Medicine v. Psychology--a deliberation

[whiteelephant]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I was wondering whether anyone else on this board has or has had deliberations between medicine and psychology.

At the moment, I feel torn between the two. I would like to do clinical work and am most interested in the mind/brain or mind/brain connection. While I like the long term emotional relationship that psychology allows for and feel that counseling can help many disorders, I also feel that my skills make it harder for me to sustainably practice in psychology. I am much better at clear cut answers and not as great with teasing out emotional problems and at the same time juggling many roles of a clinician.

If anyone has had a similar deliberation, would you mind sharing your thought process and decision?

Thanks.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

If you do a search within the clinical psychology or psychiatry forum, you will find a number of threads on this topic.

 

[neuropsyance]

I've had the same issue, and sometimes I wish I had still gone the medical route instead. It was a difficult choice for me, so I made a pros and cons list to compare the two and try to figure out what career would best suit me. If you need anyone to bounce ideas or concerns off of, I'm all ears via PM.

neuropsyance

 

[Psychology 76]

I'm still debating it. I'm applying this year to clinical PhD programs and if I don't get in anywhere I will probably take a year off to take pre-med courses then apply for medical school. I'm mostly interested in cognitive neuroscience so I could study the brain as a physician also.

 

[docma]

One interesting cross-over option is becoming a psychiatric nurse practitioner. The job options and roles for this career track continue to expand, it attracts an interesting array of individuals and it has the potential to be both lucrative and flexible in ways that used to be true of clinical psychology. It definitely incorporates elements of medicine and psychology as they've been defined traditionally.

 

[PHinisheD]

If you're interested enough in medicine and/or neuroscience to seriously consider going to med school, it's probably a better choice than psychology. As a physician, you'll learn a wider range of treatment approaches to psychopathology, and you'll have much better career prospects (more job openings, much higher pay) than a psychologist.

You should know, though, that a strong need for clear cut answers may be problematic in either line of work. All clinicians need a high tolerance for ambiguity.

 

[AlaskanJustin]

I'm still debating it. I'm applying this year to clinical PhD programs and if I don't get in anywhere I will probably take a year off to take pre-med courses then apply for medical school. I'm mostly interested in cognitive neuroscience so I could study the brain as a physician also.

So I am the guy that is going to destroy worlds, having come from medicine INTO clinical psychology. Let me list my feelings on the matter, and if I offend people I apologize but its just my experience. Hopefully most of you will be honest with yourselves and come to similar conclusions.

1: It's not like you can just CHOOSE to get into a medical school......... over the last 2 years the average mcat score for admitted applicants has gone from 28.5 to 31.5... that is astronomical considering the test is only out of 45. One VERY LARGE reason for this is the economy, it has been shown that during recessions, professional schools receive spikes in admissions. Pick up an MSAR from 2010-2011 and check out last years admissions stats, lets just say its f**king ridiculous. The average GPA's have gone up as well.

2: Test scores and GPA aside, you cannot just finish your premed requirements in 1 year (trust me I know). IF you are crazy like I was you could finish them in 2 years, assuming you did not have any background in the sciences (as many psychology students do not). Remember, requirements include:
Full year of General Bio and labs
Full year of Gen Chemistry and labs
Full year of Physics and labs
Full year of Organic chem and labs
year of calculus

Those are just the minimal standard requirements, but more and more schools want to see variety in coursework.

3: Let's now assume you have all of this, what extracurricular activities did you do during this time? Remember you are competing with minimally 3000 other students who have shadowed doctors, volunteered at clinics, shelters, etc (not silly research projects, but the grunt work of volunteering). Also, a ton of these kids have a laundry list of things like president for the CADUCEA, blah blah, and blah blah. So what do you have to offer? Psych club member? So what... Senior thesis? So what that has nothing to do with medicine... My point, is that unless you are a 4.0 38+ MCAT, you look identically to 3000+ applicants.

4. Having been one of those 31 mcat applicants, I get how difficult it is. I will be the first person to admit that the only reason I got into U Washington was because of my Alaska residency (any time you have residency for a state school that only takes residents you skew the numbers wayyyyy lower). Us WWAMI kids have a nice thing going, basically have lower stats and get into a top 10 med school... but that is rare...My other friend had a 31 too, took him 3 tries to get it (which is common) had a 3.6 gpa, got into some schools he wanted, but that was after a year of postbacc research and clinical work with MS AND getting into/completing an MPH.

I do not think you can fathom how many people apply, the local schools for instance, Georgetown and GW, both had well over 10k applicants for like 180 spots... and these are not even particularly good schools.

5. So here is the possibly offensive part... if you enjoy psych, are you SURE you actually enjoy medicine? I do not mean the thought of treating people blahblah, I mean have you EVER picked up a biochemistry or immunology text book and just tried to read a chapter? How does that make you feel? Headache? Because your first two years of med school are ridiculously intense courses on these very topics. I seriously urge you to check out the USMLE Step 1 review book at B&N sometime, and tell me that that stuff excites you, because if it does not even interest you, GOOD LUCK getting through the first two years and passing Step 1, not too mention if you do not do well first two years and get a good Step 1 score, good luck getting that Residency you want. The other question I pose, ever shadowed an OB/GYN, or an ER doctor, or anything other than something psych related? IF NOT, try it sometime, and tell me medicine still is interesting... because years 3 and 4 arte intensive rotations through things not relating to psychiatry (I cannot fully remember, but on average psychiatry is one of the shortest rotations).

6. It drives me nuts on here when people talk like it is easy to just "go into medicine"... are you kidding me???? Kids spend years preparing to apply to med school, and you think you can just waltz in and get accepted? You think you can just not get into clinical psych and take a year off then get into med school? HAHA! No offense but if you are not getting into a phd program what makes you think it will be any easier getting into an MD program? ESPECIALLY in a year, or even two years??? My friend and I each had 3 years off to do it (I had to go back and do two years of premed + I did several other bio classes, then 1 year of clinical research in immunology)... If you cannot stay dedicated enough to get into a phd program, how will you stay dedicated enough to get into med school, or for that matter dedicated enough to get through med school? You think I am rude asking this question, but I guarantee any admissions committee will ask the same thing...

7. This does not even include the debt people accrue to a) prepare, apply, and get into med school and b) pay for med school, living etc. People argue how great it is for MD doctors to make so much, I still disagree after all debt is settled and how long it takes for a doctor to get real work (Psychiatrist or Neurologists = 4 years of med school assuming no clinical research years in between year 2 and year 3, 1 year general internal medicine + 3 to 4 years specialty, and if you want to subspecialize (i.e., neurophysiology) another 1 to 2 years = range 8 to 11 years for psychiatry or neurology). Then you might start making some money, but realistically you will be mid to late 30s before you start making anything substantial... if you are lucky.

Have fun with that!

 

[PickMePickMe]

If you feel that you are better suited to finding clear-cut answers, but enjoy working in psychology, maybe you should frame your career to be the kind that deals more with assessment and research, instead of therapy. A psychologist doesn't necessarily have to provide therapy as his job, even though you will for sure be trained well in it if you pursue a clinical psych program.

I'I'm not sure what stage of studies you are at right now, but if you pursue the right kind of research and experiences (neuro-related research, volunteering with vulnerable/clinical populations), they can be good preparation and application fodder for both fields. 🙂

I'm sure you've already done this, but I think it'd be beneficial to speak to or shadow the professors and professionals in both fields and get their input. Additionally, if you can, I think it'd be nice to talk to a med student and a clinical psych grad student as well.

And I don't think anyone on this thread intend to "waltz in and get accepted" anywhere....we all know both med and clinical psychology are competitive like nuts and if we were planning on waltzing, we wouldn't be here! If the post above gives the misleading impression that Clinical Psych is easier to get into, be mindful that admission to clinical psychology is just as steep, if not more (where I live, it's more intense) than medicine and requires the same qualifications: great GPA, GRE scores, volunteering, and you will have to prepare yourself to get matched for internship spots and practica in your program as well.

AlaskanJustin, I don't think it's offensive that you feel that someone who enjoys psych might not enjoy other sciences, but I do find it unfair that you assume a psychology student wouldn't have experienced "the grunt work of volunteering" and have less to offer than pre-meds. While many are involved in "silly research projects" (and what's silly about that?) only, many are also executives of relevant organizations and work to gain extensive experiences in their field.

 

[Psychology 76]

So I am the guy that is going to destroy worlds, having come from medicine INTO clinical psychology. Let me list my feelings on the matter, and if I offend people I apologize but its just my experience. Hopefully most of you will be honest with yourselves and come to similar conclusions.

1: It's not like you can just CHOOSE to get into a medical school......... over the last 2 years the average mcat score for admitted applicants has gone from 28.5 to 31.5... that is astronomical considering the test is only out of 45. One VERY LARGE reason for this is the economy, it has been shown that during recessions, professional schools receive spikes in admissions. Pick up an MSAR from 2010-2011 and check out last years admissions stats, lets just say its f**king ridiculous. The average GPA's have gone up as well.

2: Test scores and GPA aside, you cannot just finish your premed requirements in 1 year (trust me I know). IF you are crazy like I was you could finish them in 2 years, assuming you did not have any background in the sciences (as many psychology students do not). Remember, requirements include:
Full year of General Bio and labs
Full year of Gen Chemistry and labs
Full year of Physics and labs
Full year of Organic chem and labs
year of calculus

Those are just the minimal standard requirements, but more and more schools want to see variety in coursework.

3: Let's now assume you have all of this, what extracurricular activities did you do during this time? Remember you are competing with minimally 3000 other students who have shadowed doctors, volunteered at clinics, shelters, etc (not silly research projects, but the grunt work of volunteering). Also, a ton of these kids have a laundry list of things like president for the CADUCEA, blah blah, and blah blah. So what do you have to offer? Psych club member? So what... Senior thesis? So what that has nothing to do with medicine... My point, is that unless you are a 4.0 38+ MCAT, you look identically to 3000+ applicants.

4. Having been one of those 31 mcat applicants, I get how difficult it is. I will be the first person to admit that the only reason I got into U Washington was because of my Alaska residency (any time you have residency for a state school that only takes residents you skew the numbers wayyyyy lower). Us WWAMI kids have a nice thing going, basically have lower stats and get into a top 10 med school... but that is rare...My other friend had a 31 too, took him 3 tries to get it (which is common) had a 3.6 gpa, got into some schools he wanted, but that was after a year of postbacc research and clinical work with MS AND getting into/completing an MPH.

I do not think you can fathom how many people apply, the local schools for instance, Georgetown and GW, both had well over 10k applicants for like 180 spots... and these are not even particularly good schools.

5. So here is the possibly offensive part... if you enjoy psych, are you SURE you actually enjoy medicine? I do not mean the thought of treating people blahblah, I mean have you EVER picked up a biochemistry or immunology text book and just tried to read a chapter? How does that make you feel? Headache? Because your first two years of med school are ridiculously intense courses on these very topics. I seriously urge you to check out the USMLE Step 1 review book at B&N sometime, and tell me that that stuff excites you, because if it does not even interest you, GOOD LUCK getting through the first two years and passing Step 1, not too mention if you do not do well first two years and get a good Step 1 score, good luck getting that Residency you want. The other question I pose, ever shadowed an OB/GYN, or an ER doctor, or anything other than something psych related? IF NOT, try it sometime, and tell me medicine still is interesting... because years 3 and 4 arte intensive rotations through things not relating to psychiatry (I cannot fully remember, but on average psychiatry is one of the shortest rotations).

6. It drives me nuts on here when people talk like it is easy to just "go into medicine"... are you kidding me???? Kids spend years preparing to apply to med school, and you think you can just waltz in and get accepted? You think you can just not get into clinical psych and take a year off then get into med school? HAHA! No offense but if you are not getting into a phd program what makes you think it will be any easier getting into an MD program? ESPECIALLY in a year, or even two years??? My friend and I each had 3 years off to do it (I had to go back and do two years of premed + I did several other bio classes, then 1 year of clinical research in immunology)... If you cannot stay dedicated enough to get into a phd program, how will you stay dedicated enough to get into med school, or for that matter dedicated enough to get through med school? You think I am rude asking this question, but I guarantee any admissions committee will ask the same thing...

7. This does not even include the debt people accrue to a) prepare, apply, and get into med school and b) pay for med school, living etc. People argue how great it is for MD doctors to make so much, I still disagree after all debt is settled and how long it takes for a doctor to get real work (Psychiatrist or Neurologists = 4 years of med school assuming no clinical research years in between year 2 and year 3, 1 year general internal medicine + 3 to 4 years specialty, and if you want to subspecialize (i.e., neurophysiology) another 1 to 2 years = range 8 to 11 years for psychiatry or neurology). Then you might start making some money, but realistically you will be mid to late 30s before you start making anything substantial... if you are lucky.

Have fun with that!

Thank you for your reply 🙂 I do appreciate your perspective on things.
My post was vague and probably made me seem naive but I didn't feel I had to say much since this topic has been addressed so many times.

I do understand how challenging medicine is. I spent an entire summer volunteering full time at a hospital. Some things I liked, some things I did not. I read a lot about medicine and I do have more of a science background than the average psychology major. I would still have to take o-chem, some more bio classes, and some physics but I could complete them in a year because I've looked into it. I really liked your point 5. That is the main reason I am not applying to med school now and I'm not a pre-med undergrad.

To surmise, I understood how challenging and difficult getting into and completing medical school is. I feel as though I have a relatively strong CV for clinical psych PhD programs (even though no one has bothered to give me feedback on WAMC😛) so I'm not a weak student just thinking med school would be an easier route. I'm just meaning if I don't get in anywhere I might become fed up with clinical psychology and pursue medicine. I personally think clinical psychology's future is looking bleak compared to medicine. Though I will probably end up in cognitive neuroscience academia anyway 🙂

 

[Psychology 76]

If you feel that you are better suited to finding clear-cut answers, but enjoy working in psychology, maybe you should frame your career to be the kind that deals more with assessment and research, instead of therapy. A psychologist doesn't necessarily have to provide therapy as his job, even though you will for sure be trained well in it if you pursue a clinical psych program.

I'I'm not sure what stage of studies you are at right now, but if you pursue the right kind of research and experiences (neuro-related research, volunteering with vulnerable/clinical populations), they can be good preparation and application fodder for both fields. 🙂

I'm sure you've already done this, but I think it'd be beneficial to speak to or shadow the professors and professionals in both fields and get their input. Additionally, if you can, I think it'd be nice to talk to a med student and a clinical psych grad student as well.

And I don't think anyone on this thread intend to "waltz in and get accepted" anywhere....we all know both med and clinical psychology are competitive like nuts and if we were planning on waltzing, we wouldn't be here! If the post above gives the misleading impression that Clinical Psych is easier to get into, be mindful that admission to clinical psychology is just as steep, if not more (where I live, it's more intense) than medicine and requires the same qualifications: great GPA, GRE scores, volunteering, and you will have to prepare yourself to get matched for internship spots and practica in your program as well.

AlaskanJustin, I don't think it's offensive that you feel that someone who enjoys psych might not enjoy other sciences, but I do find it unfair that you assume a psychology student wouldn't have experienced "the grunt work of volunteering" and have less to offer than pre-meds. While many are involved in "silly research projects" (and what's silly about that?) only, many are also executives of relevant organizations and work to gain extensive experiences in their field.

👍

 

[AlaskanJustin]

If you feel that you are better suited to finding clear-cut answers, but enjoy working in psychology, maybe you should frame your career to be the kind that deals more with assessment and research, instead of therapy. A psychologist doesn't necessarily have to provide therapy as his job, even though you will for sure be trained well in it if you pursue a clinical psych program.

I'I'm not sure what stage of studies you are at right now, but if you pursue the right kind of research and experiences (neuro-related research, volunteering with vulnerable/clinical populations), they can be good preparation and application fodder for both fields.

Disagree, unless you are talking about MD/PhD research, such as pubs or experience has much less weight on an application. Not just anecdote, its even in the MSAR (AMA published) book.

And I don't think anyone on this thread intend to "waltz in and get accepted" anywhere....we all know both med and clinical psychology are competitive like nuts and if we were planning on waltzing, we wouldn't be here! If the post above gives the misleading impression that Clinical Psych is easier to get into, be mindful that admission to clinical psychology is just as steep, if not more (where I live, it's more intense) than medicine and requires the same qualifications: great GPA, GRE scores, volunteering, and you will have to prepare yourself to get matched for internship spots and practica in your program as well.

Really? we ALL know? Because it sure seems like i read on these boards a lot of how people think you can just not go into psych and go into medicine instead... And having been through both processes (as well as regular basic science PhD) medicine was by far the hardest for me. Hardest tests, more competitive applicants, etc. Could be personal experience I admit, but I would even ask someone like T4C if he honestly believes that psych applicants and med school applicants are comparable academically... Would actually be interesting to see how many med school applicants do well on the GRE vs how many psych applicants do well on the MCAT...

I would and will continue to argue getting into a clinical phd program is easier than getting into med school, YES the numbers are similar, but the level of applicants are not.

AlaskanJustin, I don't think it's offensive that you feel that someone who enjoys psych might not enjoy other sciences, but I do find it unfair that you assume a psychology student wouldn't have experienced "the grunt work of volunteering" and have less to offer than pre-meds. While many are involved in "silly research projects" (and what's silly about that?) only, many are also executives of relevant organizations and work to gain extensive experiences in their field.

I did not say all students, and I am also not saying psych students dont volunteer for certain things, but how many psych students do you know that volunteer for med related professions? The only ones I knew were pre-med to begin with. And of course there are the great applicants from psych out there, no doubt.

My point was that a LOT of people on here are so negative on psych and SO positive on medicine when in reality the way they come across makes them sound ignorant, making it sound like meds make SO much more money in a lifetime and their careers are sooo much brighter... and that all of us should just go into medicine... and that is bollocks

 

[PickMePickMe]

Really? we ALL know? Because it sure seems like i read on these boards a lot of how people think you can just not go into psych and go into medicine instead... And having been through both processes (as well as regular basic science PhD) medicine was by far the hardest for me. Hardest tests, more competitive applicants, etc. Could be personal experience I admit, but I would even ask someone like T4C if he honestly believes that psych applicants and med school applicants are comparable academically... Would actually be interesting to see how many med school applicants do well on the GRE vs how many psych applicants do well on the MCAT...

From what I've seen, an overwhelming majority of the people here understand that both medicine and clinical psychology app processes are hardcore. I appreciate your intent to demonstrate how difficult med is, but your assessment of clinical psychology applicants comes off as generally condescending.

I did not say all students, and I am also not saying psych students dont volunteer for certain things, but how many psych students do you know that volunteer for med related professions? The only ones I knew were pre-med to begin with. And of course there are the great applicants from psych out there, no doubt.

Does that mean that volunteering for things other than med-related professions is somehow easier?

I don't see the point of a who's-field-is-harder argument. Apples vs. oranges; for the most part, each of these pools have participants who geared their undergraduate careers toward their respective goals specifically. Why compare the GRE and MCAT? The OP is wondering how his skills fit better into one program or the other, not which is easier to get into. Unless there's a study done on this, I will stick with the stance that they are equally astronomically tough, and clin psy PhD slightly tougher not because of the caliber of applicants, but because of the limited number of positions.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

...And having been through both processes (as well as regular basic science PhD) medicine was by far the hardest for me. Hardest tests, more competitive applicants, etc. Could be personal experience I admit, but I would even ask someone like T4C if he honestly believes that psych applicants and med school applicants are comparable academically... Would actually be interesting to see how many med school applicants do well on the GRE vs how many psych applicants do well on the MCAT...

It is hard to compare apples to apples because while there are common factors that successful applicants in both areas have, there are also some differences. Having strong analytical skills, the ability to digest large amounts of data, ability to synthesis information, etc....are all skills that successful applicants in both areas possess. Some of the differences can be more subtle, but none the less important. The rigidity of the applicants and how they approach problems tends to be quite different, as is the approach to learning and the way in which information is handled/incorporated. It is hard to quantify which applicant pool is "better", because the skills sets are different.

I'll use myself as an example....from an academic perspective, I am far better suited for medicine. Chemistry, biology, neuroanatomy, physiology, etc are all areas where I have excelled. Those classes were far easier to me than some of the other classes I took in college and graduate school. Conversely, I know people who did far better in the social sciences...but went into medicine because that is what they wanted. I think in the end the "strength" of each applicant pool is quite relative, and it is hard to generalize outside of the groups because there are too many other factors. It is far easier to compare within-group members because they typically had much more similar experiences.

I'll use my friends Mike1 and Mike2 to illustrate why GPA is a rather worthless statistic for comparing between divergent areas of study. Mike1 went to a premier school of engineering that prided itself on not giving A's. The professors regularly failed a portion of each class, and getting through the program was a badge of honor, and getting through with a 3.5 was next to impossible but for a few students per year (Mike1 was one of them). Mike1, compared to his cohort, was heads and shoulders above them.

Mike2 went to a premier school for economics that prided itself on placing students into top firms and having their graduates eventually land at the best financial firms in NYC . Mike2 finished with a 3.8 or so, though he was the benefactor of a Gentlemen's C (or two). Most everyone who came from Mike2's program had similar GPAs. Mike2 was right in line with his cohort, and everyone basically had between a 3.7-4.0.

My point....they both ended up being successful, on paper they both were excellent, but their experiences were quite different and their comparative numbers within-group were quite different. This is how I see psych applicants and medical school applicants. Some of the smartest people out there have failed out of medical school, and some of the most average people who have found a way to skate by and graduate. Similar things can be said about psych applicants. I know clinical psych. people have experienced a, "how they heck did they get this far?" moment...I had one the other day (not at my hospital).

I would and will continue to argue getting into a clinical phd program is easier than getting into med school, YES the numbers are similar, but the level of applicants are not.

I disagree.

If you limit "acceptance" to US-only MD & DO programs and university-based Psy.D. & Ph.D. programs...I think you'd find it harder to get into clinical psychology programs because there are far far less spots per year. In medical school you can apply to 30+ programs, but in clinical psychology you tend to be much more limited on "fit." With that being said, I think there are far more hurdles during medical school that can weed out the people who don't belong, and unfortunately clinical psychology doesn't not have as many. I think we are worse off for it, and I wish we could make boarding (ABPP not vanity boards) similar to our colleagues in medicine, where it is the norm and not the exception. There are too many mediocre clinicians running around who I wouldn't trust with a stuffed animal.

 

[Manicsleep]

If you limit "acceptance" to US-only MD & DO programs and university-based Psy.D. & Ph.D. programs...I think you'd find it harder to get into clinical psychology programs because there are far far less spots per year. In medical school you can apply to 30+ programs, but in clinical psychology you tend to be much more limited on "fit." With that being said, I think there are far more hurdles during medical school that can weed out the people who don't belong, and unfortunately clinical psychology doesn't not have as many. I think we are worse off for it, and I wish we could make boarding (ABPP not vanity boards) similar to our colleagues in medicine, where it is the norm and not the exception. There are too many mediocre clinicians running around who I wouldn't trust with a stuffed animal.

How many PsyD and phd programs respectively are you talking about.
Can you tell me the names some of these PsyD programs that are more competitive in your opinion than a US medical school?

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

How many PsyD and phd programs respectively are you talking about.
Can you tell me the names some of these PsyD programs that are more competitive in your opinion than a US medical school?

The applicable programs would depend on your research interest. The vast majority of applicants apply to faculty members within a clinical psychology programs. This comes into play because there are a limited number of professors who work in a particular area, so if you can find over 6-8 professors who are accepting a student in a particular year...you are doing well. This is what I meant by "fit".

For medical school, if you have the money you can apply to 30+ programs and make it a numbers game. Obviously a poor applicant is a poor applicant, but in the end there is more opportunity to get in somewhere,which is why I said it was easier.

 

[loveoforganic]

For the love of god, it doesn't matter.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

For the love of god, it doesn't matter.

My original message had little to do with this,but that was picked out.

 

[loveoforganic]

I didn't mean for that to seem like it was directed specifically at you, sorry. Just annoyance at the topic in general. I think the vast majority of people are in agreement that the pool of applicants for both schools is mostly quality. That's all that matters. There's no point picking the pools apart to see who's just a little better, or whatever

 

[Manicsleep]

I didn't mean for that to seem like it was directed specifically at you, sorry. Just annoyance at the topic in general. I think the vast majority of people are in agreement that the pool of applicants for both schools is mostly quality. That's all that matters. There's no point picking the pools apart to see who's just a little better, or whatever

Unfortunately that is just not the case.
This is why when T4C states that these schools are similar he fails to provide details even when asked specifically.
Sure getting a PhD from Harvard may be as competetive as a US medical school but then again, clinical psychology degrees are offered at online Universities. While some people may view this as one end of a small spectrum, I certainly do not.

On the other hand. I do think that is easily true for US medical schools. BTW, they are also not easier to get into, just the opposite. Just because you can apply to more schools doesn't mean you will get in. It is a numbers game (you better bring some amazing numbers) and you have to be a right 'fit' for the program.

 

[futureapppsy2]

Unfortunately that is just not the case.
This is why when T4C states that these schools are similar he fails to provide details even when asked specifically.
Sure getting a PhD from Harvard may be as competetive as a US medical school but then again, clinical psychology degrees are offered at online Universities. While some people may view this as one end of a small spectrum, I certainly do not.

On the other hand. I do think that is easily true for US medical schools. BTW, they are also not easier to get into, just the opposite. Just because you can apply to more schools doesn't mean you will get in. It is a numbers game (you better bring some amazing numbers) and you have to be a right 'fit' for the program.

And those online schools (with the exception of Fielding, which is not entirely online) aren't accredited, and their grads are often denied licensure. The Caribbean also has med schools designed to specifically to train US practitioners, by the way.

The mean acceptance rate to university-based, accredited clinical PhD (roughly analogous to accredited US MD programs for the sake of this argument) is around 10%--not high by any means. Including PsyDs (including professional schools, which in likelihood have an inflating effect) in those calculations and you get a mean acceptance rate of 15%. About half the people who apply in a given year to clinical programs get in somewhere, roughly the same as for med school (MD), as cited in the Insider's Guide to Clinical and Counseling Psychology. Mean acceptance rate calculations use 2007-2008 admittance data and were calculated by me.

I'm really failing to see the big discrepancy in selectivity between equivalent med school programs and equivalent clinical psych programs (and some would argue that the prof. schools really don't fall under that equivalence and thus undually influence the mean for the clinical psych programs).

 

[AlaskanJustin]

Unfortunately that is just not the case.
This is why when T4C states that these schools are similar he fails to provide details even when asked specifically.
Sure getting a PhD from Harvard may be as competetive as a US medical school but then again, clinical psychology degrees are offered at online Universities. While some people may view this as one end of a small spectrum, I certainly do not.

On the other hand. I do think that is easily true for US medical schools. BTW, they are also not easier to get into, just the opposite. Just because you can apply to more schools doesn't mean you will get in. It is a numbers game (you better bring some amazing numbers) and you have to be a right 'fit' for the program.

Although I tend to agree with you I also have to agree with what some of T4C is saying. I know it is not an apples to apples comparison, but when you take a single person (such as the point the first person was making to begin with) and throw them into a situation where they are applying to BOTH, my point was to suggest that that particular person might be well suited for grad school and not med school. Or maybe like in T4C and my cases, the person is more suited for medicine and NOT grad school (sounds like me and T4C are those exceptions, who knows).

My other point was one of annoyance, because although NOW people come out and say "obviously people applying are well qualified" if you do a forum search for this topic, you will see numerous occurrences where fellow SDNers have made claims such as "just go into med school clinical psych isnt worth it" or "medical school and medicine is a far better option" and (although I do believe the person on this post, I do not necessarily believe others) "If I do not get into grad school I will just apply to med school"... Does anyone else not see how these types of comments seem really ignorant??? I know these things have been discussed ad nauseum, but isn't that just the way of a discussion board to begin with???

 

[AlaskanJustin]

And those online schools (with the exception of Fielding, which is not entirely online) aren't accredited, and their grads are often denied licensure. The Caribbean also has med schools designed to specifically to train US practitioners, by the way.

The mean acceptance rate to university-based, accredited clinical PhD (roughly analogous to accredited US MD programs for the sake of this argument) is around 10%--not high by any means. Including PsyDs (including professional schools, which in likelihood have an inflating effect) in those calculations and you get a mean acceptance rate of 15%. About half the people who apply in a given year to clinical programs get in somewhere, roughly the same as for med school (MD), as cited in the Insider's Guide to Clinical and Counseling Psychology. Mean acceptance rate calculations use 2007-2008 admittance data and were calculated by me.

I'm really failing to see the big discrepancy in selectivity between equivalent med school programs and equivalent clinical psych programs (and some would argue that the prof. schools really don't fall under that equivalence and thus undually influence the mean for the clinical psych programs).

I thought I had mentioned this already, but there is NO way you can use simple "mean acceptance rates" to compare the two? Because the number of people applying to clinical psych programs vs the number of people applying to med school is far different. Yes there are fewer spots per program or faculty member, but there are also fewer qualified applicants per faculty member as well...

Think about it, think about your last interview, where there any applicants who kind of obviously did not belong there? Just a thought question, unfortunately I do not really have evidence so its pure conjecture, but I will pose it anyways:

I have always wondered how inflated clinical psych PhD applicant numbers are inflated by people that just should not be applying, i.e., GRE or GPA do not meet cut off, no research experience, or whatever else might all but eliminate applicants vs. inflation of med school numbers by similar criteria...

Anyways again my original point was arguing med school is harder to get into, how many of you have been through the med school preparation, application, and interview processes? I guess if you have not been through it then you cannot really speak on it, and I myself am just giving my anecdote and knowledge of my own and others processes.

 

[AlaskanJustin]

The applicable programs would depend on your research interest. The vast majority of applicants apply to faculty members within a clinical psychology programs. This comes into play because there are a limited number of professors who work in a particular area, so if you can find over 6-8 professors who are accepting a student in a particular year...you are doing well. This is what I meant by "fit".

For medical school, if you have the money you can apply to 30+ programs and make it a numbers game. Obviously a poor applicant is a poor applicant, but in the end there is more opportunity to get in somewhere,which is why I said it was easier.

Technically if you had the money you could apply to 30+ clinical psych programs too... The number of average applied med schools (10-15) is roughly similar to what you see clin psych students applying to, this is almost always restricted by money. In med school you are also restricted by RESIDENCY... most of us could not even get into a very large portion of schools simply because the school gives preference (or only takes) to residents of the state (by law, not by choice). My friends and I did this once, we eliminated ALL the residency based schools, then recalculated the numbers of applied vs accepted and the numbers were far worse than psych... again I stand by that you cant compare with mean acceptance rates, but if you feel you can, then in this case the mean acceptance rates is worse than psych...

 

[AlaskanJustin]

It is hard to compare apples to apples because while there are common factors that successful applicants in both areas have, there are also some differences. Having strong analytical skills, the ability to digest large amounts of data, ability to synthesis information, etc....are all skills that successful applicants in both areas possess. Some of the differences can be more subtle, but none the less important. The rigidity of the applicants and how they approach problems tends to be quite different, as is the approach to learning and the way in which information is handled/incorporated. It is hard to quantify which applicant pool is "better", because the skills sets are different.

I'll use myself as an example....from an academic perspective, I am far better suited for medicine. Chemistry, biology, neuroanatomy, physiology, etc are all areas where I have excelled. Those classes were far easier to me than some of the other classes I took in college and graduate school. Conversely, I know people who did far better in the social sciences...but went into medicine because that is what they wanted. I think in the end the "strength" of each applicant pool is quite relative, and it is hard to generalize outside of the groups because there are too many other factors. It is far easier to compare within-group members because they typically had much more similar experiences.

I'll use my friends Mike1 and Mike2 to illustrate why GPA is a rather worthless statistic for comparing between divergent areas of study. Mike1 went to a premier school of engineering that prided itself on not giving A's. The professors regularly failed a portion of each class, and getting through the program was a badge of honor, and getting through with a 3.5 was next to impossible but for a few students per year (Mike1 was one of them). Mike1, compared to his cohort, was heads and shoulders above them.

Mike2 went to a premier school for economics that prided itself on placing students into top firms and having their graduates eventually land at the best financial firms in NYC . Mike2 finished with a 3.8 or so, though he was the benefactor of a Gentlemen's C (or two). Most everyone who came from Mike2's program had similar GPAs. Mike2 was right in line with his cohort, and everyone basically had between a 3.7-4.0.

My point....they both ended up being successful, on paper they both were excellent, but their experiences were quite different and their comparative numbers within-group were quite different. This is how I see psych applicants and medical school applicants. Some of the smartest people out there have failed out of medical school, and some of the most average people who have found a way to skate by and graduate. Similar things can be said about psych applicants. I know clinical psych. people have experienced a, "how they heck did they get this far?" moment...I had one the other day (not at my hospital).



I disagree.

If you limit "acceptance" to US-only MD & DO programs and university-based Psy.D. & Ph.D. programs...I think you'd find it harder to get into clinical psychology programs because there are far far less spots per year. In medical school you can apply to 30+ programs, but in clinical psychology you tend to be much more limited on "fit." With that being said, I think there are far more hurdles during medical school that can weed out the people who don't belong, and unfortunately clinical psychology doesn't not have as many. I think we are worse off for it, and I wish we could make boarding (ABPP not vanity boards) similar to our colleagues in medicine, where it is the norm and not the exception. There are too many mediocre clinicians running around who I wouldn't trust with a stuffed animal.

Come on, we both know Sternberg's work well enough to agree that GPA and GRE etc are not necessarily predictive of a successful grad student (although recent studies suggest MCAT IS a successful predictor of USMLE Step 1 success). This is NOT the point, GRE and GPA ARE successful predictors of acceptance... and that was my original point.

Again since it seems mean acceptance rates are what are the most relevant at this point, IF you remove state med schools, residency-restricted schools (this can all be done through the numbers in the MSAR)... you will find that the mean acceptance rate is far worse than for clin psych programs...

So we also all know that if you are a resident of say... new mexico, then you have a significantly better (1:5 to 1:10) chance of acceptance vs if you are a resident of say... New York.

I agree on the lacking standards however... and most everything else you write on this board too.

 

[AlaskanJustin]

Just wanted to say thanks to all of you for the (mostly) civil discussion on here! I rarely debate anymore but this is one thing I like to discuss since I am pretty intimately tied to both.

 

[psychnic]

I agree with you, AJ, that the number of applicants to a program does not necessarily indicate the quality of those applicants. As others have repeatedly stated, clinical psychology and medicine require differently knowledge, skill sets, and background experiences. I understand your frustration when others on the board make statements like, “you should just go into medicine.” Being admitted to medical school is a huge achievement, attained by a group of students who repeatedly show dedication, persistence, and intelligence (among other things). Becoming a doctor is, rightly so, a difficult and worthy achievement.

Please consider my frustration, as a future clinical psychologist, to read posts in this forum with people saying they are going to leave the “funny farm,” (recent post on another thread) that medical and clinical psych applicants are not “comparable academically” and are only doing “silly research projects.” With people on a professional forum unable to stop themselves from expressing these disparaging stereotypes, how can we expect physicians, patients, or society to see us as anything other than “head shrinks,” existing on the fringe of the medical community? I would really appreciate it if, in the future, forum members would keep in mind that civil discussion includes using respectful language when describing our profession and our patients.

 

[futureapppsy2]

I thought I had mentioned this already, but there is NO way you can use simple "mean acceptance rates" to compare the two? Because the number of people applying to clinical psych programs vs the number of people applying to med school is far different. Yes there are fewer spots per program or faculty member, but there are also fewer qualified applicants per faculty member as well...

Think about it, think about your last interview, where there any applicants who kind of obviously did not belong there? Just a thought question, unfortunately I do not really have evidence so its pure conjecture, but I will pose it anyways:

I have always wondered how inflated clinical psych PhD applicant numbers are inflated by people that just should not be applying, i.e., GRE or GPA do not meet cut off, no research experience, or whatever else might all but eliminate applicants vs. inflation of med school numbers by similar criteria...

Anyways again my original point was arguing med school is harder to get into, how many of you have been through the med school preparation, application, and interview processes? I guess if you have not been through it then you cannot really speak on it, and I myself am just giving my anecdote and knowledge of my own and others processes.

Not a perfect comparison, no, but I still think it shows that clinical psych is not a "you want in, you get in" field, at least not for university-based programs.

As for people who obviously shouldn't have been at interviews but were?

I can honestly say none. Maybe a few were light on research experience, but those people had also been working as actual school psychologists as well, so they definitely had the clinical qualifications. People all had either VERY strong clinical experience (as in, actual clinical experience) and some research experience or VERY strong research experience and some clinical experience. Some were very strong in both.

Is med school hard to get into? Of course. Are university-based clinical PhDs hard to get into as well? IMHO, Yes. It's not really an either/or, esp. because, as you said, the admissions criteria/pre-reqs really differ between the two.

 

[krisrox]

. . . just an observation.

A 27 MCAT will get you into medical school somewhere, maybe even somewhere good (i.e., a state school without excessive tuition costs). A 27 corresponds to about the 57th-64th percentile. Medical school admission isn't a particularly high bar. Of course, neither is admission to the average phd program in any discipline.. . . or law school.

We are talking about degrees that are the minimum barrier of entry into fields with thousands and thousands of practitioners. This is not elite. It's not particularly impressive (getting into a doctoral or professional program). There's no reason to fret about it.

I disagree. A 27 will NOT neccessarily get you into a DO school, let alone an MD school (read up if you don't know the differences, esp. The differences in admissions standards). And med school is very difficult to get into. It's not as specialized as a PhD degree, but it's still difficult.

Also, I agree that it's not fair to compare the two applicant pools (clinical psych PhD and MD) because the process is completely different, the fields are very different, and the jobs studies entail different things.

 

[sunlioness]

What I find particularly impressive is the competition for APA accredited internship spots. Yes, getting into schools (whichever schools) is competitive, but at least in medicine you know that once you get in, if you do the work and graduate, you'll be a physician. Sure, you might not be a radiation oncologist or a dermatologist or an ophthalmologist, but you'll be able to match into a residency doing something. The scary thing to me about the process to becoming a licensed psychologist is that you can get into grad school, do all the work, do a dissertation, and still not be guaranteed to match into an accredited internship. And thus after all that work, may not become licensed to practice. It really blew my mind when I learned how frequently that actually happens.

 

[Neuropsych2be]

What I find particularly impressive is the competition for APA accredited internship spots. Yes, getting into schools (whichever schools) is competitive, but at least in medicine you know that once you get in, if you do the work and graduate, you'll be a physician. Sure, you might not be a radiation oncologist or a dermatologist or an ophthalmologist, but you'll be able to match into a residency doing something. The scary thing to me about the process to becoming a licensed psychologist is that you can get into grad school, do all the work, do a dissertation, and still not be guaranteed to match into an accredited internship. And thus after all that work, may not become licensed to practice. It really blew my mind when I learned how frequently that actually happens.

The match unbalance issue does not apply to medicine but I have read rumblings that this may happen in medicine eventuallly. God help us if that occurs. Part of the problem for psychology is the cost in money and manpower of maintaining an internship program. One of the things about my current practicum site is that I offer them free billable labor that more than makes up the cost of having me there. I would love to know the breakdown of costs versus income in clinical psychology internships. I know in medicine, on residency you physicians are often actually paid below or at minimum wage given the number of hours you work so its cost effective for institutions to hire you as serfs for X number of years. It would be interesting to see what psychology internships do for the bottom line. I mean. frankly I want to be a serf too!

 

[Manicsleep]

A 27 on the MCAT does not mean admission. By no means.
24 may be the mean but there are more than 60K people who take the MCAT every year. Of those about 17K apply. Of those about 10K get accepted. There are people that get accepted with low scores and exceptional skills in other areas such as research, GPA and life experience. Its all about that 'fit' that some people falsely believe only applies to their profession.

The 60k doesnt even take into account those that wanted to be medical and stopped because they couldnt do well enough in the pre-med courses (remember 40% of med-school students are non science majors). Those non-science majors often end up in other fields, often doing well but to do medicine you must be well rounded. Physicians are scientists who are hard working, leaders and socially capable (when they want to be).

As far as the match imbalance, the only solution will be to cut off IMG access to pre-match spots. There are more spots in residency than US graduates but the pre-match has been taking too many IMGs lately and there has been an increase in med school seats (while getting more competitive at the same time). This will be solve in 1-2 years. AMSA is not to be messed with. US med students dont play games, will demand action and get it.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

As far as the match imbalance, the only solution will be to cut off IMG access to pre-match spots. There are more spots in residency than US graduates but the pre-match has been taking too many IMGs lately and there has been an increase in med school seats (while getting more competitive at the same time). This will be solve in 1-2 years. AMSA is not to be messed with. US med students dont play games, will demand action and get it.

Why would that be the only solution? If they are "taking" spots from AMGs, there might be a reason. The high attrition rates and cost of some of the int'l schools is problematic, but if they beat out AMGs, I think the AMGs need to step up and show why they should get the spots.

 

[Manicsleep]

Why would that be the only solution? If they are "taking" spots from AMGs, there might be a reason. The high attrition rates and cost of some of the int'l schools is problematic, but if they beat out AMGs, I think the AMGs need to step up and show why they should get the spots.

Read the whole post.

If you don't understand something, ask about it.
Just because you are a mod doesn't mean you know everything (or anything) --> read your signature.

Your reply makes no sense if you have any concept of the NRMP in its real world application.

(I look forward to you not replying, side stepping or changing the subject regarding this post).

 

[psich]

Read the whole post.

If you don't understand something, ask about it.
Just because you are a mod doesn't mean you know everything (or anything) --> read your signature.

Your reply makes no sense if you have any concept of the NRMP in its real world application.

(I look forward to you not replying, side stepping or changing the subject regarding this post).

Is the acerbic tone necessary?

 

[Manicsleep]

Is the acerbic tone necessary?

Not acerbic. Just truthful.

I don't mind that someone has an clear agenda (4chnge or whatever). However, if that comes with clear insults towards my profession by using untruths, half truths, misleading statements etc then I think its important that the truth be put out there.

A forum is supposed to be a place for debate and discussion. Consistently posting falsehoods and then not responding, side stepping or otherwise avoiding the subject that is refuted later is tantamount to flaming.

Again I say. Read the post by me (just the part that was quoted by t4c) and then if you still believe (or find reasonable) what was written by t4c then you have absolutely no understanding of the match system as it exists in the US...which is ok because nobody is asking you to know the NRMP. But I will tell you, it was a ridiculous post.

Now it is possible that t4c has very little real knowledge of how the medical system, medical school and residency really work. Then a post like that would make sense. However, in the t4c posts, there are statements that suggest (not prove) some significant understanding of the way US healthcare is run from pre-med to clinical practice. Either there is a faker or a flamer...either way, annoying.

So yes, it is necessary to make the truth be known.

 

[Ollie123]

I'm not sure I view simple entrance to either med school or clinical psychology as an particularly high barrier. If I was aiming for med school I'd have gone about my undergrad quite differently, but I'm quite confident I could have done it and been successful. I've always done better in "hard science" type coursework than social science and within psychology my interests are probably more...biological, than most folks here (i.e. psychophysiology, genetics, drug effects). I know plenty of people with pretty mediocre credentials who have made it into both fields without much difficulty...though they certainly aren't at the top schools.

I actually do think it is apples and oranges to some extent. Though anecdotal, in my current lab and previous lab we actually get a pretty even split between psychology and pre-med RAs and the differences are notable even there. I've done plenty of application reviewing for both of them so have a pretty good understanding of their credentials. The pre-meds are typically involved in more activities, and will almost universally look better on paper. However, that thousand hours of volunteering frequently means hanging out with patients in a waiting room, playing "babysitter" in a hospital, pushing people around in wheelchairs, or fetching things. Many of them have told me they found the small amount of interviewing they do as part of research protocols to have been far more "quality" experience than the hours and hours they spend in the hospital.

Similarly, they tend to have different skillsets. The pre-meds seem to do better with structure. They can be fantastic at following protocols and instructions to the letter...but the psychology students tend to do much better with less structured roles. If I have an instruction sheet, and want it followed precisely and accurately, the pre-meds have generally been better. If there is no instruction and just a vague problem to be solved...the psychology students typically do better.

Again, that is purely anecdotal and also just trends, there have been plenty of psychology students who didn't have any trace of problem-solving ability, and pre-meds who couldn't follow instructions worth a damn. However, I think it illustrates some broader differences in the training focus.

I'm happy with the choice of psychology. Frankly, I don't compare which is more competitive. I'm confident I could have done either if I set my mind to it. I didn't pick clinical psych for the prestige, I picked it because it provided better training for what I want to do.

 

[Manicsleep]

I'm not sure I view simple entrance to either med school or clinical psychology as an particularly high barrier. If I was aiming for med school I'd have gone about my undergrad quite differently, but I'm quite confident I could have done it and been successful. I've always done better in "hard science" type coursework than social science and within psychology my interests are probably more...biological, than most folks here (i.e. psychophysiology, genetics, drug effects). I know plenty of people with pretty mediocre credentials who have made it into both fields without much difficulty...though they certainly aren't at the top schools.

I actually do think it is apples and oranges to some extent. Though anecdotal, in my current lab and previous lab we actually get a pretty even split between psychology and pre-med RAs and the differences are notable even there. I've done plenty of application reviewing for both of them so have a pretty good understanding of their credentials. The pre-meds are typically involved in more activities, and will almost universally look better on paper. However, that thousand hours of volunteering frequently means hanging out with patients in a waiting room, playing "babysitter" in a hospital, pushing people around in wheelchairs, or fetching things. Many of them have told me they found the small amount of interviewing they do as part of research protocols to have been far more "quality" experience than the hours and hours they spend in the hospital.

Similarly, they tend to have different skillsets. The pre-meds seem to do better with structure. They can be fantastic at following protocols and instructions to the letter...but the psychology students tend to do much better with less structured roles. If I have an instruction sheet, and want it followed precisely and accurately, the pre-meds have generally been better. If there is no instruction and just a vague problem to be solved...the psychology students typically do better.

Again, that is purely anecdotal and also just trends, there have been plenty of psychology students who didn't have any trace of problem-solving ability, and pre-meds who couldn't follow instructions worth a damn. However, I think it illustrates some broader differences in the training focus.

I'm happy with the choice of psychology. Frankly, I don't compare which is more competitive. I'm confident I could have done either if I set my mind to it. I didn't pick clinical psych for the prestige, I picked it because it provided better training for what I want to do.

When it comes to university based...aka government funded academic researchers it really doesn't matter what field you are in. It takes smart people to be successful consistently over a lifetime. However, that is not what I am talking about. There are very few clinical psychologists that fall under that umbrella out of the total number that graduate or even those that are accredited. I have met a few ABPP psychologists and have not been disappointed although I will say upfront I am largely ignorant of the difference. They certainly seemed very haughty and compared the boards to the ABPN which may be true given the quality but it was a small sample size.

I worked for several years in moonlighting in residency/fellowship and during practice. I saw a lot of different clinical psychologists. The vast majority are even close to the same quality as academic center psychologists. They didn't know how to do therapy properly, couldn't do testing and would always throw out how competitive it is to get into some psychology program or another. My same size for this is well over a hundred and these weren't some outliers. This was the norm. It is like a psychiatrist who doesn't know how to prescribe SSRIs, mood stabilizers or antipsychotics. These are basics.

Apologists can point to one person here or one person there all they want but as a whole there is a big difference out there in the quality of clinical psychologists. The range in a clinical psychiatrist, especially board certified ones, is limited when it comes to fundamental skills.

 

[Manicsleep]

A 27 with a reasonable GPA and activities will get you in somewhere, and most likely without resorting to attending a DO program or a carribean school. Not that it matters. My point is that none (PhD, MD, JD) are a particularly high bar. Many thousands of people do it. You mentioned foreign grads. Many of them go to medical school directly from high school. It's just a matter of doing the work, which again, lots and lots of people have and will continue to accomplish every year.

I tend to recommend that students with interest in the brain and mental health choose medical school. I like what I do, I make a decent living, but if I had it to do over, I'd go to medical school. It's not because I think the training is better, or that it's more prestigious, or that the students are smarter. It's because I think it's an easier path. It's more scripted, less stumbling blocks (don't have to create anything. . . dissertation). There is a clear path to decent money, better job availability, and better defined roles in hospital settings. I think medical school is as close to a sure thing in terms of assuring a high quality of living as there is in the professional world. Almost every other field has substantially greater risk.

The pluses of these things to me make medical school a safer choice. Medical school is somewhat cookie cutter (at least in comparison to academically based degrees, like psychology). After, there are an abundance of specialties for people with all sorts of personalities and skills. Either way, you're almost guaranteed a 6 figure income. If you're more of a technician, don't mind doing the same thing (basically) every day, don't really want to think too hard, but want to make lots of money, go be an orthopedic surgeon (note: I'm not saying these guys are stupid, I understand there is big competition for the higher paying specialities, but think about what they do all day long). If you like solving puzzles, be a behavioral neurologist. Etc. . .

Well, by your standard being a genius isn't particularly high bar either. Since millions of people are geniuses. You comment on IMGs has little to do with my post. For example in india school is until the 10th grade. 11/12th are extremely tough pre-whatever years. Medical schools are also longer there. If they don't meet certain requirements they can't practice here.

Although I agree to a degree that a medical degree is more scripted, it is only to a point. At some point, and this is where it is just a matter of perspective, you will have to create. Your first 2 years are very cookie cutter. It becomes more chaotic after that. It is just a very well created system that you learn to do very well in the chaos because you have usually seen everything before. I have seen this implode when physicians in private practice try their hand at inpatient medicine again after retirement...not pretty. But I created plenty as a resident on call and some other times as well.

Also, I am not sure but I want to make sure that everyone is clear I am only talking about clinical psychology. Most other fields, that don't do therapy by other means, are not included because they are usually in that academic umbrella. Both my parents are PhDs and professors so I know the academic stress that accompanies that life, especially early on.

As far as being a technician...whatever. You can call academic people politicians (worse than the f bomb in my book) and be pretty much right on the money but again, not everyone is the same.
You can train a monkey to do surgery, but the monkey doesn't know when not to do it or what to do if something goes wrong.

I guess the rigors of medicine cant be explained until you wake up post call thinking your pager just went off...rethink all the ways you could have treated the patient differently and then go back to sleep with kaplan and sadock in your hands.

 

[Ollie123]

Apologists can point to one person here or one person there all they want but as a whole there is a big difference out there in the quality of clinical psychologists. The range in a clinical psychiatrist, especially board certified ones, is limited when it comes to fundamental skills.

I actually don't strongly disagree with this statement, though I view it as a separate (but related) issue compared to our previous discussion. What sort of students are accepted into programs is a somewhat different point than how well they are trained once there. As many here will tell you, I have frequently made the point that I don't feel there is anywhere near the amount of quality control there needs to be in psychology. We set the bar way too low, and the major organization (APA) has been, if anything, supportive of low bars and lack of quality control. Frankly, I believe medicine does a better job instilling belief in evidence-based practice amongst its students, and preparing them to do so.

That said, you can find plenty of boarded psychiatrists who have no idea what the hell they are doing too - I agree the variance is probably lower, but I think we'd disagree on how much lower. I personally have seen a number of clients who had psychiatrists who apparently prescribe and diagnose by dice roll, don't follow even basic clinical practice guidelines, or operate within the ballpark of standard practice. I can point you to MANY others who have had the same experience, just as you find psychologists doing bizarre, unproven therapies for no explicable reason.

 

[Manicsleep]

Neither does the surgeon (at least to the former)

The surgeon knows when not to and what to do when something goes wrong.
You and the monkey are very similar in that you won't and I can't be sure that you are even trainable to do the surgery.

As far as genius goes: The population is several billion, several million geniuses are bound to happen. It is very simple statistics. You should take a course at a reputable school and you will understand.

 

[Manicsleep]

I actually don't strongly disagree with this statement, though I view it as a separate (but related) issue compared to our previous discussion. What sort of students are accepted into programs is a somewhat different point than how well they are trained once there. As many here will tell you, I have frequently made the point that I don't feel there is anywhere near the amount of quality control there needs to be in psychology. We set the bar way too low, and the major organization (APA) has been, if anything, supportive of low bars and lack of quality control. Frankly, I believe medicine does a better job instilling belief in evidence-based practice amongst its students, and preparing them to do so.

That said, you can find plenty of boarded psychiatrists who have no idea what the hell they are doing too - I agree the variance is probably lower, but I think we'd disagree on how much lower. I personally have seen a number of clients who had psychiatrists who apparently prescribe and diagnose by dice roll, don't follow even basic clinical practice guidelines, or operate within the ballpark of standard practice. I can point you to MANY others who have had the same experience, just as you find psychologists doing bizarre, unproven therapies for no explicable reason.

You may find some outliers. Plenty is a strong and false descriptor especially when it comes to treatment of basic, fundamental disease states. These are things that are seen regularly, presented at every CME conference and the fundamental therapies have changed minimally over time. This is especially true for board certified psychiatrists.

Second, for things like personality disorders that often get mixed up with mood/psychosis, the whole field is screwed up and some have very strange ideas on how to treat them. The other place I find odd treatments is, strangely enough, academic centers where someone is trying to prove something or another. Pure academic types are often odd and have eccentric views like if someone with depression smiles more than twice per hour, they are ultra-rapid cycling bipolar.

Finally, I have had my treatments questioned by well trained psychologists who thought I was doing something crazy until it was explained to them. The problem with that is that they or the patient didn't have the expertise to say what was the right treatment. I think part of the problem is the client/consumer paradigm where someone sees that advertisement for abilify and now wants it for their mild depression (I have seen this for psychologists and patients). Its a huge problem but thats another story.

 

[AlaskanJustin]

A 27 with a reasonable GPA and activities will get you in somewhere, and most likely without resorting to attending a DO program or a carribean school. Not that it matters. My point is that none (PhD, MD, JD) are a particularly high bar. Many thousands of people do it. You mentioned foreign grads. Many of them go to medical school directly from high school. It's just a matter of doing the work, which again, lots and lots of people have and will continue to accomplish every year.

I tend to recommend that students with interest in the brain and mental health choose medical school. I like what I do, I make a decent living, but if I had it to do over, I'd go to medical school. It's not because I think the training is better, or that it's more prestigious, or that the students are smarter. It's because I think it's an easier path. It's more scripted, less stumbling blocks (don't have to create anything. . . dissertation). There is a clear path to decent money, better job availability, and better defined roles in hospital settings. I think medical school is as close to a sure thing in terms of assuring a high quality of living as there is in the professional world. Almost every other field has substantially greater risk.

The pluses of these things to me make medical school a safer choice. Medical school is somewhat cookie cutter (at least in comparison to academically based degrees, like psychology). After, there are an abundance of specialties for people with all sorts of personalities and skills. Either way, you're almost guaranteed a 6 figure income. If you're more of a technician, don't mind doing the same thing (basically) every day, don't really want to think too hard, but want to make lots of money, go be an orthopedic surgeon (note: I'm not saying these guys are stupid, I understand there is big competition for the higher paying specialities, but think about what they do all day long). If you like solving puzzles, be a behavioral neurologist. Etc. . .

I don't disagree with this post, I think at this point we are all on the same page about this... but I will just correct you, a 27 was good enough circa 1999 to 2000, but unless (as I noted before) you are a resident of a state that has a med school that only gets 500 to 1000 applicants (aka New Mexico, poor state) you will almost never get in with an MCAT of 27, its actually more like 30, and even then still dont have a great chance unless everything else is stellar.

Anyhoo good post nevertheless.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

Genius is a loaded term, one probably more aptly attributed to creativity, not necessarily abstract reasoning ability. Per 100 people (randomly sampled), you'll find a few with IQs > 130 (mean = 100, SD = 15) (not necessary, by the way, to attend medical school or a PhD program). That's what, a couple of hundred people in your run of the mill public high school?

Day 1, Lecture 1 of an IQ Assessment class.....but worth mentioning here. Genius is up there with borderline as the most misunderstood term by the general public.

 

[Therapist4Chnge]

I don't disagree with this post, I think at this point we are all on the same page about this... but I will just correct you, a 27 was good enough circa 1999 to 2000, but unless (as I noted before) you are a resident of a state that has a med school that only gets 500 to 1000 applicants (aka New Mexico, poor state) you will almost never get in with an MCAT of 27, its actually more like 30, and even then still dont have a great chance unless everything else is stellar.

Anyhoo good post nevertheless.

My old roomate got into a DO program w/ a 26. I'm still not sure how she swung it. I guess she was an outlier.

 

[krisrox]

I picked the 27 number as a low ball AND based on my experience in dealing with medical students. I've known plenty with scores in that vicinity (even recently). I know the average scores at most medical schools are in the 30s. But, that's still 70-80th percentile, not 99th, if you get my drift.

Also worth mentioning, then, is that the MCAT is nothing like the GRE. Someone could do fairly well on the GRE without studying; You'd be lucky to get a 23 without studying on the MCAT. It's also more specialized.

 

[krisrox]

Interesting point. Both the gre and the mcat are u
intended as aptitude tests. That studying is essential for the mcat suggests that aptitude isn't quite as important in medical school admission. I say this without data, just going off of the logic of what you've referenced.

The GRE measures math, verbal and writing skills. It is a test used by a variety of different grad school programs (from psych to English to chemistry) in admissions. It is more general; people going into many different specialties are required to do well on it in order to get into grad school. The MCAT measures hard science skills (bio, chem, physics) and verbal skills. It is used by med schools and some medical grad programs for admissions. Even the verbal section uses science-based texts. It is very science- and medicine-oriented. I didn't mean to say that it doesn't measure aptitude as well; I meant to say that when you're quoting percentiles, it doesn't necessarily mean that a 70th percentile on the MCAT is equivalent to a 70th percentile on the GRE. I've take both tests and got a similar percentile on each one. I studied for six months for the MCAT, as is typical of those taking the exam. I only studied for 4 weeks for the GRE. N=1, but I've seen a similar trend in others taking both exams.

 

[olychick65]

The GRE measures math, verbal and writing skills. It is a test used by a variety of different grad school programs (from psych to English to chemistry) in admissions. It is more general; people going into many different specialties are required to do well on it in order to get into grad school. The MCAT measures hard science skills (bio, chem, physics) and verbal skills. It is used by med schools and some medical grad programs for admissions. Even the verbal section uses science-based texts. It is very science- and medicine-oriented. I didn't mean to say that it doesn't measure aptitude as well; I meant to say that when you're quoting percentiles, it doesn't necessarily mean that a 70th percentile on the MCAT is equivalent to a 70th percentile on the GRE. I've take both tests and got a similar percentile on each one. I studied for six months for the MCAT, as is typical of those taking the exam. I only studied for 4 weeks for the GRE. N=1, but I've seen a similar trend in others taking both exams.

I would say (loosely speaking) that the MCAT is more similar to a subject GRE than the general GRE. The point is to understand a student's understanding of biology, chemistry, physiology, etc, and to test their verbal aptitude in reference to hard science knowledge. Without a serious prior hard science background, you just won't succeed (hence the reason for so much studying). It's the same with the subject GRE- you have to know the information, although I would say that if you don't have verbal/reading skills, your score won't be stellar.

The general GRE is a different animal all together, with perhaps the exception of the vocab aspect of the verbal, because these days with Barron's and all that, you can memorize 800 words if you want.

An exceptional med school student with no psych background would most likely bomb the psych subject GRE. An exceptional psych grad student with no biochem background would most likely bomb the MCAT. Both will probably do well on the general GRE.

 

[Manicsleep]

Oh, and, btw, nice sentence.

You arent good at jokes. See above.

Genius is a loaded term, one probably more aptly attributed to creativity, not necessarily abstract reasoning ability. Per 100 people (randomly sampled), you'll find a few with IQs > 130 (mean = 100, SD = 15) (not necessary, by the way, to attend medical school or a PhD program). That's what, a couple of hundred people in your run of the mill public high school?

There wouldn't be "a few" there would be exactly 2.27 with your parameters. A couple hundred, lets say 227, in a public high school would mean that high school selected randomly from the general population and had a population of about 10,000. You have some strange high schools where you grew up.

 

[Manicsleep]

Also worth mentioning, then, is that the MCAT is nothing like the GRE. Someone could do fairly well on the GRE without studying; You'd be lucky to get a 23 without studying on the MCAT. It's also more specialized.

Not true.
If you have a good grasp of the science basics you dont need to study.
Also, nobody goes from 23 to 36 etc by just studying. You have to be intelligent and have fundamental knowledge of the topics tested.

The most common topic tested in the MCAT verbal reasoning. Its more than half the exam.

 

[Manicsleep]

Genius is a loaded term, one probably more aptly attributed to creativity, not necessarily abstract reasoning ability. Per 100 people (randomly sampled), you'll find a few with IQs > 130 (mean = 100, SD = 15) (not necessary, by the way, to attend medical school or a PhD program). That's what, a couple of hundred people in your run of the mill public high school?

Day 1, Lecture 1 of an IQ Assessment class.....but worth mentioning here. Genius is up there with borderline as the most misunderstood term by the general public.

Unfortunately many "professionals" have no clue either.