Anonymous asked:

I'm looking for a therapist and am struggling financially. Counselors are definitely cheaper, but in your opinion, do they have the training to provide effective treatment? I don't know if this makes a difference or not, but I'm seeking help because of bingeing/purging, self-harm, and depression. Obviously you can't provide any personal treatment help or anything, but I just wasn't sure if a counselor would be worth it IN GENERAL for clients who are dealing with these issues.

Sorry to hear about your troubles, anon :[

Generally, counselors (LPC) are not as evidence-based, and so long-term outcomes don’t hold up as well as those who do utilize evidence-based treatments. Some might be great, but based on averages, they tend not to be. At least relative to, say, a clinical psychologist.

Is it better than nothing? Maybe…really not sure. It might give you someone to talk your struggles out with, but that’s not really a self-sustaining and particularly effective treatment long-term, unfortunately. My best advice would be to compile a list of treatment providers in your area, and call each one asking what sort of treatment they provide for struggles similar to your own. I would ask about their general approach to therapy (i.e., therapeutic orientation), and what specific kinds of therapeutic tasks they do.

So if they say they are CBT, what kinds of components of CBT do they use? Cognitive restructuring? Behavioral activation? Or is this just reflective listening with a “logical” twist (aka, watered down CBT).

You could also call clinical psychologists and ask if they use a paying scale approach, or offer pro bono work for those who can prove financial difficulties. Some clinical psychologists might charge some clients $150/hour, but then charge others with the same struggles just $40/hour, based on affordability. I would actually do this first, if possible.

Hopefully that helps! Best of luck to you. Please let me know if you have other questions, and I’m sure therapy101 could shed additional insight.

therapy101:

cognitivedefusion:

For sure! I don’t know if you can even be APA-certified without having some sort of coursework devoted to neuropsych-esque assessment (sometimes under the cognitive assessment umbrella). I guess I’m not certain if that’s sufficient to be considered a neuropsychologist as one’s career title? I don’t really know. I assumed it would require more.

Neuropsychologist is a protected title- you need to be board certified through ABPP/ABCN to use it. The method to do this is to first get a PhD or PsyD in clinical psych, then attend a internship focused on neuropsych (there are specific ones that fulfill ABPP/ABCN criteria) and then complete a postdoc in neuropsychology (that again, fulfills the ABPP/ABCN criteria), then apply for certification. In order to get an internship, graduate students generally need to take a bunch of specialized neuropsych classes and get a fair amount of neuropsych experience. 
I believe that only two assessment courses are required for APA-accreditation, one in intellectual/cognitive assessment and one in personality assessment. It’d be easy to miss many of the key pieces that neuropsychologists need if that’s really all you do. 

therapy101:

cognitivedefusion:

For sure! I don’t know if you can even be APA-certified without having some sort of coursework devoted to neuropsych-esque assessment (sometimes under the cognitive assessment umbrella). I guess I’m not certain if that’s sufficient to be considered a neuropsychologist as one’s career title? I don’t really know. I assumed it would require more.

Neuropsychologist is a protected title- you need to be board certified through ABPP/ABCN to use it. The method to do this is to first get a PhD or PsyD in clinical psych, then attend a internship focused on neuropsych (there are specific ones that fulfill ABPP/ABCN criteria) and then complete a postdoc in neuropsychology (that again, fulfills the ABPP/ABCN criteria), then apply for certification. In order to get an internship, graduate students generally need to take a bunch of specialized neuropsych classes and get a fair amount of neuropsych experience. 

I believe that only two assessment courses are required for APA-accreditation, one in intellectual/cognitive assessment and one in personality assessment. It’d be easy to miss many of the key pieces that neuropsychologists need if that’s really all you do. 

For sure! I don’t know if you can even be APA-certified without having some sort of coursework devoted to neuropsych-esque assessment (sometimes under the cognitive assessment umbrella). I guess I’m not certain if that’s sufficient to be considered a neuropsychologist as one’s career title? I don’t really know. I assumed it would require more.

For sure! I don’t know if you can even be APA-certified without having some sort of coursework devoted to neuropsych-esque assessment (sometimes under the cognitive assessment umbrella). I guess I’m not certain if that’s sufficient to be considered a neuropsychologist as one’s career title? I don’t really know. I assumed it would require more.

Anonymous asked:

Thanks for answering :) (Statistics question) I would like to know what part of statistics (what kind of models and tests) is most useful/used in your field and if you work with statisticians for your research and what kind of fields in psychology are more quantitative (if there are some more than others). And maybe what kind of problems in psychology are mostly looked at from a statistical perspective? I don't know, for example, the effects of medication...

It’s tough to outline which kinds of statistics are most useful in psychology as the field uses a wide array. Some of the more basic stuff (e.g., ANOVAs, T-tests, regressions, etc.) and some more complex stuff (e.g., EFA, MLM, mediation/moderation, etc.) - it’s all about what sort of research question you are asking, and what model best answers that question.

All the fields are quantitative, but they’ll generally differ. A lot of experimental psychology is primarily based on ANOVAs and T-tests (this is based off what one of my quant professors suggested, who was experimental-based). I think clinical and I/O are usually seen as employing a greater variety of statistical models as the research questions can be a bit more complex than some experimental research questions (e.g., the effects of an intervention vs. reaction time).

I can’t really give you anything too specific because you’re asking questions that would require a textbook to answer! Which is good! It’s good to be thinking about these things, but I might suggest some research into these matters with more objective and structured materials (e.g., statistics texts devoted to psychology).

Anonymous asked:

Hi! I'm interested in clinical psych PhD programs. I'm keen on research & practice; I hope to go into academic medicine. I'm not too keen on being a professor/pursuing tenure—I'd probably enjoy teaching in some capacity (e.g., supervision & adjunct lecturing), but am definitely not willing to devote the majority of my time to it. [1/2]

My question is to the best of your knowledge, do you think my disinterest in TT would affect my chances of getting into programs with a strong emphasis on research (e.g., BU, UNC-Chapel Hill, FSU)? [2/2] In other words, do such clinical science programmes prefer applicants to be primarily interested in getting tenure?
I’m not sure if being non-tenure track would drastically reduce your odds of getting accepted to one of those universities. Understand that being tenure doesn’t inherently mean you devote the majority of your time to teaching, though. There are tenured professors out there who teach 1-2 classes per semester, typically because they receive grant funding to allocate more time towards research. That’d be a perfectly viable option for you.
I’d say as long as you express strong research interests within a future career, then you should be okay. That’s more a hunch, though.

So about last night.

Y’all.

Y’ALL.

No words for last night. I took the psych GRE yesterday morning and drove home (had to take it 4 hours away…) I took a break from most other work the rest of the day save for maybe an hour or two of random stuff, and thus decided to go out with friends and be social for literally the first time in 10 weeks. While we were having some beers, I check my phone around 10:30 pm and have an email from a professor at one of the top clinical psychology programs (1.2% of those who apply end up going). Literally, top 5 in terms of funding opportunities, impact power of the research they do, the credibility of their work, their professors leading multiple organizations and special interest groups, etc. and it said:

I just checked with the DCT, and it should be possible for us to consider your application at [university] to potentially match with my lab even though I am not officially taking a student this cycle. Based on my experience working with you on the chapter, the discussions we had around it, and the various research work we’ve done, I am confident that it would be a lot of fun and very productive working together.

Anyhow, if you are still interested in the possibility of working together, I am encouraging you to apply.

I’ve worked with him for probably a year and a half now and I’ve known for a while that he was not going to be taking anyone in his lab for the 2015 admission cycle as he took two for the 2014 cycle, but he has apparently been looking into changing that so he can offer me a spot. This was completely unbeknownst to me until last night.

I’m just overwhelmed. I was shaking when I read that email. Because he was not originally listed to take a student, it’s not a guarantee that room can be made, but just him telling me that he’s trying to change that for me is like…beyond words.

And I think a lot of this comes down to what I’ve said in a previous post. If there’s someone you are working with you and want to get as much as you can out of it, then go above and beyond. It obviously depends on the person you are working with, as some may not appreciate the tips I provided in that linked post above, so you have to get a feel for the person yourself before taking any of my [anecdotal] advice. But with this researcher, I would just email him questions semi-regularly regarding the nature of the work we were doing and posing ideas for future areas of work, and I think a lot of that showed him characteristics about me not always captured through more formal means (e.g., personal statements, applications, etc.) I think a lot of him trying to get me into his lab despite not having room comes from me emailing him those “random-ish” questions/study ideas because it made it apparent that I was thinking very critically about that specific area of study, and that I could actually contribute beyond just doing grunt work. It sort of helped him see the way I was thinking about this area of study that is his specialty.

I don’t know…this is such a major thing for me. I’m just gloating/rambling at this point, but yeah…beyond overwhelmed just at the prospect. Even if it doesn’t work out, that’s just an incredible email to receive.

Anonymous asked:

can you describe your typical grad school schedule? like when you do homework/study, when you have class etc

I’m on internship, so this is not typical, but…

  • Wake up between 6:00 - 6:30.
  • Drive to internship (~40 minute drive).
  • Seeing students, working through crises, doing miscellaneous clinical tasks from 8:00 am - 4:00 pm.
  • Drive home (~40 minute drive).
  • Mondays I have lab from 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm, Wednesday I have to teach from 5:30 pm - 8:00 pm, and every other Thursday or so I have to meet up with faculty advisers at 5:15 to check in with how my course is going (the one I actually teach).
  • After that, I’m usually working on various research endeavors at home.
  • On days I don’t have that stuff going on, I’m usually at home working on those same various research endeavors (or, for the time being, studying for the GRE).
  • Weekends are usually 8-10 hour days doing research, studying applying to programs, etc.

Anonymous asked:

im not sure if you would know the answer to what i am about to ask, but i wanted to know if being in a phd program is 'maybe' less stressful than a psyd program? like in comparison (if you know) which degree is not 'AS' time consuming? To where theres a lot more personal time

I’d be surprised if it were less stressful as PhD programs are typically known for being more time-intensive, given they can only take 4-10 students per year while PsyD programs can take up to 200 (depending on where you go).

progenyofworms:

cognitivedefusion:

socialworkeroneday:

connect-the-dots-backward:


Hayes, S. C., Levin, M. E., Plumb-Vilardaga, J., Villatte, J. L., & Pistorello, J. (2013). Acceptance and commitment therapy and contextual behavioral science: Examining the progress of a distinctive model of behavioral and cognitive therapy. Behavior Therapy, 44(2), 180-198.

This. This. This.

so maybe I just need to read it a few more times to fully understand it. Or I’m just dumb. But
connect-the-dots-backward
what is this EXACTLY saying lol? I sorta get it. But I’m not content with my assumed understanding

"Feeling better" has not been found to lead to or cause getting better in functional ways (e.g., establishing relationships, pursuing a meaningful career, practicing health habits, etc.) It seems to be more the case that establishing those relationships and pursuing a meaningful career and practicing healthy habits leads to “feeling better.”
So engaging in those positive behaviors even when you don’t “feel” great or your symptoms are distressful is more important than simply getting to a place where you “feel better.”
Practicing healthy things when distressed > waiting until no longer distressed (if possible) and then practicing healthy things.


 Picking up the weights when they are heavy is how you get strong. You’re (in all likelihood) not going to get strong first.

I’m going to use the shit out of that in the future. Well put!

progenyofworms:

cognitivedefusion:

socialworkeroneday:

connect-the-dots-backward:

Hayes, S. C., Levin, M. E., Plumb-Vilardaga, J., Villatte, J. L., & Pistorello, J. (2013). Acceptance and commitment therapy and contextual behavioral science: Examining the progress of a distinctive model of behavioral and cognitive therapy. Behavior Therapy, 44(2), 180-198.

This. This. This.

so maybe I just need to read it a few more times to fully understand it. Or I’m just dumb. But
connect-the-dots-backward
what is this EXACTLY saying lol? I sorta get it. But I’m not content with my assumed understanding

"Feeling better" has not been found to lead to or cause getting better in functional ways (e.g., establishing relationships, pursuing a meaningful career, practicing health habits, etc.) It seems to be more the case that establishing those relationships and pursuing a meaningful career and practicing healthy habits leads to “feeling better.”

So engaging in those positive behaviors even when you don’t “feel” great or your symptoms are distressful is more important than simply getting to a place where you “feel better.”

Practicing healthy things when distressed > waiting until no longer distressed (if possible) and then practicing healthy things.

Picking up the weights when they are heavy is how you get strong. You’re (in all likelihood) not going to get strong first.

I’m going to use the shit out of that in the future. Well put!