Education, Training, Licensing, and Credentialing in Clinical Psychology
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter summarizes the current status of doctoral education, practica, internship, and postdoctoral training of clinical psychologists (broadly defined) in the United States and Canada. For comparison, brief information is also provided on the education and training of psychologists in the European Union and Latin America. A summary of the developmental history of the profession of psychology in the United States, including specialization, provides a context for understanding the quality assurance mechanisms for programs and the two models of training: PhD and PsyD. This chapter presents the differences in accreditation between the United States and Canada, and contrasts accreditation with designation mechanisms in professional psychology. The requirements for licensure are summarized for the United States and Canada, including the importance of mobility, followed by a summary of the main credentialing organizations in professional psychology. Finally, this overview informs the reader on the responsibility that licensure and national credentialing organizations share in holding the profession accountable to the public it serves.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it