I was curious as to what your opinions are of doing psychotherapy research in a clinical phd program. I've heard that you want to specialize in one area (to make you more appealing in the job market), but does psychotherapy research even count? Is the majority of psychotherapy research being done qualitative (as opposed to quantitative)? If so, is this problematic? Is psychotherapy research redundant because your going to receive clinical training in clinical phd programs as well? General thoughts, ideas, suggestions are always appreciated!
Psychotherapy Research
- Thread starter McClinas
- Start date
I'm a bit confused. Why would psychotherapy research not count? How are you defining psychotherapy research?
It absolutely counts. In fact, I wish it held more interest for me because its far more fundable than basic science work (well, assuming its good). I'm not sure where you got the idea most is qualitative, I don't think that's the case at all. I'm not sure why it would be redundant...one of the big advantages of doing psychotherapy research is that it is VERY much in line with our training and it fits within our "niche". Tons of psychologists do therapy research, and its quite well-respected (assuming they do it well of course).
The only issue is that therapy research can take a long time. For this reason, I know many labs (mine included) discourage students from doing psychotherapy research for their master's or dissertations, though we are often involved in faculty projects. Other labs are fine with it, but its still important to be careful that it doesn't delay your graduation.
It absolutely counts. In fact, I wish it held more interest for me because its far more fundable than basic science work (well, assuming its good). I'm not sure where you got the idea most is qualitative, I don't think that's the case at all. I'm not sure why it would be redundant...one of the big advantages of doing psychotherapy research is that it is VERY much in line with our training and it fits within our "niche". Tons of psychologists do therapy research, and its quite well-respected (assuming they do it well of course).
The only issue is that therapy research can take a long time. For this reason, I know many labs (mine included) discourage students from doing psychotherapy research for their master's or dissertations, though we are often involved in faculty projects. Other labs are fine with it, but its still important to be careful that it doesn't delay your graduation.
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,827
- Reaction score
- 5,612
Well of course not. Training a practitioner is not the same as conducting original research on new/existing intervention methods.
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2007
- Messages
- 1,563
- Reaction score
- 58
No, from what I've seen, the majority is quantitative. I suppose that if you look into psychodynamic or psychoanalytic orientations, you'll find qualitative work. However, the majority of the studies being done on evidence based treatments are quantitative.
You REALLY need to be more specific here. In what situation? As a master's? A dissertation? As a little side project for fun? In whose lab? What kind of qualitative work? Case studies? Measure development?
You're unlikely to build a career off exclusively qualitative work, regardless of type. It certainly has merit and is getting an increasing amount of respect, but mostly to help guide quant work. This is assuming you're referring to methodologically sound qualitative work. Case studies and the like also have their merit, but are generally not going to be viewed in the same light - though there is nothing wrong with writing up an interesting case if you are lucky enough to get one. They're also very unlikely to fly as a master's or dissertation most legitimate places, since they typically want to see something a bit more methodologically advanced. On the other hand, a well-done qualitative study to develop a measure that guides future research would probably be fine as a master's.
You're unlikely to build a career off exclusively qualitative work, regardless of type. It certainly has merit and is getting an increasing amount of respect, but mostly to help guide quant work. This is assuming you're referring to methodologically sound qualitative work. Case studies and the like also have their merit, but are generally not going to be viewed in the same light - though there is nothing wrong with writing up an interesting case if you are lucky enough to get one. They're also very unlikely to fly as a master's or dissertation most legitimate places, since they typically want to see something a bit more methodologically advanced. On the other hand, a well-done qualitative study to develop a measure that guides future research would probably be fine as a master's.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 10,827
- Reaction score
- 5,612
Nothing wrong with it, but I agree, its much to broad of a question. What do you mean? What you talking about researching..... underlying theory, constructs, processes, etc? Or are you refering to a specific type of dynamic oriented therapy compared to another modality (ie., efficacy)? The former is much different than the later and I would have to ask what your paradigm and methodology for this for the former would be?
Anyway, the point is that, yes, many academics have made a name for themselves researching psychotherapy outcomes. If this is something your interested in, then i would suggest searching programs for professors conducting intervention research that interests you.
Last edited:
