On psychological identity and training: Boulder is better for rehabilitation psychology

Stephen T. Wegener, Kristofer J. Hagglund, Timothy R. Elliott

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

This article addresses issues of training in applied psychology, generally, and rehabilitation psychology, specifically. The long-term success and growth of rehabilitation psychology will depend, in part, on how the field answers the following questions: How do rehabilitation psychologists define their area of competence? How is this competence to be achieved? A review of recent literature suggests that rehabilitation psychology has yet to resolve fully the fundamental issues of a young subspecialty: identity, training, and long-term direction. We maintain that the scientist- practitioner model should continue to be the framework for training future rehabilitation psychologists. Furthermore, subspecialty and cross-discipline training should be completed following core training in an appropriate specialty of psychology (i.e., counseling or clinical).

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)17-29
Number of pages13
JournalRehabilitation Psychology
Volume43
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 1 1998

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
  • Rehabilitation
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'On psychological identity and training: Boulder is better for rehabilitation psychology'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this