Search

Disability is an important facet of diversity. Although diversity in clinical training in health service psychology has improved considerably, training often neglects accessibility and inclusion for individuals with sensory disabilities. The limited research to date documents that trainees with sensory disabilities (TSDs) report extensive barriers and are consistently underrepresented in clinical settings. Furthermore, few resources have been developed to guide accommodating TSD in clinical training. Accordingly, our goals in this article are twofold as follows: (a) to highlight the barriers in clinical training faced by TSD and (b) to provide recommendations for trainees, supervisors, clinical leadership, and directors of clinical training to improve accessibility and inclusion for TSD. We offer vignettes to illustrate barriers faced by TSD and suggest guidelines to improve access for TSD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Assessment is critical to health service psychology and represents a core area of coverage during doctoral training. Despite this, training practices in assessment are understudied. Accordingly, this study utilized a national sampling of students (n = 534) enrolled in an American Psychological Association-accredited health service psychology doctoral program with substantive training in clinical or counseling psychology. We asked trainees to rate their competency for instruments in which they had training. We examined trends in training experiences, including both theory-based education and applied clinical opportunities, and explored differences in instrument training trends across program type (PhD/PsyD) and program discipline (clinical/counseling). Results of this study suggest a general convergence with professional practice trends in terms of instrument coverage, less clinical training, and exposure compared with didactic methods and generally small differences across program type and discipline in perceived competence and instrument exposure. Implications for training and education in psychological assessment are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This investigation surveyed students (n = 91) from 16 American Psychological Association accredited doctoral programs in clinical and counseling psychology about knowledge and training in personality assessment. We report self-perceived competency on specific instruments as well as training trends in coursework and instrument exposure in clinical settings. We also evaluate skill at interpretation on a popular personality instrument using two tasks, a narrative interpretation where trainees estimate an originating score profile using a standardized interpretive report and a symptom probability task where trainees predict the likelihood of symptoms based on a score profile. The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) and Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI) were the most frequently trained and utilized and had the highest self-perceived competence. When given interpretation tasks to evaluate assessment skills using the MMPI-2-RF, trainee performance was variable and discrepant from a comparison expert panel given the same tasks. Overall, our results suggest that there is a need for further, and more comprehensive, study on competence and training according to the experience of trainees. We note that there is variability across instruction on instrument use, exposure to instruments in practice, and practical skill level. We highlight our findings across four conceptual areas and discuss the implications for the observed trends: frequency of instrument exposure, trainee beliefs of competence, trainee interpretation skills, and reporting of testing interpretation. This pilot study provides the first evaluation of assessment training patterns as reported by health service psychology trainees. Results indicate that, in general, trainee instrument exposure and use mirror those of practicing psychologists; however, there is notable variability in how assessment results are reported and in trainee competency. Additional research evaluating health service psychology training should utilize student participants so that direct evaluations of competency and outcomes are possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Articles in this series (Callahan & Watkins, 2018a, 2018b, 2018c, 2018d) elucidate a concerning lack of research on training in the field of health service psychology. There are many factors that impact the scant evidence available, including aspects of training programs themselves, aspects of our current funding climate, the structure and influence of universities, a lack of diversity in graduate students and faculty, and the flexibility (or the perception of a lack thereof) inherent in the practice of psychology and the accrediting bodies that influence our training. There are numerous ways to improve our evidence base for training, especially those related to supporting and growing the number of researchers engaged in this area of study. Some external factors outside individual program control will likely limit the speed with which improvements can be made, but a great deal can be done within our programs to make significant changes that have the potential to influence both training and client outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This brief report summarizes the basic principles and common applications of the flipped classroom, highlighting its use in the teaching of psychology. Evidence regarding the effectiveness of the inverted teaching model is reviewed and an argument for its use within graduate-level psychology courses is provided. Two examples of graduate-level psychology courses (i.e., cognitive abilities and objective personality assessment) that incorporate elements of the flipped classroom are presented, along with suggestions for other applied courses. Finally, the authors discuss potential benefits and barriers for redesigning a traditionally formatted class to adhere to an inverted format. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]