why do PhD's have such a problem with PsyD's?

Question

the PsyD is a professional doctorate (just like an MD or a JD) yet it gets little respect in its field. what i dont understand is why PhD's have such a problem with PsyD's. they are basically the same thing as the PhD programs but with a different emphasis. PhD's are constantly saying that PsyD's arent well rounded and that PhD's are better trained, but how can that be when most PhD programs focus on research and the PsyD degree was created specifically because some people in the psychology community began the question PhD's ability to provide quality therapy/counseling? PhD's claim that PsyD's dont understand the science behind psychology, but PsyD's write dissertations to! and PsyD's base all of their practices off of scientific research! i think that PhDs are just as narrow in their training as PsyD's, they just have a different emphasis. what do you think? do you think PhD's have a legitimate arguement? or are they just snobs? please add your degree and state when you respond

Answer 1

I'm a Ph.D in North Carolina. I couldn't give a hoot whether someone has a PsyD or Ph.D. What sticks in MY craw is all you CLINICIANS who think that is the ONLY type of psychology there is! Only about 1/2 of all psychologists graduate from a clinical program. The rest of us (myself included) are in social psych, school psych, ergonomics, I/O psych, ed psych, developmental, etc. but you would think that we aren't psychologists to listen to the clinical majors.

What do YOU think?

Answer 2

I came down with a mental illness in 1987, at that time, the most used drugs for mental illness's were anti convulsants. In 1987, the "science" of Psychology really got underway. It was so new to us and we didn't have a real comprehension of the brain's function. I think PhD's are more apt to have problems with PsyD's because PhD's are geared to a logical, mathematical, method. 1+ 2 = 3. Sociology is the study of human behavior within society. Psychiatry is the same thing but with a twist that trys to hypothesize in a logical, biological way that we do what we do because we are "born" that way. A Sociologist will say that we are what we are raised to be. A PsyD will say we are what out biology tells us. PhD's literally have the questions asked and answered and then they learned it. Their new cases are pretty much the same medical problems they've seen before. Sure there are newer things. As the environment changes, we are exposed to newer physical ailments...do you see many people eating from styrofoam anymore? It used to be that acid leaches the petroleum in the styrofoam of the cups and we ingested that. Sure, there are still styrofoam products, and the green issue has really dampened the use. I guess that PhD's don't give credit to PsyD's because their practice is made up of complicated guesswork, rather than proven tradition.

I personally have a PhD and a PsyD. They get along fabulously, and I wouldn't want it any other way. I think there is a growing trend among both sides that see that the only ones whom get caught in the middle are their patients, and does this bickering break the hypocratic oath..."I will do no harm..." I hope that this answers your question.

Answer 3

I get concern when I read a question and the attitude that accompany.Gives me the impression of how little psychologist know about their own professio.In the late 50 s in one of their convention in Colorado participants discussed the method in which psychologist were to be trained.These standards came to be known as The Bolder Modal (google it is also in Wikipedia). In essence the idea was to train psychologist as scientists first and then clinicians. If you don't know the science how do you know the level of what you are doing is presise, valid and reliable?Since, the APA has in my not so humble but accurate opinion has lower the standards to an anything goes, any treatment is better than no treatment and a number of attitudes that I assert is not in the best interest of the patients.The PsyD, is based mostly is prove of such lowering of scientific standard.Butler & lilienfeld note that survey have shown that only 28percent of clinicians in mental health ever read any science

Answer 4

I am a Psy.D. working in CA and I have not experienced fellow Ph.D. clinicians having any kind of problem with me. While a Ph.D. is definitely a more research-oriented degree, it should be noted that a Psy.D. is perfectly capable of doing research if they want to and if they have the right job - I did my post-doctoral hours on a research study at a prestigious university, for instance. But most Psy.D.'s are not interested in that - hence, their degree.
Whatever the degree, it has been my experience that the people that get the most respect are the ones who are most competent at their jobs... in addition, a Psy.D. from an APA-accrediated program is worth a lot of more than a Ph.D. from a "degree mill," if you know what I mean.

Answer 5

I think that psychology is a pseudoscience. It cannot be measured and proven like biology, math, or physics. I do cancer research at a university, and all my colleagues snicker at the psych department. They are not considered real scientists.