How Ph.Ds view Psy.Ds in the real world

[PsyD123]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Reading through the recent threads, it's obvious that *some* Ph.D holders don't respect Psy.D holders. I knew this was the case before applying to my choice Psy.D program. I talked to my undergrad Ph.D professors about their candid opinions of the Psy.D, and all of them agreed that university-affiliated Psy.D programs are fine and many are great. In fact, I got a complete thumps up when I told them about the program I was applying to. I didn't get this negative vibe from them that I'm feeling from a select few Ph.D holders on this forum.

So, I want to know what it's like out there in the real world. Am I going to have to defend my degree for the rest of my life??!! Will I be looked down upon amongst my Ph.D colleagues?

 

[50960]

No you will not. People will only care if you can do the job. 😉

 

[psych101]

In many cases, no. psisci is probably right - since you will have the credentials for whatever position you are seeking, you will be qualified for it. Than people will care whether you do the job well. Unfortunately, some PhDs (though not all) will always look at the PsyD with an extra critical eye given the historical shortcomings of SOME programs and models of training. The problem is, I have seen several PsyD-trained individuals who simply couldn't do the job well due to poor training. This opinion is based on my interactions with PsyDs throughout my experience thus far. For example, I attended an APA pre-doc internship at which one intern was a PsyD candidate, the others of us were PhD candidates. What mattered as far as winning the internship slot was whether we interviewed well, whether faculty liked us. However, over the course of the year, the PsyD candidate's training was quietly criticized by faculty and by the other interns given that this person had come from a large professional school and shortcomings in training became increasingly evident. We really liked this person a lot - it was never meant to be a criticism of that person, just the training. However, that person has gone on to be quite successful in the "real world." I have also encountered a PsyD holder who was a clinical director of a local mental health center at which I worked. She was eventually let go -- she was supporting ridiculous, empirically contraindicated treatment strategies that were failing miserably. Those are just a couple of examples. So I guess I'm saying, as with any PsyD or PhD program, carefully educate yourself to make up for any shortcomings in your training so that you CAN be successful doing the real thing in the real world.

 

[50960]

Good points 101! Another observation on my part is that the only professionals who may look down on a Psy.D. are other psychologists. Medical people could care less as long as you can help the patient, and work with the providers.

 

[Annakei]

I had a conversation with the neuropsych director at one of the mental health hospitals we work with here. We dsicussed the PsyD v. PHD debate. Of course, he had obtained a PHD at GWU before they split into PHD and PSyD CLINICAL PSYCH programs, they were all one program before the split. His criticism stemed from the same as the above poster, stating when coming in contact with another PsyD he tends to scrutinize their credentials more than he would another PHD. That having to do with the larger classes thereby limiting the 1:1 supervision given by staff and sometimes poor clinical training because of the lack of supervision.

He advised that I stay away from programs that are heavily oriented towards 1 theory (ex: GWU/PSYD-psychoadynamic) as they don't take students from that program (mind you this is the largest mental health hospital in this area) for externships, internships, post docs, etc because of the lack of training in other areas. Not specifically because they are a PsyD program. Suprisingly, he likes the students from Argosy's PsyD program because he feels that most of them have good training whereas there are others he feels could have received better training, so he was 50/50 with that program but still he would take them over GWU anyday.

Overall Im glad that I had this conversation with him because it gave me an understanding of the debate that ensues between profesional holders of both degrees. My observation (and advice from my own clinical director (PHD) is just make sure that whatever I choose, PHD or PsyD that I make sure the program gives solid and balanced clinical training thereby opening more doors for me in the future. I say this because I was battling between GWU and Argosy.

Now this gives me more to think about and perhaps refining my choices..

 

[Annakei]

That's interesting. I think that many PsyD programs are hard to judge, in terms of general training, because of the variability. .

He also commented on them being harder to judge because when compared to a PHD program they have more variability.

I can't see attending a professional school unless you really couldn't get in anywhere else, and then I might consider a different career. A good university-based PsyD program can be a nice option.

Goodness youre scaring the children!


******

I still don't think that taking the route of a PsyD seals your doom in the professional field of psychology. It is all about the cards we have been given and using them to achieve your goal. If a student doesnt have the grades and/or research experience to pursue a PHD but has the clinical experience then the PsyD might be a better option. For some, professional schools offer the flexibility that a PHD program might now. Furthermore, not all professional schools are created the same. There are some excellent programs out there that offer great clinical training and supervision.

 

[Annakei]

Well, see that's the problem. The Vail model wasn't supposed to be that way. They should have equal entrace requirements. IF they don't have the grades, GRE scores, whatever, should they really be a doctor?

You may have a point but has it stopped the PHD student who entered at the bottom of his class from pursuing his/her chosen field? Think about it...there are a few students who are admitted each year who don't quite make the cut but may have had other aspects of their application stand out, gaining them admission to a PHD program. I dont believe that GRE scores correlate highly with doing well in school and this has been proven.

 

[PsyD123]

People don't trust the professional schools and many programs (say at the internship and post-doc levels) do not want professional school students at all. What it comes down to is practicality as I have stated in other threads. There is nothing ideologically wrong with the Vail model. It is how it has manifested. Demonstrate that you're competent and you'll be fine.

I wasn't referring to professional schools, as you know there are university-affiliated Psy.D programs. "Demonstrate that I'm competent"? That's very sad...I hope that your views are the minority, Paendrag.

 

[50960]

I agree. I have seen far too many psychologists who cannot perform competently get by via being good BSers. I disagree with your evaluation of professional schools, in the sense that it was much worse 20 years ago where one could get a license with and Ed.D. and/or another type of doctorate not closely regulated and these folks are still out there.

 

[Annakei]

See the current president of APA, an Ed.D. APA is the devil.

Don't mind me, Im just having a good laugh visualizing you say that in your best Darth Vader voice!

Carry on...rants and all...

 

[PsyD123]

I'm not insulted...I just think it's a shame that some Ph.D people may think that I will need to prove that I'm competent simply because I hold a Psy.D instead of a Ph.D.

Don't be insulted.

 

[RobinA]

Well, see that's the problem. The Vail model wasn't supposed to be that way. They should have equal entrace requirements. IF they don't have the grades, GRE scores, whatever, should they really be a doctor?

See, as an undergrad slacker who's done a total turnaround in grad, here's a major beef I have with strict entrance standards in higher education. It shouldn't be what comes in the door that counts, it should be who walks out the door. The program should be set up to produce the results it wants/deems appropriate. Anybody should have the chance. If they can't hack it, fine, they are out.

Personally, I suck at math. But if I want to take a stab at being a math major at Stanford, so be it. I won't get past the first class, so the program will weed me out. However, someone else who may be a math whiz but partied through undergrad will get the shot. And I say this as somebody who tops the charts on standardized tests, so I'm not giving the standard "I don't test well" line. I just think that the proof should be in the program, not the entrance requirements.

My point is that I'd like to see a sea change in education whereby it's how you actually perform in the program that counts, not what you did 80 years ago. Part of the change would be that ease of entry to a program would no longer be a diss to the program, because the program would see to it that its graduates were up to snuff.

 

[winnie]

What's wrong with EdDs now? Doesn't it just mean that the person got a degree in counseling psych through a Dept. of Education? Lots of therapy-type jobs are open to both counseling and clinical psych grads. As long as the person with the EdD isn't doing something they aren't trained for, I don't see what the problem is. And I can't see why they would be more likely than anyone else to do something naughty...

Should I be mad about something? Fill me in!

 

[psych101]

I agree with previous posters - seems like there is an abundance of less-than-competent individuals out there passing themselves off as qualified. The most dangerous kind are those who have a minimal bit of experience in some area and then erroneously view themselves as qualified to practice or offer opinions in an area that is beyond their expertise. I've seen people read a book or attend a workshop and then feel perfectly qualified to begin practicing something (an assessment instrument, a type of therapy) they're not really qualified to do just yet. Sure, it's unethical, but unfortunately many people don't even recognize when they're going beyond their level of expertise. I think it's smart to evaluate others (regardless of type of degree) with skepticism. Would you randomly open the phone book and make a referral just because someone has initials behind their name?

 

[Nimmuk]

Don't be insulted. That holds true for anyone I meet. For example, within my speciality, I have a pet peeve regarding modern neuropsych training that I think definitely holds true within non-research focused programs and that is that too much attention is given to test construction, psychometrics and norms, and how to administer tests at the expense of understanding brain-behavior relationships. Too many neuropsychologists don't know syndromes and don't know how to do a good behavioral neuro eval. These are things that should be the bedrock of our field. This issue is so widespread that I assume incompetance until proven otherwise. It's also fundamentally changed, and is changing, how our field is viewed and utilized. Our value is, and should be, our knowledge of the brain and how various neuropathologies affect cognition, emotion, motor function, sensory function, and the viscera. Knowing how to give a wisconsin card sorting test, a cvlt, a TMT, or a bender, informs none of that.

Don't blame the APA, or the professional schools, blame the neuropsychology field, for god's sakes, they dont even have a licensing exam, how can one call themselves neuropsychologist?

 

[50960]

Troller...don't bite paendrag.

Perhaps Paendrag should start a thread on what it takes to be board certified in anything as a psychologist, because this is an area our field needs alot of work on. 🙂

 

[Nimmuk]

Why can you just say, oh, you’re right". gessh, you have such a Grandiosity attitude. Troll? Please.... though I am currently in med school, I have a ph.d in neuro-physiology...and I have practice as a research-practitioner (particular in the oncology clinical trials) for numerous years.

“…..It just doesn't have the backing of APA. At the moment, if you have a license in psychology, you can practice neuropsychology. Doesn't matter if you've never had any training at all....

This is why the field of psychology is split up....they don't support each other...especially with people like you, the know it all attitude.

Regarding the medical profession and NP, PA's, there is a shortage of physician in the field, so let them get a piece of the pie...love is to share my friend...unless neuro-psychologist attempt to take over the field of neurology, I have nothing to fear.

For those prospective student heading towards the professional schools, don't let anyone tell you will be looked at as inferior, once you are in the field, you degree holds as much weight in the real world. Just ask me for examples and I will reply. Unless of course you are looking for an university base position in academia. However, is teaching your passion, you will have no problem teaching at a community base program.

Heck, it is even hard for those with the “glorified” ph.d to teach in a university base program, as there lots of competition. I actually find it really funny when people say “ I will do a fellowship in neuropsychology and then score a position in a medical school” Unless they know someone who is retiring, their chances of landing a job of such is almost cero.

Once again, I been practicing psychology for a very long time and I truly love this field, but with people like the above poster, it seems that psychology will need to find a way to weed these kinds of attitudes.

To the moderator, I feel sorry for your clients. You were very fast to jump to conclusion “labeling” me as a troll. Hopefully, you are mature enough to recognize this and apologize.

 

[Nimmuk]

Because, you're not right. I'm guessing languages aren't your strong point.





Right, because we should be all inclusive. The field of psychology is split because of liberal accredidation policies that have fostered a very divisive climate. This has been contributed to by poor leadership and representation resulting in problems with reimbursement rates with insurance companies and legal separation from other disciplines.




You apparently have no idea what you're talking about. It's all about dollars. There are plenty of expanding programs out there. The last few years have been tough because of drying up NIH funds, but there is always an eb and flow. Competition is no big deal if you're competitive.





Practicing psychology? As a neuro-physiologist?

When do you graduate from undergrad?

First of all, you are just a fellow, still learning the ropes. I would bet that you are not even license, as you have not accumulated enough hours to do so. I take your comments just as what you are a “fellow” with no weight, yet.

Second, don’t assume that I am an American and I have command of the English language. I also feel bad for your future clients as you are quick to assume what you don’t know. This is why foreigners usually win novel prizes as they think abstractly, differently than main stream America. This is why the field of psychology needs more minorities, as they think differently. Some of these minorities are in a disadvantage when competing (academically) with other students as some don’t have the resources to go to a major university.

You apparently don’t have an idea of what you are talking about, but then again, you are “just” a fellow, and thus, I understand you. But just for kicks, just do a search and find the trends in academia.

Yes, practicing psychology and neuro-psychology.

 

[Nimmuk]

Thank you...

sometimes the truth hurts, but you'll get over it.....

 

[Nimmuk]

I was surprised by the moderator comments as he is a "practicing psuchologist". However, your comments are expected, fellowship can only teach you so much.......you''ll learn when you get to the real world...."fellow"

 

[Sanman]

First question, In what way were you practicing psychology and neuropsychology with a neurophysiology doctorate? Was this all human contact or mostly lab work on animals? I am simply confused as to what relevant qualifications you hold to practice as such.

Secondly, you are blaming the "field of neuropsychology" for things it cannot do anything about. The infighting occurs in medicine as well. Simply look at interventional radiology and surgery or derm,plastics, ENT, OMFS,etc for cosmetic procedures. The problem is the same as in medicine. Ther eis a single all-encompassing license and anybidy can pratice anything. What stops people from practicing this rampantly in medicine is that inability leads to a worse outcome and can cost you a lot more (i.e. lawsuit). If you don't blame governing boards like the APA and the people who pass the laws, who can you blame?

 

[psychgeek]

Why can you just say, oh, you’re right". gessh, you have such a Grandiosity attitude. Troll? Please.... though I am currently in med school, I have a ph.d in neuro-physiology...and I have practice as a research-practitioner (particular in the oncology clinical trials) for numerous years.

Honestly guys, I’m proud of us. This board has finally become active enough to attract its own troll. It is a good day for clinical psychology. Nimmuk, may you continue to spout barely coherent nonsense for a long time to come.

In response to the OP’s question, I do think PsyDs have more to prove than PhDs. Unfortunately, there are a few crappy PsyD programs that compromise the reputation of the entire degree because they churn out so many students. The worst two psychology students I’ve met were PsyD students. The other 10 or so PsyD students were average to great, but those two who sucked really do stick out.

The good news (as a PhD candidate who is not opposed to the PsyD in general) is that most people are open to being impressed by PsyDs. 5 years after you get your degree your reputation will be built on how good of a clinician you are rather than your school. 10 years after you get your PsyD you may be supervising snotty PhD students like myself (two of my supervisors had PsyDs). The whole PsyD stigma seems to be most influential when you are applying to internships. After that, it seems to decline in importance.

 

[50960]

Ya this is great!! We have our esteemed psychiatry MOD over here stirring up trouble on another thread!!

For what it is worth I am not now, nor have I ever practiced "psuch-ology"!! 😉

 

[Anasazi23]

What trouble? 😀

Really though, the discussion about psychiatrists administering psychological tests? It's sorta relevant, isn't it? I know Paendrag is always up for a good discussion....

For what it's worth, I know a few people that practice "psuchiatry."

 

[50960]

LOL!!!

I am happy to see you pop over here and get us going! This Forum needed a spark. Psychiatrists administering "non-public domain" published psychological tests is a good topic. Give us your take!

 

[sasevan]

So, I want to know what it's like out there in the real world. Am I going to have to defend my degree for the rest of my life??!! Will I be looked down upon amongst my Ph.D colleagues?

Hi PsyD123,

I don't know and I suspect that no one here knows either, although some people seem to enjoy speculating and then presenting that as evidence; and at times possibly doing so in order to present their own beliefs and biases as fact.
I mean, as far as I know, there has not been any empirical study of this matter so how does someone, while presenting themselves as a scientist, actually assert that they know that PhDs look down on PsyDs (university dept or prof school)?
IMO all that can really be stated here on this matter, by anyone, is anecdotal.
Having said that I like to share with you my personal experience about this issue; and again, it is, just like everyone else here, just one person's perspective.

There is often ingroup prejudice/discrimination of the outgroup.
If we look at medicine we sometimes see this with some MDs looking down on DOs (and vice-versa) or with some US medical grads looking down on Foreign med grads (and vice-versa).
In psych we may see some PhDs looking down on PsyDs (even on this board 🙄 ), or some univ dept PsyDs looking down on prof school PsyDs. And vice-versa.
I have heard some physicians look down on psychiatrists and I have also heard some psychiatrists look down on psychologists. And vice-versa.

My point is that there will always be SOME people who will be prejudice/discriminate against others; even some doctors against doctors with different initials.

So, is there some stigma to the PsyD? Yes, just like there is (in SOME circles) to the MD, DO, USMG, FMG, and even the PhD.

My advise is: figure out, as best as you can, what kind of practice you are most interested in having and then, given your particular resources and limitations, determine which educational/training program will best prepare you for that.

Peace. 🙂

 

[sasevan]

Which, of course, doesn't make them wrong for doing so 🙂

🙁

 

[Nimmuk]

Heh. You can't even make up your mind what field you were in or what you were doing



In that statement I was stating that yes, there is such thing as “practicing” psychology and the yes, that I was referring to neuro-psychology, both in question by the last poster. Please read previous post. I did not say, I was neuro-psychologist.

I assure you, the “psychologist in training” i.e the fellow, is a gold fish in my shark infested pond.

I will not defend my credentials. There are what there are….look outside your bubble.

I do want to apologize to current and prospected students if I sounded unprofessional and if I offended anyone, my apologies. It seems that the poster above uses his “psychologist in training” title to bully people around…..However, I will rebuttal his bias nonsense every single time in the future. I assure you, his fellow status holds now weight,,,,been there than that. I have practice, I have researched, I have teached. Honey, your world is just starting.

Since psychology is about helping people, perhaps myself, the moderator, and other experienced psychologist can help current and prospective students become more competitive in their current field.

If anyone is living in the state of Hawaii, and interested in research please PM me. I have strong ties in Queens Medical Center, Department of psychiatry

Tripler Army Medical Center Department of psychiatry, adult and child psychiatry
Current ongoing research is a study in para suicide and suicide prevention. Will be present in the APA next spring.
I also have strong ties with the department of psychology, both health and neuro-psychology at the same Hospital: notice THIS IS FOR RESEARCH ONLY.

Also in Hawaii, if anybody has a biological background, there is chance in collaborating with pharmaceutical companies doing psychological research


BAY AREA, CA:

Anyone interested in neuropsychological research can also PM me. There is a world renown neuropsycholgist in need of assistance with major research. This research has change legislation in the state of LA and will do the same in CA regarding welding workers. Great chance to get your name publish. This person is also license to supervise for a neuropsychology internship. Great chance and topics for dissertation.

Interested students please.

Quick story.

Why I am doing this?

When I was in college and my husband was attending medical school (obviously very poor) a stranger overheard our conversation regarding our plans to get marry. That stranger gave us a $1000 check for our wedding bands. Every since, I have help when given the opportunity. I challenge everyone for a more positive forum and helping students and prospective students to become more competitive.

Though not in the psychology field anymore, 40++ yrs and current medical student, this is where I started a wonderful career. I feel forever endebt.

 

[Flutterbyu]

I can't see attending a professional school unless you really couldn't get in anywhere else, and then I might consider a different career. A good university-based PsyD program can be a nice option.

😱 Did I really just read that?!

 

[Flutterbyu]

Well, see that's the problem. The Vail model wasn't supposed to be that way. They should have equal entrace requirements. IF they don't have the grades, GRE scores, whatever, should they really be a doctor?

What the?! Did I just agree with something that Paendrag has said? Now I definitely need a drink! Seriously though, I agree with this 100%. Now there are certainly cases in which a not-so-strong student has gone on to an entry-level position within a mental health facility and has grown into a mature, promising candidate for a doctoral program, but each case has to be looked at very seriously. Although test scores and grades can only tell you so much, they can tell you an awful lot about whether the person can hack the demands of a doctoral program, potential or not.

 

[PsyD123]

Thank you, Sasevan. That was a very respectful answer and I appreciate it. 🙂

Hi PsyD123,

I don't know and I suspect that no one here knows either, although some people seem to enjoy speculating and then presenting that as evidence; and at times possibly doing so in order to present their own beliefs and biases as fact.
I mean, as far as I know, there has not been any empirical study of this matter so how does someone, while presenting themselves as a scientist, actually assert that they know that PhDs look down on PsyDs (university dept or prof school)?
IMO all that can really be stated here on this matter, by anyone, is anecdotal.
Having said that I like to share with you my personal experience about this issue; and again, it is, just like everyone else here, just one person's perspective.

There is often ingroup prejudice/discrimination of the outgroup.
If we look at medicine we sometimes see this with some MDs looking down on DOs (and vice-versa) or with some US medical grads looking down on Foreign med grads (and vice-versa).
In psych we may see some PhDs looking down on PsyDs (even on this board 🙄 ), or some univ dept PsyDs looking down on prof school PsyDs. And vice-versa.
I have heard some physicians look down on psychiatrists and I have also heard some psychiatrists look down on psychologists. And vice-versa.

My point is that there will always be SOME people who will be prejudice/discriminate against others; even some doctors against doctors with different initials.

So, is there some stigma to the PsyD? Yes, just like there is (in SOME circles) to the MD, DO, USMG, FMG, and even the PhD.

My advise is: figure out, as best as you can, what kind of practice you are most interested in having and then, given your particular resources and limitations, determine which educational/training program will best prepare you for that.

Peace. 🙂

 

[PsyD123]

Paendrag,

I thought I remembered reading somewhere on this forum that your wife has a Psy.D...is that correct? If you don't mind me asking, how does she feel about your views on the Psy.D and Vail model? I'm genuinely curious. Would love to see her post on here! 👍

 

[Shatani]

I agree. I have seen far too many psychologists who cannot perform competently get by via being good BSers. I disagree with your evaluation of professional schools, in the sense that it was much worse 20 years ago where one could get a license with and Ed.D. and/or another type of doctorate not closely regulated and these folks are still out there.

thats funny...the dean of my program is an Ed.D.