Predoctoral psychology intern selection: Does program type make a difference?

Social Behavior and Personality, 2003 by Gayer, Harvey L, Brown, Michael B, Gridley, Betty E, Treloar, James H

The purpose of this study was to determine whether or not the type of program (school psychology, clinical psychology or counseling psychology) is a factor in the predoctoral psychology internship selection process. Simulated application materials describing a prospective intern, identical in all respects except for the doctoral program type, were randomly sent to 535 directors of Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC) internship sites. One-third of the sites each received application materials that indicated that the student's training was in an APA-accredited clinical psychology program, an APA-accredited counseling psychology program, or an APA-accredited school psychology program. Internship directors or intern selection committee members from 302 APPIC-listed internship sites responded, resulting in a 58% response rate.

There is a pattern of greater acceptance for students from clinical psychology programs, with students from counseling psychology programs accepted somewhat less frequently, and students from school psychology programs being most often rejected. The results suggest that internship selectors may use a judgment heuristic that clinical psychology students are more suited to internships than are counseling and - especially - school psychology students during initial screening of internship applicants, even though there is no empirical evidence to support the hueristic. Internship selectors are advised to become more aware of potential biases toward students from counseling and school psychology programs.

Doctoral training for psychologists who wish to provide health services requires both a prescribed academic course of study and supervised practice that includes a predoctoral internship experience. The internship is not only an essential culminating component of doctoral training for professional psychologists, but is also a requirement of licensure for independent practice (Prus & Mittelmeir, 1995). Because interns are more likely to obtain employment in a setting similar to their internship site, internships are also an important link in doctoral students' career paths (American Psychological Association, 1999; Swerdlik & French, 2000).

A significant number of students, however, are left without internships following the internship selection process (Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers [APPIC], 1995; Dixon & Thorn, 2000; Keilin, Thorn, Rodolfa, Constantine, & Kaslow, 2000; Lopez, Draper, & Reynolds, 2001; Murray, 1996). Oehlert and Lopez (1998) also identified an imbalance in the number of American Psychological Association (APA) accredited internship sites compared to the number of students enrolled in APA-accredited doctoral programs. Applicants who were unmatched on match day had fewer APA-accredited or APPIC-approved sites available to them. Non-APA-approved sites are viewed as less prestigious than APA-approved sites (Kramer, Conoley, Bischoff, & Benes, 1991), and accreditation is important because of the connection between accredited internship sites and credentialing (Swerdlik & French, 2000). Lopez et al. (2001) found mixed outcomes for doctoral students in obtaining placements after notification day, with negative emotional effects for some students as a result of nonplacement.

The supply of predoctoral interns has outweighed the number of available internships as a result of a confluence of factors, including changes in the number and diversity of graduates applying for positions and health care budget cuts that reduced the number of internship slots available (Gloria & Robinson, 1994; Murray, 1996). The changing supply and demand came during a time of transition for school psychology doctoral students. While students from clinical psychology programs traditionally applied to internships in settings such as community mental-health centers, medical schools, and Veterans' Affairs Medical Centers, students from school psychology programs applied to - and obtained internships in - schools (Holder & Dodge, 1987; Phillips, 1981). Schools began to be less viable as internship sites as few were APA-accredited and there was often less availability of doctoral-level supervision (Hyman, Rosenfeld, & Olbrich, 1994). The increasing relevance of school psychologists' skills outside of schools led a greater number of doctoral school psychology students to aspire to internships in nonschool settings. During this same time counseling psychology also underwent similar changes in training programs, employment sites and demand for predoctoral internship sites (Gelso & Fretz, 1992; Watkins & Campbell, 1987; Watkins, Lopez, Campbell, & Himmell, 1986).

The intern selection process is similar to the process used for selecting any employee. The process is predicated on the assumption that some potential employees will be better suited for the job than others (Muchinsky, 1997). Selection becomes an especially relevant concern when there are many more applicants than positions to be filled (Cascio, 1998). The selection process is reductionistic, reducing a relatively large pool of applicants down to one person who is going to be the best for the job (Berry, 1998). These decisions are made by putting applicants through a series of steps in the selection process and eliminating some applicants from consideration at each step. For intern selection the first hurdle is the review of the application materials. If an applicant does not pass through this step then he or she will not be considered for the internship position.