D. programs, time is generally split evenly between research and clinical work, with some students focusing more on the former and some on the latter. Also, remember that even with Ph.D. holders, the majority will focus predominantly on clinical work in their careers.

Clinical-scientist programs, on the other hand, may be a closer fit in some respects to the statements you've made.

Click to expand...

Actually, you are right about more balanced PhD programs. I was referring more to scientist practitioner/Boulder Model programs. I did no realize that there were some out there. Many of the state schools in my area are hard core research 1 institutions. Thanks for the comment.

PsyDLICSW said:

Actually, you are right about more balanced PhD programs. I was referring more to scientist practitioner/Boulder Model programs. I did no realize that there were some out there. Many of the state schools in my area are hard core research 1 institutions. Thanks for the comment.

Click to expand...

Boulder-model/scientist-practitioner programs represent a wide array of foci. After all, the definition of the scientist-practitioner model is that you learn science so you can become a better practitioner. This is arguably more open to interpretation than the Vail-model. So, some programs are heavy on research, some are balanced, and some are heavy on the clinical side. I would caution against using the category of Boulder-model as a synonym for research-heavy, as most graduates end up practicing instead of going into academia.

AcronymAllergy said:

I would actually disagree with your characterization of Ph.D. programs. While we are required to take a decent number of stats and methodology courses, the majority of our credits are nonetheless in clinically-oriented classes (psychopathology, psychotherapy, etc.). Additionally, in most Ph.D. programs, time is generally split evenly between research and clinical work, with some students focusing more on the former and some on the latter. Also, remember that even with Ph.D. holders, the majority will focus predominantly on clinical work in their careers. Clinical-scientist programs, on the other hand, may be a closer fit in some respects to the statements you've made.

Click to expand...

Yes. Most of my classmates during my Ph.D. training focused more on clinical work and did so exclusively after graduating, as did the majority of Ph.D. students I met from other programs during my doctoral studies. I often see people offering the general advice that Ph.D. programs are for those who want to go into research or academia and suggesting those with primarily clinical interests look elsewhere, but, practically, that's many times not the way it works out (whether one who doesn't want to go into academia or do testing is better off becoming an LCSW is another question, and I think the answer to that is also not so cut-and-dried as tends to be presented). At least not in my metro area, where the vast majority of doctoral programs in clinical are Ph.D.s, not Psy.D.s.

KillerDiller said:

Boulder-model/scientist-practitioner programs represent a wide array of foci. After all, the definition of the scientist-practitioner model is that you learn science so you can become a better practitioner. This is arguably more open to interpretation than the Vail-model. So, some programs are heavy on research, some are balanced, and some are heavy on the clinical side. I would caution against using the category of Boulder-model as a synonym for research-heavy, as most graduates end up practicing instead of going into academia.

Click to expand...

Exactly. I was also referring to scientist-practitioner model schools, the majority of which seem to focus equally on clinical work and research, and the majority of whose graduates go on to lead predominantly clinically-oriented professional lives. There are no doubt Boulder-model programs that primarily emphasize, and even those programs that generally don't would likely be willing to let you carve out a research-heavy niche; however, I would say by and large, if you plan to focus almost exclusively on research once you graduate, then your best bet would be to find a clinical-scientist program or a Boulder program known to produce research-oriented graduates.