Jun 23, 2014
58
1
Status
Psychology Student
Assuming a decent class size, what would be the internship match rate to look for when applying to clinical programs? Does it has to be 100%? Would 85 or 75 be sufficient for applying? (i.e Georgia State, South Florida, University of Hawaii, University of New Mexico - all have between 90-75% according to Insider's Guide)
 
Dec 11, 2014
5
2
With regard to my professor, who is a clinical psych from U of New Mexico - the more is better, but 75-85 is ok.
 

AcronymAllergy

Neuropsychologist
Moderator
Gold Donor
7+ Year Member
Jan 7, 2010
7,343
1,647
Status
Psychologist
If applicant pool sizes at the program are <10, I'd say an overall average of 85 would be ok, especially assuming there are years of 100%'s sprinkled in there.

Of the programs you've mentioned, for example, I wouldn't have concerns about any of them (although my experience with U of Hawaii is admittedly limited).

You can also evaluate other program metrics to get an overall idea of the type of applicant admitted (e.g., incoming class GPA, GRE, etc.) and graduate outcomes (e.g., EPPP pass rates, percentage of folks licensed), which can provide additional information.
 

WisNeuro

Board Certified Neuropsychologist
10+ Year Member
Feb 15, 2009
10,186
8,878
Somewhere
Status
Psychologist
I would exclude anything lower than 80% from schools I would even remotely consider. Anything lower than 85% would make me wary.
 

ClinicalABA

7+ Year Member
Aug 31, 2011
1,076
1,178
New England
Status
Psychologist
For mentor model programs, rates for the specific professor/lab might be more meaningful. Professor with "pipeline" relationships with specific sites would be a positive, even if the overall program rates are relatively low.
 

Ollie123

10+ Year Member
Feb 19, 2007
4,800
1,364
Status
Psychology Student
Agreed - focus on APA match rate and don't be fooled by inclusion of APPIC/CAPIC match rates. These can be substantially different and I'd recommend a school with a 75% match rate (all APA) over one with a 90% match rate (30% APA) without reservation. I agree that the higher the better, but as others have indicated it can get somewhat more complicated when you factor in things like mentor, type of program (e.g. clinical-science vs. scientist-practitioner) and a million other things that can impact it.

Since we are generally dealing with small sample sizes, I wouldn't worry about relatively small differences (e.g. a 5% difference in match rate in programs with 5 students entering the match per year is probably not a meaningful difference). Similarly, it will fluctuate from year to year so look at aggregate numbers. One year with a 75% match rate shouldn't scare you off from a program if it is consistently 90-100% in other years. Again, with small programs this could be a case of 4 people applying, 1 heavily geographically restricted person not matching and not much of an indicator of the program itself. On the other hand, if 75% or lower is occurring consistently (or it is trending downward over time) that is quite worrisome and I'd think very carefully about it.
 
Mar 24, 2014
4,393
3,841
Rural Area Medical Facilty
Status
Psychologist
Agreed - focus on APA match rate and don't be fooled by inclusion of APPIC/CAPIC match rates. These can be substantially different and I'd recommend a school with a 75% match rate (all APA) over one with a 90% match rate (30% APA) without reservation. I agree that the higher the better, but as others have indicated it can get somewhat more complicated when you factor in things like mentor, type of program (e.g. clinical-science vs. scientist-practitioner) and a million other things that can impact it.

Since we are generally dealing with small sample sizes, I wouldn't worry about relatively small differences (e.g. a 5% difference in match rate in programs with 5 students entering the match per year is probably not a meaningful difference). Similarly, it will fluctuate from year to year so look at aggregate numbers. One year with a 75% match rate shouldn't scare you off from a program if it is consistently 90-100% in other years. Again, with small programs this could be a case of 4 people applying, 1 heavily geographically restricted person not matching and not much of an indicator of the program itself. On the other hand, if 75% or lower is occurring consistently (or it is trending downward over time) that is quite worrisome and I'd think very carefully about it.
I had to chuckle a bit when I read this because I was thinking that if the student doesn't know how to interpret the available stats given the small sample size, it might be a moot question.
:D
 

Ollie123

10+ Year Member
Feb 19, 2007
4,800
1,364
Status
Psychology Student
Perhaps, though I could easily see someone overlooking that when scanning this info for the hundreds of programs so thought it was worth calling attention to. It would be very easy to generate an excel spreadsheet and sort programs by characteristics like "match rate" (not that I was ever that nerdy and obsessive when I was applying to programs...or internships...) and factoring that into decisions without accounting for the fact that much of the variance will be driven by class size. Perhaps I'm not giving people enough credit though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: smalltownpsych
Mar 24, 2014
4,393
3,841
Rural Area Medical Facilty
Status
Psychologist
Perhaps, though I could easily see someone overlooking that when scanning this info for the hundreds of programs so thought it was worth calling attention to. It would be very easy to generate an excel spreadsheet and sort programs by characteristics like "match rate" (not that I was ever that nerdy and obsessive when I was applying to programs...or internships...) and factoring that into decisions without accounting for the fact that much of the variance will be driven by class size. Perhaps I'm not giving people enough credit though.
I didn't expect them to do a test for statistical significance. :cool: I just found it humorous, but my laughing at a stats joke shows why my brother is the comic genius of the family. :hardy:
 
OP
M
Jun 23, 2014
58
1
Status
Psychology Student
I would exclude anything lower than 80% from schools I would even remotely consider. Anything lower than 85% would make me wary.
Even from the schools I listed? (from my own researching, they all appeared to have popular/good programs)
 

WisNeuro

Board Certified Neuropsychologist
10+ Year Member
Feb 15, 2009
10,186
8,878
Somewhere
Status
Psychologist
Even from the schools I listed? (from my own researching, they all appeared to have popular/good programs)
I'd consider it, but they would be farther down my list if they fell below 85%. That's my cutoff and what I recommend, you have to find what you're comfortable with.
 
OP
M
Jun 23, 2014
58
1
Status
Psychology Student
I'd consider it, but they would be farther down my list if they fell below 85%. That's my cutoff and what I recommend, you have to find what you're comfortable with.
Okay, thank you for your feedback!
 

AcronymAllergy

Neuropsychologist
Moderator
Gold Donor
7+ Year Member
Jan 7, 2010
7,343
1,647
Status
Psychologist
I'd consider it, but they would be farther down my list if they fell below 85%. That's my cutoff and what I recommend, you have to find what you're comfortable with.
Yep, have to find what you're personally ok with. It's also something that, if you apply and interview, you can ask them about while there. Sometimes programs have a bad few years due to factors outside their control (e.g., a couple pools of very geographically-restricted applicants or folks who've decided they want to go in different directions for which they may not be as competitive), and sometimes it can be a harbinger of bigger problems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Therapist4Chnge

PBCocce

2+ Year Member
Aug 20, 2015
76
23
Status
Psychology Student
I was told to be scared of many of the PsyD programs which were FAR below 80% in matching...

When there are 5-10 students applying every year, it is easy for the small sample size to factor in.
 

psychRA

Psychologist
10+ Year Member
Mar 8, 2007
455
195
I would use an APA match rate of 80-85% as a minimum (average from the past 5 or 10 years) personally. And I will second what others have said about also looking at a program's yearly match rate over the last few years. If the cohorts are small, an occasional bad year (say, 1 person out of 4 didn't match in a given year) is not a big deal. What matters is when you see that a program consistently has a low match rate.

I came from a program that has had a 100% APA match rate for many years running. This is partly because it's a good program, and partly because students receive a good deal of information and guidance about the match process, as well as a lot of input on their application materials and on choosing a list of sites. Students are encouraged to apply to an optimal number of sites, and to include sites where they are likely to be a good fit, which maximizes the chances of everyone matching. Students still have the freedom to apply to as few or as many sites as they'd like, but no one is uninformed about the process - if you tell your mentor that you only want to apply to a handful of sites in a particular location, you're going to be told that having geographic limitations puts you at risk of not matching, and you'll be encouraged to consider adding some more sites to your list.
 

PBCocce

2+ Year Member
Aug 20, 2015
76
23
Status
Psychology Student
A question to ask is this: maybe you get into a program with a poor match rate, but do you really want to spend 5+ years somewhere, only not to match?
 
OP
M
Jun 23, 2014
58
1
Status
Psychology Student
A question to ask is this: maybe you get into a program with a poor match rate, but do you really want to spend 5+ years somewhere, only not to match?
I appreciate your response, but I was asking what is considered a "poor" match rate, because several factors could influence it. I would only apply to a program where I believe I will be matched, but I was asking how to identify that. A simply statistic in the Insider's Guide just didn't provide me with confident insight.