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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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