if you knew what you know now? Ie Would you guys still be Psychologists if you knew everything you know now (the whole process of becoming a Psychologist, and now having experience doing the job day to day)?
Last edited:
why were you warned about it?Maybe? I very much enjoy what I do, though I'd probably do an MD/PhD...which was my original plan, but I was warned off by multiple students.
I sort of have that situation in-front of me now. I think I will be hold out, assuming my marks stay high.Yes, but I probably would have gone about it in a more patient and strategic way (e.g. worked/researched longer and held out for better funding versus going to a specialist program with limited funding so I wouldn't have had to wait for another cycle to start working towards my PhD).
I was told by multiple students (across different programs) that it is a ton of work (duh), but there is also a lot of pressure to apply to certain specialties and residency programs. I would have made it work, as it was just one of many paths.why were you warned about it?
No way. I don't think it's worth all the blood, sweat, tears, years, and money....
Just curious for the last couple of guys..for both of you it says Psychology students..are you guys actual Psychologists?
Just curious for the last couple of guys..for both of you it says Psychology students..are you guys actual Psychologists?
Is it because of much of what LETSGONYR said?No. But I'm in my 5th year of graduate school and can honestly say I would not do it over. Granted, my answer could change after being a psychologist for a while, but I doubt it. Optimism FTW.
Is it because of much of what LETSGONYR said?
I'm a postdoc. I think the path to get where I am has been really tough and was often unforgiving... lots of relocation and lots of stress, which have impacted me and my relationships. Overall, I love what I do and I really like my job, and looking at job postings on the listservs gets me excited about the prospects for the future. That being said... I wouldn't want to go through it all again. There are simply too many other paths that would have also led to career satisfaction without as much sacrifice.
Yeah. I'm very curious how dependent it is on the program you end up with (from faculty, to your actual class)/including potential debt of said program.Man, I had it made in grad school, apparently. Some of the best years of my life, along with some awesome people who are still a big part of my life/social network. Also, I wonder about how much debt load plays into career satisfaction.
Man, I had it made in grad school, apparently. Some of the best years of my life, along with some awesome people who are still a big part of my life/social network. Also, I wonder about how much debt load plays into career satisfaction.
Man, I had it made in grad school, apparently. Some of the best years of my life, along with some awesome people who are still a big part of my life/social network. Also, I wonder about how much debt load plays into career satisfaction.
I would do it all again. Sometimes I think I might have picked psychiatry because I do enjoy the field of medicine and they do get paid more, but the truth is I love being a psychologist and I think that what we bring to the table in the field of mental health is essential and valuable. I worked for ten years in transportation and ten years in sales. The business world is not for me. I do think we have a few problems in the field: pressure to lower standards, midlevels competition, salary deflation, skyrocketing debts, and I am passionate about working towards solutions because I think our profession benefits society. We are a relatively young and growing field and I am excited about being part of that. I also love that my interventions are safer and more effective for my patients than most medications. My schedule is always full and people in my community are starting to realize that the poorly supervised, online degree LPC, MFT types are not as effective. I know a couple of them personally and one of them just signed a contract for supervision and the other is always "just wanting to pick my brain about stuff". They are good people, they just don't have the experience, education, and training that we have and the better ones know their limitations and seek guidance.
As a behavior analyst (clinically) and radical behaviorist (philosophically), I guess I have to be conceptually consistent and honestly say that my being a psychologist was not actually a result of my "knowing" and "choosing," but rather of the combination of learning history and interactions with the environments that I found myself in. I won't be super-deterministic and posit that the collection of matter known as me was set to be what/where I am at the time of the big bang, but it's something like that. Plus, I have no other marketable skills.if you knew what you know now? Ie Would you guys still be Psychologists if you knew everything you know now (the whole process of becoming a Psychologist, and now having experience doing the job day to day)?
This gives me hopeMy answer is probably. FWIW, I'm 1.5 years out of grad school, fully licensed, and in a relatively good job. I think in my last years of grad school, my answers would sound ALOT like sunshine008 though. A few years ago, totally not worth it. Now that I'm done, yeah, I dig it.
But... when I compare where I'm at versus my friends who didnt go after PhD's, and instead got a job, and that job paid for a masters, etc... sometimes I wonder. There's part of me that wonders if I was a computer programmer, data analyst, etc, what my job satisfaction, savings, debt, and outlook on life would be like. Hard to really know, tbh.
All I can really say is that for the most part, I really enjoy a) being a psychologist, and b) being done with grad school.
In this spirit, since I am primarily a psychodynamic clinician then obviously it is my mom's fault that I ended up being a psychologist! I imagine the CBT folks are just following their irrational core beliefs - "if I become a psychologist, then I will be loveable, worthwhile, matter, good enough (fill in whichever core belief most suits). The humanistic psychologists are the really nice people who believe that all humans are essentially nice like them. The existentialists don't really know what they are doing or why they are doing it and then ask whether it really matters or not. The neuropsychologists are really just mad scientist types that want to study the human brain cause it's cool, they have no deeper underlying psychological motivations.As a behavior analyst (clinically) and radical behaviorist (philosophically), I guess I have to be conceptually consistent and honestly say that my being a psychologist was not actually a result of my "knowing" and "choosing," but rather of the combination of learning history and interactions with the environments that I found myself in. I won't be super-deterministic and posit that the collection of matter known as me was set to be what/where I am at the time of the big bang, but it's something like that. Plus, I have no other marketable skills.
fwiw I would identify myself primarily as CBT, and I find myself very unlovable. Being a psychologist has not changed that at all.I imagine the CBT folks are just following their irrational core beliefs - "if I become a psychologist, then I will be lovable, worthwhile, matter, good enough (fill in whichever core belief most suits).
In this spirit, since I am primarily a psychodynamic clinician then obviously it is my mom's fault that I ended up being a psychologist! I imagine the CBT folks are just following their irrational core beliefs - "if I become a psychologist, then I will be loveable, worthwhile, matter, good enough (fill in whichever core belief most suits). The humanistic psychologists are the really nice people who believe that all humans are essentially nice like them. The existentialists don't really know what they are doing or why they are doing it and then ask whether it really matters or not. The neuropsychologists are really just mad scientist types that want to study the human brain cause it's cool, they have no deeper underlying psychological motivations.
See, I told you I didn't want to work this morning.
For the neuro folks..a Q..for those that have practiced a year or two..is there an sense of boredom after awhile or is there always something new t keep you interested?
Diagnosis: The vast majority of your practice ends up being very typical cases for your type of practice (e.g., Alzheimer's). If you are competent, you learn everything you can about those diagnoses, treatments, legal ramifications (even if you are not forensic), prognosis, etc. Every once in a while, there is an rare thing that comes across your plate which is incredibly interesting. After a few thousand cases, you end up being able to pretty much call a diagnosis based upon the interview and neuro exam. Still have to give the tests to confirm, which can be boring. Example: I had a pt in the hospital a few years ago who reported the symptoms of posterior cortical atrophy. So, I knew what was going to happen on tests, and what the diagnosis was going to be. Still gave them, gave the feedback, family explained that a local neurologist had performed a huge series of tests to come up with that diagnosis in the past and that pt had just forgotten it.
Testing: To keep yourself interested you can vary the tests you give and keep up with the literature about the various psychometric properties of said tests. Every now and again, there are reports about a very specific subtest that has XYZ properties which can be interesting. Or learn the history of some old tests.
Long story short: It can get boring. You can find some ways to mitigate boredom.
For the neuro folks..a Q..for those that have practiced a year or two..is there an sense of boredom after awhile or is there always something new t keep you interested?