PhD vs PsyD

[Mason_Ost]

Title.

I am curious to hear everyone's take on this. Tuition cost aside, speaking strictly on competency/perceived competency.

I am in an accredited PsyD program, and often feel imposter syndrome when interacting with PhD faculty members or students. Prior to admittance, I had one co-author publication in Psi Chi, worked as an RA/TA for a year, and as a psychometrist for 1.5 years. Graduated with a 3.5 GPA, (3.8 psych). Did not take the GRE. I applied to a few PhD programs and was rejected. I would like my view on the difference between the two to be as objective as possible, as I feel that my emotions often cloud my judgment as to my own competency as a future clinical psychologist with a PsyD.

Please be candid with your response.

- What generally separates a psychologist with a PhD from a PsyD?
- What generally separates someone from getting in to a PhD program vs a PsyD?

Thank you,

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Sanman]

Is your imposter syndrome because you are in a PsyD program or because you did not get into a PhD program?

I applied to both and simply picked the best fit with the best funding. Program differences are more based on program model (prac/scholar vs scientist/prac vs clinical science). A PsyD program like Baylor has more in common with a scientist/prac PhD program than either a school like CSPP or a clinical Science PhD. So, experiences and answers will differ based on program.

 

[Mason_Ost]

Is your imposter syndrome because you are in a PsyD program or because you did not get into a PhD program?

I applied to both and simply picked the best fit with the best funding. Program differences are more based on program model (prac/scholar vs scientist/prac vs clinical science). A PsyD program like Baylor has more in common with a scientist/prac PhD program than either a school like CSPP or a clinical Science PhD. So, experiences and answers will differ based on program.

Both, probably. There is data to suggest that PhD candidates are objectively better overall (EPPP pass rates, average GPA, publications, etc.), as I am sure you're already aware. This makes me feel discouraged, as not being accepted into a PhD program often makes me feel inadequate in comparison.

There is data to suggest that the "PhD is more research-focused, PsyD is more clinical" trope is inaccurate (see APA PsycNet), so it doesn't have much to do with that, either. The program I am in has felt great, training-wise.

Based on the objective data, I am just feeling inadequate compared to PhDs. I don't feel personally incompetent and am confident in my own self-efficacy, but it is proving difficult for me not to feel like a "silver medalist" at the moment.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

Both, probably. There is data to suggest that PhD candidates are objectively better overall (EPPP pass rates, average GPA, publications, etc.), as I am sure you're already aware. This makes me feel discouraged, as not being accepted into a PhD program often makes me feel inadequate in comparison.

There is data to suggest that the "PhD is more research-focused, PsyD is more clinical" trope is inaccurate (see APA PsycNet), so it doesn't have much to do with that, either. The program I am in has felt great, training-wise.

Based on the objective data, I am just feeling inadequate compared to PhDs. I don't feel personally incompetent and am confident in my own self-efficacy, but it is proving difficult for me not to feel like a "silver medalist" at the moment.

Honestly, I've just seen more variability in PsyD graduates but know plenty of excellent psychologists who have PsyD's and plenty of mediocre/poor ones who have PhD's. Most of the variance in how competent/knowledgeable you turn out to be as a doctoral-level psychologist is within your ability to influence over the course of your career by really applying yourself, going above and beyond, volunteering for training opportunities (e.g., that allow you to learn expertise in various techniques, etc.).

 

[Mason_Ost]

Honestly, I've just seen more variability in PsyD graduates but know plenty of excellent psychologists who have PsyD's and plenty of mediocre/poor ones who have PhD's. Most of the variance in how competent/knowledgeable you turn out to be as a doctoral-level psychologist is within your ability to influence over the course of your career by really applying yourself, going above and beyond, volunteering for training opportunities (e.g., that allow you to learn expertise in various techniques, etc.).

That makes perfect sense, as PsyD programs admit more students. I suppose I am concerned with being part of the "problem." Narrowing down what the problem is, however, is partially why I wanted to make this post.

Thanks for your response, I agree with you.

 

[PsyDuck90]

The biggest issue with the PsyD is the greater variability in training programs. Sure, you can get a PhD from a school like CSPP as well, but the majority of PhD programs in clinical/counseling psych are small cohort programs housed in non-profit universities. PsyDs are more of a mixed bag. The university-based PsyD programs with smaller cohorts are pretty on par with the scientist-practitioner model PhD programs. However, there are certain PsyD programs that take on cohorts of like 100 each year. And if you’re pumping out 100 graduates each year (even with attrition, still way more than the average small cohort PhD or PsyD), your grads are flooding the market. And when you have 100+ people to train per year, these folks are not getting the individualized attention that is often seen in smaller programs. There’s just no way for advisors to keep track of the individual strengths and growth areas of hundreds of students. And with that, more people are likely to skate by with minimal competencies and get through. That’s far less likely to happen in a small cohort program with a matched mentor who has an invested (financial and personal) interest in your training. The obscene debt and minimal oversight/quality control are IMO the biggest reasons of concern with PsyDs, and those often aren’t issues in smaller university-based PsyDs.

 

[Sanman]

The biggest issue with the PsyD is the greater variability in training programs. Sure, you can get a PhD from a school like CSPP as well, but the majority of PhD programs in clinical/counseling psych are small cohort programs housed in non-profit universities. PsyDs are more of a mixed bag. The university-based PsyD programs with smaller cohorts are pretty on par with the scientist-practitioner model PhD programs. However, there are certain PsyD programs that take on cohorts of like 100 each year. And if you’re pumping out 100 graduates each year (even with attrition, still way more than the average small cohort PhD or PsyD), your grads are flooding the market. And when you have 100+ people to train per year, these folks are not getting the individualized attention that is often seen in smaller programs. There’s just no way for advisors to keep track of the individual strengths and growth areas of hundreds of students. And with that, more people are likely to skate by with minimal competencies and get through. That’s far less likely to happen in a small cohort program with a matched mentor who has an invested (financial and personal) interest in your training. The obscene debt and minimal oversight/quality control are IMO the biggest reasons of concern with PsyDs, and those often aren’t issues in smaller university-based PsyDs.

I will add this, with poor training and large numbers I have noticed deficits in areas such as assessment training in many newer grads. These skills help differentiate us from mid level practitioners. Without the enhanced knowledge, you end up as a doctor in name only and interchangeable with a mid level to many healthcare systems and insurance companies.

 

[Fan_of_Meehl]

The biggest issue with the PsyD is the greater variability in training programs. Sure, you can get a PhD from a school like CSPP as well, but the majority of PhD programs in clinical/counseling psych are small cohort programs housed in non-profit universities. PsyDs are more of a mixed bag. The university-based PsyD programs with smaller cohorts are pretty on par with the scientist-practitioner model PhD programs. However, there are certain PsyD programs that take on cohorts of like 100 each year. And if you’re pumping out 100 graduates each year (even with attrition, still way more than the average small cohort PhD or PsyD), your grads are flooding the market. And when you have 100+ people to train per year, these folks are not getting the individualized attention that is often seen in smaller programs. There’s just no way for advisors to keep track of the individual strengths and growth areas of hundreds of students. And with that, more people are likely to skate by with minimal competencies and get through. That’s far less likely to happen in a small cohort program with a matched mentor who has an invested (financial and personal) interest in your training. The obscene debt and minimal oversight/quality control are IMO the biggest reasons of concern with PsyDs, and those often aren’t issues in smaller university-based PsyDs.

Systemically and professionally...it's a huge problem (the diploma mills).

 

[deleted1129370]

That makes perfect sense, as PsyD programs admit more students. I suppose I am concerned with being part of the "problem." Narrowing down what the problem is, however, is partially why I wanted to make this post.

Thanks for your response, I agree with you.

In terms of success - how much emphasis are you placing on the program vs. what you will contribute to your academic endeavors? Could you be just as successful in "fill in the blank" Psy.D. program vs. "fill in the blank" Ph.D. program? What are your goals? This will also assist in shaping your decision-making to determine if getting more research experiences and exposures are aligned with your professional values vs. more of a clinical inclination.

 

[deleted1129370]

Both, probably. There is data to suggest that PhD candidates are objectively better overall (EPPP pass rates, average GPA, publications, etc.), as I am sure you're already aware. This makes me feel discouraged, as not being accepted into a PhD program often makes me feel inadequate in comparison.

There is data to suggest that the "PhD is more research-focused, PsyD is more clinical" trope is inaccurate (see APA PsycNet), so it doesn't have much to do with that, either. The program I am in has felt great, training-wise.

Based on the objective data, I am just feeling inadequate compared to PhDs. I don't feel personally incompetent and am confident in my own self-efficacy, but it is proving difficult for me not to feel like a "silver medalist" at the moment.

This is anecdotal, but I figured I'd at least provide you my experience (which by no means should be the model, but of a mere example of others you should consider). I attended a Psy.D. program (not of the highest calibre I should add). I managed to publish, attend excellent practicum sites in neuropsychology, had fantastic interviews for neuropsychology track internship sites at AMCs and VAs (I attended a VA neuro track internship). I also had some awesome post-doc interviews at APPCN neuro programs and several rehabilitation psychology post-doc interviews at leading AMCs and VAs. My path took a different turn after internship in that I didn't go in for the neuro post-doc, so I landed a staff psychologist job at a VA in Ohio, and after a year there, I moved on up to becoming a psychologist at the 3rd (or 4th?) largest VA in the country and am an assistant professor for a leading medical school here in Houston. I should also add, that I got licensed only 4 months after completing internship. I also have my own private practice I run on the side, and am often contacted by various 3rd party agencies and companies to do various clinical and civil forensic work.

I do remember thinking that because of my Psy.D. pedigree that I would be forever doomed to work for a sub-par employer and I would be viewed by my peers as a "pretend" psychologist. And who knows, maybe some people hold those sentiments, but I am unaware of them. For me personally, I just don't care about their opinions. I achieved exactly what I set out to do as they aligned with my professional and personal goals. I make a nice 6 figure income, own my own business, have some level of "prestige," I do the work that is meaningful to me, and I have a work/life balance that I envisioned for myself back when I was considering becoming a psychologist. I knew that I wanted to be a psychologist, not a researcher, so I decided on the Psy.D. program. I was also geographically restricted, so that limited my application options at the time. I know several of my professors in my program who graduated from Ph.D. programs told me I would have been just as successful in a Ph.D. program as I was in mine. It is what it is - I made the decision I made based on the facts at the time and the reasonable predictions I could make based on factors that mattered to me the most. The debt is manageable - I am not living in poverty (I have a nice two story house with a pool and outdoor kitchen, in a classy suburb of Houston; I have two dogs, a spouse, a nice Ford pickup truck and other material possessions that I like). For all intents and purposes, my life looks pretty much the way I expected it would be after I graduated.

So...that's my story, I am sure others might read this and shake their head in disapproval (and that's okay too). Take my story/example with a grain of salt (and pepper too?)

P.S. I do agree with others about the fact that Psy.D. programs tend to produce highly variable clinicians. My program absolutely highlighted that sentiment as I was more of the exception to the rule.

 

[Sanman]

This is anecdotal, but I figured I'd at least provide you my experience (which by no means should be the model, but of a mere example of others you should consider). I attended a Psy.D. program (not of the highest calibre I should add). I managed to publish, attend excellent practicum sites in neuropsychology, had fantastic interviews for neuropsychology track internship sites at AMCs and VAs (I attended a VA neuro track internship). I also had some awesome post-doc interviews at APPCN neuro programs and several rehabilitation psychology post-doc interviews at leading AMCs and VAs. My path took a different turn after internship in that I didn't go in for the neuro post-doc, so I landed a staff psychologist job at a VA in Ohio, and after a year there, I moved on up to becoming a psychologist at the 3rd (or 4th?) largest VA in the country and am an assistant professor for a leading medical school here in Houston. I should also add, that I got licensed only 4 months after completing internship. I also have my own private practice I run on the side, and am often contacted by various 3rd party agencies and companies to do various clinical and civil forensic work.

I do remember thinking that because of my Psy.D. pedigree that I would be forever doomed to work for a sub-par employer and I would be viewed by my peers as a "pretend" psychologist. And who knows, maybe some people hold those sentiments, but I am unaware of them. For me personally, I just don't care about their opinions. I achieved exactly what I set out to do as they aligned with my professional and personal goals. I make a nice 6 figure income, own my own business, have some level of "prestige," I do the work that is meaningful to me, and I have a work/life balance that I envisioned for myself back when I was considering becoming a psychologist. I knew that I wanted to be a psychologist, not a researcher, so I decided on the Psy.D. program. I was also geographically restricted, so that limited my application options at the time. I know several of my professors in my program who graduated from Ph.D. programs told me I would have been just as successful in a Ph.D. program as I was in mine. It is what it is - I made the decision I made based on the facts at the time and the reasonable predictions I could make based on factors that mattered to me the most. The debt is manageable - I am not living in poverty (I have a nice two story house with a pool and outdoor kitchen, in a classy suburb of Houston; I have two dogs, a spouse, a nice Ford pickup truck and other material possessions that I like. For all intents and purposes, my life looks pretty much the way I expected it would be after I graduated.

So...that's my story, I am sure others might read this and shake their head in disapproval (and that's okay too). Take my story/example with a grain of salt (and pepper too?)

P.S. I do agree with others about the fact that Psy.D. programs tend to produce highly variable clinicians. My program absolutely highlighted that sentiment as I was more of the exception to the rule.

Ford truck...at least it isn't a Chevy.

 

[PsyDuck90]

Systemically and professionally...it's a huge problem (the diploma mills).

Yes absolutely. And I say this is a soon-to-be graduate of a small university based funded PsyD.

OP, I don’t think anyone necessarily thinks that all PsyDs are problematic or have poor training. The biggest issue is that, while good clinicians undoubtedly can come from these large cohort diploma mills, they are typically successes despite their program, and they often sought out other opportunities and experiences to rise to the top of their cohorts. They weren’t necessarily guided there by the program and receiving the hands on mentorship that is the modal experience of smaller programs. These programs sell people a very expensive dream and then do little in the ways of actually helping them prepare for that dream. That’s why their often talked about so poorly, as they can very much be described as predatory and they don’t actually do much for the heaps of money they charge in comparison to the alternatives.

 

[PsyDr]

I would focus on the functional outcomes.

IMO, the PhD vs PsyD is similar to the MD vs DO thing. One is objectively easier to get into. Most prestigious programs are PhD or MD. That matters if you are staying in academia, or want a high prestige job.

For most jobs, it really doesn’t make a difference. The VA or insurance companies pay the same, regardless of which degree you have.

There is also a very poor understanding of the market. Many old timers were around at a time when psychologists were rare, MA level people didn’t exist, and insurance rates were the same rate as today (I.e., MUCH higher when adjusted for inflation). As their income has gone down, they have assumed it is because there are more psychologists. That’s not the case.

 

[smalltownpsych]

Biggest issue I have with having a PsyD as opposed to a PhD is when other professionals and patients refer to me as being a real psychologist with a PhD. I don’t want to correct them as it’s not usually relevant at all and yet I don’t want to misrepresent my training.

 

[deleted1129370]

Biggest issue I have with having a PsyD as opposed to a PhD is when other professionals and patients refer to me as being a real psychologist with a PhD. I don’t want to correct them as it’s not usually relevant at all and yet I don’t want to misrepresent my training.

In that case I'd be like "oh, if you were searching for a real psychologist, please allow me to walk you down the hall here to work with my colleague here, the real psychologist." Get them out of my office. lol.

 

[biscuitsbiscuits]

I'll share my story here too. When I was applying, I was accepted into two programs: one PhD and one PsyD. Almost everything about them was functionally identical. The PsyD (surprisingly I guess?) offered more funding, so that's the one I went with. I have occasionally had the same thoughts you're having, especially during the time I was considering an academic career. But honestly? No real regrets at this point. I'm a few months away from licensure now (EPPP passed, just finishing up hours), and have not had any trouble making it to this point. In all settings, I worked alongside probably equal numbers of PhDs and PsyDs. There was not any real focus on which degree people had (that I was aware of). I remember needing to write out someone's degree for something and having to look it up in their email signature because I didn't know off the top of my head. If you're good, you're good, you know? That's what people are going to focus on and remember.

I do know that nagging thought you're describing, I get it. I don't think it really has to be a thing, especially long term. Like others have said here, if you put in the time to be good at whatever it is you want to do, the PhD/PsyD differences will wash out over time.

 

[summerbabe]

That makes perfect sense, as PsyD programs admit more students. I suppose I am concerned with being part of the "problem." Narrowing down what the problem is, however, is partially why I wanted to make this post.

Thanks for your response, I agree with you.

From my general experience of having graduated from a PhD and now evaluates PhD and PsyD internship applications is that if somebody is looking to do the bare minimum required to graduate and get licensed, I'd bet money on the PhD being more competent than the PsyD since their bare minimum bar is going to be much higher (not including programs like Baylor, which essentially function like a funded PhD).

At the same time, I know plenty of highly qualified and competent psychologists including from the most notorious of the diploma mills that I would still personally not recommend anybody to attend.

I imagine they were some of the top students in their programs and did much more than the bare minimum (e.g., opted to do an original dissertation with new data collection versus large lit review or using a dataset with minimal analyses, joined a research team or worked with an external source on research and attempted to publish/present, exceeded bare bones hour requirements for internship because they valued balanced training, didn't try to apply for internship in their 3rd year of grad school even if they could have found a not so great site to accept them, etc).

Those things speak directly to effort and commitment to training, which I think pays off regardless of PhD or PsyD.

 

[Mason_Ost]

I just wanted to thank everyone for their responses. I just finished reading everything and will respond soon. I appreciate the personal experiences and anecdotes, too. I wish more of this was discussed openly like in this forum.

Thank you! This helped me a lot.

 

[Cheetah89]

How much time do you spend on this forum? In my experience, the PhD-PsyD stuff is discussed and is generally more salient on here than in any real world professional, academic, or training environment I've ever been in. I too had a complex when starting grad school because I spent a lot of time on here, and then as I progressed through my training I realized how little the distinction matters. People will care about your clinical acumen, professionalism, and (in some contexts) research skills, so focus on growing those and forget about the PhD-PsyD thing.

 

[deleted1129370]

How much time do you spend on this forum? In my experience, the PhD-PsyD stuff is discussed and is generally more salient on here than in any real world professional, academic, or training environment I've ever been in. I too had a complex when starting grad school because I spent a lot of time on here, and then as I progressed through my training I realized how little the distinction matters. People will care about your clinical acumen, professionalism, and (in some contexts) research skills, so focus on growing those and forget about the PhD-PsyD thing.

To the OP:
Indeed - the whole "Psy.D. vs. Ph.D." topic has been brought up in the past more times than not. Heck, back when I was looking into programs I lurked on here and frankly, even though you will find a strong leaning towards Ph.D. here, I still didn't care. I made my decisions based on my own intra-personal factors that were salient to me. I will also say that while this forum can be a wealth of information, there is absolutely a skew/bias on certain topics, so take what you read on this forum with a grain of salt. Ask folks you might know personally, if you can join listservs for your local or state psychological association as a student, do that. It would be like going into one car dealership and dropping big bucks on a car only after hearing the folks at that dealership talk up the vehicle you want to buy. I'd be researching this on Kelly Blue Books, Auto Trader, forums (Ford F-150 forums lol), and other sources to come to a well-rounded decision. Remember, we don't know you, your personal circumstances, geographic restrictions, abilities, challenges, etc., and these should also be factored in your decision making "model" amongst other things like program funding, APA internship match rates, etc.

This was a long-winded statement to say....this is a multi-factorial decision. Treat it as such.

 

[Mason_Ost]

How much time do you spend on this forum? In my experience, the PhD-PsyD stuff is discussed and is generally more salient on here than in any real world professional, academic, or training environment I've ever been in. I too had a complex when starting grad school because I spent a lot of time on here, and then as I progressed through my training I realized how little the distinction matters. People will care about your clinical acumen, professionalism, and (in some contexts) research skills, so focus on growing those and forget about the PhD-PsyD thing.

I spent a significant amount of time on here a year or two ago, reading every post I could discussing the differences. It took me a while to recognize that the responses generally had a PhD bias (as many of the same people shared the same opinions across multiple posts). Which is not inherently bad because I also think the points generally brought up are salient and relevant considerations. However, the primary tropes I encountered were "PsyD = diploma mill (as long as it isn't Baylor)" and "never attend an unfunded program." While I appreciate the message many people have been trying to paint on those topics, it has been difficult for me to find nuanced discussion on it like this post has created, thankfully. Not everyone who doesn't attend Baylor is in a diploma mill, and many people recover from the cost of tuition just fine (from my personal experience talking with PsyD practitioners, researchers, teachers, etc.). That distinction for me historically felt hard to come by, and I can still taste its remnants on my tongue, so to speak.

"People will care about your clinical acumen, professionalism, and (in some contexts) research skills, so focus on growing those and forget about the PhD-PsyD thing." - I could not agree more, and that has held true based on my own personal experiences. Thank you for your response; I appreciate it a lot.

To the OP:
Indeed - the whole "Psy.D. vs. Ph.D." topic has been brought up in the post more times than not. Heck, back when I was looking into programs I lurked on here and frankly, even though you will find a strong leaning towards Ph.D. here, I still didn't care. I made my decisions based on my own intra-personal factors that were salient to me. I will also say that while this forum can be a wealth of information, there is absolutely a skew/bias on certain topics, so take what you read on this forum with a grain of salt. Ask folks you might know personally, if you can join listservs for your local or state psychological association as a student, do that. It would be like going into one car dealership and dropping big bucks on a car only after hearing the folks at that dealership talk up the vehicle you want to buy. I'd be researching this on Kelly Blue Books, Auto Trader, forums (Ford F-150 forums lol), and other sources to come to a well-rounded decision. Remember, we don't know you, your personal circumstances, geographic restrictions, abilities, challenges, etc., and these should also be factored in your decision making "model" amongst other things like program funding, APA internship match rates, etc.

This was a long-winded statement to say....this is a multi-factorial decision. Treat it as such.

I think this website's strong leaning bias initially skewed my self-perception. Again, many of the comments however are true (funded vs unfunded is a no-brainer; smaller cohort size; generally better applicant CVs), and I understand the point. However, the distinctions always seemed less black and white to me and from my own experiences. I had multiple discussions with people in the real world (PhDs and PsyDs). I even worked for both and did not notice any difference in competency. Your personal experience post earlier is what has been extremely helpful for me to read and resonated with much of the real-world experiences I have had with people who obtained PsyDs.

"This was a long-winded statement to say....this is a multi-factorial decision. Treat it as such." - Thank you for the wise words of caution. I appreciate it and the time you've taken to respond to my initial post. You're responses mean a lot to me.

 

[NewNeuroDemic]

I think, and this has been suggested previously, the area where the PhD v PsyD differentiation is most pronounced is in big time research. I am hard pressed to think of more than one or two heavy hitters with a PsyD.