Clinical Psychology

training by accrediting those programs that adhere
to the goals of psychological clinical science and
produce outcomes consistent with these goals
(Baker et al., 2009).
As evidenced by the Academy’s membership
growth over the last two decades, more programs

have embraced this model of training for clinical

psychologists. Further, the addition of internships

into the Academy has provided the opportunity

for a continuum of clinical science training in a

variety of settings (e.g., classroom, research labora-

tory, and clinical settings).

cognitive science and neuroscience. This means that I

must be an active student of the discipline. Another

facet of my professional life is my involvement in

administrative and service roles. I have been director of

the clinical training program at Indiana University;

have been on the board of directors of the local com-

munity mental health center; have served on editorial

boards of journals; and have been active in profes-

sional organizations at the national level. Virtually all

of my professional efforts, in one way or another, are

devoted to differentiating science from pseudoscience

within clinical psychology and to promoting clinical

psychology as a science.

What are your particular areas of expertise or interest?

I’ve already described my content focus in research:

interpersonal competence. In pursuing this interest, I

have studied a variety of specific clinical problems and

populations—including shy college men and women;

nonassertive individuals; persons suffering from

schizophrenia, depression, OCD, eating disorders, and

addiction to tobacco; adolescent boys and girls identi-

fied as juvenile delinquents; and men who are sexually

coercive toward women. My research across these

problem areas has been characterized by an emphasis

on conceptual and measurement issues. Recent work,

in particular, has explored the use of concepts and

methods adapted from cognitive science and neurosci-

ence. My goal is to build better theoretical and quan-

titative models of clinically relevant phenomena.

What are the future trends you see for clinical

psychology?

Clinical training programs that continue to have a

strong“practice”focus (whether they identify them-

selves as Psy.D. programs or scientist-practitioner Ph.D.

programs) are ignoring the dramatic changes currently

taking place within the mental health field (increas-

ingly called the behavioral health field). As health care

in the United States shifts from the traditional

fee-for-service model to the managed care model,

clinical psychologists are losing their role as primary

care providers. The reasons are obvious. Two to three

social workers can be hired for the price of one psy-

chologist. If the research evidence shows no difference

in treatment outcome between doctoral-level clinical

psychologists and master’s-level social workers, then

the cost-conscious managed care systems will hire

social workers, rather than psychologists, to provide

most mental health services. One feature distinguishes

some doctoral-level clinical psychologists from most

other mental health specialists, however; this is the

psychologist’s research training, or special preparation

for the role of research scientist. Only those clinical

training programs that have maintained and strength-

ened the Ph.D.’s traditional focus on scientific research

training are preparing their students for a viable future

in the changing mental health care field.

Richard M. McFall

Psychology Dept., Indiana Univ.

CURRENT ISSUES IN CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY 65