MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401342525 · doi:10.61727/sssppj/1.2024.06

The problem of psychologist certification: A comparative analysis of international experience

2024· article· en· W4401342525 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Oksana Voloshyna

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Studios on Social and Political Psychology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationPsychologyManagement scienceApplied psychologyMedical educationMedicinePolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the war in Ukraine poses a significant threat to national mental health, professional psychological support has become more crucial than ever for Ukrainians. The need to regulate the profession and establish a safe environment for consumers of psychological services has led to the implementation of psychologist licensing and certification. In Ukraine, this system is imperfect and requires optimisation, one of the ways to achieve which is to study and adapt the best international experience. In light of this, the aim of this article was to examine the characteristics of psychologist certification in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, the European Union, and China to identify prospects for developing the psychologist certification system in Ukraine. The methodological tools used included the dialectical method, as well as systemic, informational, theological, and functional approaches, which allowed for the presentation of the features of certification in the current conditions of professionalisation of psychological activities. It has been established that certification has historically been one of the methods for measuring competence in professional psychology. For this purpose, professional associations create voluntary certification systems. The features of the most developed psychologist certification systems (USA, Canada, and the United Kingdom) were examined, and an attempt was made to compare them with similar certification models in the European Union and China. Common requirements for psychologist certification in these countries were identified, including requirements for the content and duration of specialised education; requirements for supervised psychological practice; requirements for professional development in both practical and research areas; and requirements for the moral and ethical qualities of the psychologist. Conceptualising and measuring psychologist competence is an ongoing dynamic process as the field of psychological practice continues to evolve. The practical value of the results lies in their potential use to identify ways to improve the national psychologist certification system and the possibilities for transitioning from voluntary certification to mandatory certification

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.206
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Studios on Social and Political PsychologySame topicCounseling Practices and SupervisionFrench-language works237,207