Development of a global curriculum for professional psychology: Implications of the Combined‐Integrated model of doctoral training
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article considers the development of a global training curriculum and qualification in professional psychology, with particular emphasis on the Combined-Integrated (C-I) model. The C-I model exposes professional psychology trainees to two or more of the practice areas (i.e., clinical, counseling, school/educational). The authors argue that the C-I approach is one that is well suited to the development of a global training curriculum due to its emphasis on broadly training psychologists as well as its respect for diversity and integration of various theoretical and professional orientations. A survey of training programs in 16 countries/regions on six continents found significant variation in training, minimal qualifications, and roles of the professional psychologist. The authors recommend that an international group of psychologists develop a regionally flexible, but common, training curriculum and qualification that would include a five- to six-year competency-based qualification. Ways in which the C-I training model may serve to integrate and globalize professional psychology are discussed.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".