New Issue: Orbital Catastrophe Ahead? Read Now

Bringing Science Policies to Clinical Psychology

An accreditation program could help bring better treatments to patients

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The high cost of health care is no secret. Revamping clinical psychology could be one way to make the system more efficient—while also helping psychologists better serve their patients, according to a recent report from the Association for Psychological Science. The report details an accreditation system that has been in development for two years, which will certify training programs that focus on scientifically validated treatments and instruct their students in the scientific method. The system would also create a “seal of approval” to show prospective patients that a psychologist received such an education, the report says.

“Many of the people being trained today aren’t trained to understand and apply science to patients out in the real world, so patients aren’t getting the treatments most likely to help them,” says Timothy Baker, a psychology researcher and professor of medicine at the University of Wisconsin–Madison and co-author of the report. Clinical psychology continues to depend on outdated, ineffective strategies of diagnosis and treatment—and surveys show individual practitioners often value their own experience or a “hunch” over scientific evidence, ultimately hindering their ability to effectively help patients. “We’re simply not taking advantage of what is known in scientific research,” Baker says.

With a stronger scientific background, psychologists not only will be able to better choose treatments for patients and gauge therapy’s effectiveness, but they also could become “more sophisticated users of psychological research,” Baker notes. “They’ll contribute to research and improve treatments.”


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Note: This story was originally printed with the title "Bringing Science into the Clinic"

Allison Bond is a resident in internal medicine at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. Her writing about science and medicine has appeared in a variety of publications, including The New York Times, Scientific American, Scientific American MIND, Discover magazine, and Reuters Health.

More by Allison Bond
SA Mind Vol 20 Issue 7This article was published with the title “Bringing Science Policies to Clinical Psychology” in SA Mind Vol. 20 No. 7 (), p. 8
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0110-8

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe