Current Patterns of Training in Personality Assessment During Internship.

OBJECTIVE: Training in broad-based objective and projective personality assessments has been a mainstay of applied psychology. Stedman (2007) and Piotrowski (2015) have documented a decline in projective training during internship. This study investigated internship directors' current expectations regarding graduate school training with objective and projective instruments, their ratings of the importance of that training, and current training patterns with objective and projective instruments during internship. METHOD: Participants were 355 psychology internship programs, representing 46.1% of the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers. RESULTS: Results indicated the following current internship training patterns: Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (68% to 51%), Personality Assessment Inventory (59% to 25%), Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (51% to 34%), Rorschach (35 to 26%), story telling (41% to 19%), sentence completion (41% to 18%), and drawings (36% to 9%). Adult program directors reported higher percentages for objective tests; child program directors reported higher percentages for projective tests. CONCLUSION: A decreased valuation of projective techniques is now typical of current internship training programs.

Knowledge competence in clinical and counseling training and readiness for internship.

The concept of competence has become the driving force in the education and training of professional psychologists. In fact, competence has evolved into increasingly sophisticated forms, now perhaps best represented by the cube model, which integrates foundational, functional, and developmental variables into ideas about professional training. This article considers one component of professional training, scientific knowledge, and argues that knowledge competence, measured by the Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology, should occur before a student is certified as internship ready.

Letters of recommendation for the predoctoral internship in medical schools and other settings: do they enhance decision making in the selection process?

Since the 1970s, letters of recommendation to medical and other internship settings have surfaced as important variables in the internship selection process. However, several studies have challenged their value in the selection process, specifically by pointing out that these letters have an overly positive bias and fail to address applicant weaknesses. Our study, using the Linguistic Inquiry and Word Count text analysis method, developed a quantitative profile for a sample of letters of recommendation, determined whether letters differentiated among applicants with regard to positive/negative attributions, evaluated letters for positive and negative bias, and investigated potential gender bias of writers toward applicants. Results indicated that writers apply positive and negative attributions homogeneously across applicants, thus, rendering applicant differentiation on this basis impossible. Also, results demonstrated that letters of male and female writers were not biased toward male or female applicants. These findings, in combination with previous studies, question the utility of letters of recommendation as presently structured. Possible modifications are discussed.