Psychology Education and Training

A global perspective

Rainer Silbereisen, Pierre Ritchie, Janak Pandey, Rainer Silbereisen, Pierre Ritchie, Janak Pandey

• Publisher: Psychology Press
• Year: 2014
• ISBN:
  9781317915973
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: History & Theory in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

Much of the psychological research in the last century has been conducted in the global North West; hence, many prevailing theories and methodologies reflect the philosophical framework and shared cultural knowledge of this region. Other world views and cultural contexts have, as yet, not had the same opportunity to develop scientific insights that come to the attention of global audiences. Psychology Education and Training is the first truly international effort to generate a framework for common standards in psychological education and training across the globe.

Psychologists have long studied human beings in their socio-cultural context. New challenges such as globalisation and the relationship of the brain and behavior require that education and training keep pace with these rapidly evolving developments. The chapters in this book were generated by an international conference which resulted in the Dornburg Accord. While anchored in higher education, the focus is on the generative and translational psychological science needed to fulfill psychology's responsibility to society. Psychology Education and Training is the first book of its kind to cover both historic strengths and the requirements of emerging fields. The book deals with balancing the universalities and cultural specificities of psychological processes, the adjustments to academic curricula required to support national needs, as well as the credentials and regulations required to assure the quality of psychological services.

Psychology Education and Training is unique in providing initial data and concurrent assessment of various components of education and training in psychology across the globe. The book is a must for faculty members, advanced students of psychology and policy-makers who are interested in the issues that shape their societies.

Part I

Introduction

Introduction to psychology education and training

A global perspective

Rainer K. Silbereisen and Pierre L.-J. Ritchie

Why concern ourselves with psychology education and training (PET)? The simple answer is that we have a responsibility to enable the education and training of the next generations of psychologists for careers in academia and practice. Educators have a proactive obligation to ensure that future psychologists are prepared to deal with the sustained changes in societies and cultures which present new challenges for psychology’s composition and outreach. The ‘we’ in the second sentence refers initially to the editors and authors of this book, who have a shared commitment to the many issues of psychology education and training addressed here. All are scientists and/or representatives of organizations concerned about what defines psychology, whom it serves, and how the next generation of psychologists should be prepared for the opportunities that await them.

Changes affecting psychology

Current global challenges certainly have an impact on psychology. Globalization itself encompasses unprecedented international exchange affecting virtually all aspects of local, national and regional economies, communication and cultural diffusion. Many people are not prepared for this and have difficulties in dealing with the risks and opportunities in new market economies (Silbereisen and Chen, 2010). The pace and magnitude of extensive worldwide migration, for instance, confronts belief systems and cultural traditions. We have sadly observed how more proximate contact has increased the risk of deeply rooted conflicts being activated in some areas of the world. Similarly, globalization can reduce or increase disparities. In either case, there are consequences for social structure and concomitant psychological factors affecting, for example, mental health and family systems. Countries in sub-Saharan Africa, for instance, are mostly ill-positioned to take advantage of globalization for several reasons, but particularly due to low educational provision and lack of foreign investment. This consequently divides society and inequalities within societies widen (Perrons, 2004).

Most of the world has recently experienced wide-reaching economic recession. One of the contributing factors has been irresponsible risk-taking by some of the main decision-makers involved. To date, this is poorly understood; psychological expertise is required to understand such behavior and achieve better decisions in the future (Wuermli et al., 2012). The shake-up of repressive political regimes at the end of the twentieth century often resulted in the old elite regaining power. The new voice people had begun to express is becoming muted again. The large-scale disturbance of ecological balances by old and new industrial superpowers increases the threat of natural and man-made disasters. In all these examples, the related human activities confirm why psychology is asked to recommend solutions. As leaders of the discipline, we must acknowledge that we have not yet always achieved the scientific or applied competence to offer well-founded information and insights, or practical solutions.

To illustrate the claim that social and cultural change present new demands and opportunities for psychology, let us briefly consider one of the most profound changes affecting primarily (but no longer limited to) the North-West of the globe – population aging. In many countries, the proportion of people over 65 years has been growing steadily over recent decades and with it the burden of age-related chronic illnesses and related disabilities. According to data reported by Karel et al. (2012), the prevalence of neurocognitive disorders (e.g., dementia) among those 65 and older is 10 percent. This figure prompts the need for new research. There has been a scarcity of longitudinal studies that distinguish between the later consequences of disorders already evident earlier in life, and mental health problems that develop in old age. Moreover, the aging population in many countries is not only diverse in terms of ethnicity due to worldwide migration, but also in terms of unique generational experiences (e.g., baby boomers in the global north and those affected by economic crises earlier in life in various parts of the world).

Against this background, it is alarming to realize that in the USA for instance, psychological health service providers currently spend less than 10% of their time, on average, with adults older than 65 years (Michalski and Kohout, 2011). To close the gap between projected needs and current offerings requires a doubling of service time; this presents opportunities for the next generation of psychological practitioners. However, the psychology education and training to which we are accustomed seems to be particularly underdeveloped with regard to such challenges (Pinquart, 2007). In Chapter 4 of this book Fernandez-Ballesteros both articulates the problems and proposes a model of expertise that can serve as a basis for psychologist educators.

The examples cited may appear exaggerated to some and less relevant to others. Nonetheless, we observe that their effects are already being overshadowed by new challenges concerning the development, socialization, and education of children, youth and young adults. For example, the sweeping technological changes that resulted in the characterization ‘knowledge societies’ require large-scale investment in early education to overcome the societal divides related to opportunities for a successful life (Heckman, 2011). Educational systems must also be tailored to the needs of populations with diverse backgrounds. Beyond the traditional fundamental areas that define a ‘good education’, decision-makers are increasingly aware of the importance to social cohesion of promoting the knowledge and skills necessary for appropriate behavior in complex social groups. All this, of course, has implications for the work of psychologists as scientists and practitioners. To create the opportunity for such contributions to society and human well-being, the discipline must build on both its historic strengths and the emerging areas. While taking full advantage of technological innovation, in both instances new educational frameworks and approaches are required.

What is psychology?

There are indeed new societal challenges – both in nature and scope – that require adjustment of the traditional canons of psychology. Before proceeding with further consideration of how to get there, it is pertinent to offer a few thoughts on what we understand to be the core of the discipline. First, as Magnusson (2012) put it, psychology deals with ‘the human being and society’. It is also understood that animals can contribute to an understanding of psychological processes. Psychology deals with the unique role of individuals as the core players in societal and cultural processes. Thus, psychology and its realization through research and practice addresses the individual as an active ‘biopsychosocial’ being involved in dynamic interaction with a context, be it proximal or distal.

Psychology as a science is part of a family of related sciences that also investigate dynamic interactions between individuals and their environment, but which focus on different aspects. Although psychology is often identified as a social science, a recent study by Witte and Strohmeier (2013) of what is actually accomplished in (basic) psychological research (the ‘disciplinary matrix’) revealed a much broader overlap with biology. Both disciplines are strong in confronting empirical data with hypotheses, thereby using a statistical inference rationale, but psychology is somewhat more oriented toward testing existing theories rather than the development of new concepts and models. That said, some sub-fields of psychology, like cognitive, social, and biological psychology, have particularly well developed research paradigms. This has had important implications for psychology’s value as a neuroscience and potential in the emerging area of epigenetics. Based on the analysis of research projects funded by a national science foundation, Witte and Strohmeier (2013) conclude that to be better aligned to the approach of biology, psychology should complement its emphasis on theory testing by greater emphasis on theory development. Moreover, in contrast to other disciplines, psychology appears to be over-homogenous in its methodological approach. Thus, it could profit from greater intellectual engagement prompted by enhanced utilization of other approaches, such as model development and qualitative field studies.

Psychologists study (mainly) human beings in their larger societal and cultural context. From this platform, it is evident that cross-disciplinary research is required to explain how individuals develop and manifest their capacities for dynamic interaction with multiple contexts across the lifespan. This is a highly complex process; consequently, no one scientific discipline can shoulder the demands of formulating all explanatory concepts, providing methodologies, and planning interventions. Instead, psychology has to join in concerted action with other sciences toward understanding the dynamic interaction between individual and society.

As the remarks on prototypical research methodologies of psychology already show, this collaboration has to go beyond the usual partners, such as sociology or economics, and encompass biology and other life sciences. More specifically, the many facets of neuroscience and research on the gene–environment interaction, which are increasingly becoming coherent disciplines in their own right, offer especially fruitful prospects for strengthening the interface between psychology and biology. In Chapter 5 Wolfgang Miltner makes a contribution to our thinking about this in the context of psychology education and training.

A prominent recent example is the enriched understanding of psycho-biological aspects of stress as a mediating link between environmental pressures and lasting effects on the neurocognitive and behavioral system of humans. Stressors, such as the disruption of family processes following large-scale disasters, result in epigenetic modifications of DNA-coded cellular effects on physiological processes related to the stress system. These often relatively long-lasting changes in sensitivity to stressors have an impact on the development of brain functions and behavioral repertoires (Silbereisen et al., 2013). Without exaggeration, for the first time one can state that we, as psychologists, have a clear understanding of the cascading microprocesses at the cellular level that link environment and individual behavior.

While psychology is the science of individual behavior, behavior itself is influenced in its ontogenesis and microgenesis by the various layers of ecology around us, ranging from families to societies and cultures. However, it is also correct that it is the categorization, classification and diagnostic tools of psychology which enable us to distinguish among various patterns of behavior. Without psychology’s scientific expertise, our new scientific allies (sometimes our adversaries and competitors too) would not know which human behavior results from the conditions and processes within their own realm. This is a good example of the importance of being theory-driven, albeit informed by emerging empirically derived knowledge achieved through methodological rigour.

This example also validates Magnusson’s (2012) affirmation that ‘scientific progress is the change in the content and boundaries of disciplines over time, as a result of scientific breakthroughs and successive progress’ (p. 25). This process reveals times of rapid change as well as longer periods of stability and even stagnation. As a consequence, established sciences such as psychology become better suited to new challenges, and new disciplines also may emerge. This is a permanent process, well-known from natural sciences. We would be wise not to regard it as a matter of losing one’s territory. Of course, the new questions and new boundaries require an adjustment among all the players, whether they be established scientists (and practitioners) or novices in the field who can contribute to psychology education and training.

Science is not about single cases but about careful generalizations. In the case of the science of psychology, it aims at insights into the dynamic interaction between individuals and environments. Societies and cultures as particular expressions of environment are not only diverse; they also change over time. Any generalization has its limits. We as psychologists need to gain knowledge about the specificities of the societies and cultures that influence how individuals function and develop in their world. We want to understand the principles characterizing human functioning in various contexts as well as the mechanisms by which these principles work. These aims have two implications.

First, there may be principles and mechanisms that apply similarly in almost all environments over time, and there may be other principles and mechanisms that apply only to certain environments. Finding an answer to which of the alternatives is true is an empirical question. Second, scientific questions are typically framed and focused by paradigmatic views. One well-established practice is to take psychological approaches and research traditions originating in the Western world as the absolute reference, even implying that its results are ‘free’ of any cultural bias or limitation. Given the understanding of psychology proposed here, this belief is not only inadequate, but underscores that psychology education and training must address the diversity of the human existence and its possible manifestation in different principles and mechanisms across societal and cultural borders. The chapters by Barbarin, Hwang and Nsamenang (Chapters 6, 7 and 8 respectively) are particularly pertinent to the consideration of this dimension.

The state of the discipline of psychology varies considerably across countries, cultures and societies. Psychology’s future evolution must take account of these variances and the importance of setting priorities for the respective content and pace of development among them. This has noteworthy intellectual and ethical implications for PET. Nonetheless, it also speaks to the importance of generating and adopting common principles to guide the education and training of the next generations of psychologists.

Beyond all the recent changes in the focal issues and methodologies of science in general, and of psychology in particular, according to one source (see www.nature.com/nature/journal/v484/n7395/full/484442a.html) still only 2 percent of the scientific papers published within the social sciences deal with the new world challenges, such as globalization, economic shock and ecological degradation. Correcting this imbalance is not only an issue of innovative research programs and funding opportunities. It also goes to the heart of the creative power of any discipline – its young scientists and their education and training.

A new deal for psychology education and training

In summary, the recent changes in the discipline of psychology resulting from new concepts and methods linked (among others) to new biological and ecological approaches call for adjustments of psychology education and training. This adjustment is also required to meet new challenges to societies and cultures around the world, such as globalization, that sensitized psychology to the distal conditions beyond the individual, which were traditionally underrated in their complexity and change over time. The chapters by Lunt and Bullock (Chapter 2 and 3 of this book) capture this dimension from regional and from global perspectives.

This scenario was the background for various activities within the International Union of Psychological Science (IUPsyS) that led to the Dornburg Conference,¹ and this book. IUPsyS activities are guided by a strategic plan, which articulates the Union’s service to the discipline and society for each quadrennial period of governance and substantive activities. In its current version, four components characterize the strategic priority designated as Development of the Discipline’s Common Core: education and training, ethics, responsible conduct of research, and the recognition of psychologists. All four are interrelated in many ways. Sadly, recent examples of scientific fraud and other ethical lapses remind us that nurturing and supporting integrity is a fundamental element of education and training as well as collegial exchange.

The intense competition for new ideas and funding led some researchers to confabulate data for experiments that never took place, thereby not only betraying the scientific community, but also exploiting the trust of young investigators in compromising their own qualifications by utilizing such data (see https://www.commissielevelt.nl/wp-content/uploads_per_blog/commissielevelt/2013/01/finalreportLevelt1.pdf). These widely publicized affairs are not unique to psychology. They represent only a tiny fraction of research conducted, but nevertheless they have done great damage. Greater public recognition of psychology and psychologists was harmed; the existing regulation of research was found wanting; basic rules of ethics in psychology obviously were not internalized well enough; and above all, these cases made clear that psychology education and training should be improved to go beyond systems of knowledge and include issues such as transparency and replicability (e.g. research designs, apparatus and data acquisition and retention). These topics are not new but, as evidenced by the recent high level of activity supported by national science foundations in response to the problems, the leaders of our discipline believe that new efforts and better articulated standards are vital to the discipline’s well-being and as a service to society (see www.councilscienceeditors.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3361).

Before the Dornburg Conference, which comprised a 22-strong international faculty and a select group of young scholars from four countries, an IUPsyS workgroup had carried out a survey among the Union’s national member organizations on how psychology education training is handled in their respective countries. The survey addressed the organization of studies, the nature of qualifications gained at various levels, the core elements of the curriculum offered, basic facts about technical equipment, and the institutional structure of academic units devoted to psychology. The survey is addressed comprehensively in Chapter 1 of this book by Pinquart and Bernardo. Based on some 40+ responses, we gained first insights into an interesting pattern that showed many commonalities and relatively little country specificity. This rather homogeneous pattern should not be misunderstood as evidence for similar needs concerning psychology across countries, and consequently for providing entirely similar education and training of desired competencies. Rather, the high share of commonalities probably re...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• List of contributors
• Foreword
• Acknowledgements
• PART I Introduction
• PART II Setting the stage
• PART III International framework for psychology education and training (PET)
• PART IV Implications of emerging areas for psychology education and training
• PART V Bridging scientific universality and cultural specificity in PET
• PART VI Balancing basic and applied research with national needs in PET
• PART VII Quality control and PET
• PART VIII Roles and responsibilities of international psychology organizations for PET
• Index