Clinical expertise: A preliminary attempt to clarify its core elements

被引:10
作者
Overholser J.C. [1 ]
机构
[1] Department of Psychology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH 44106-7123
关键词
Clinical expertise; Clinical psychology; Evidence-based practice;
D O I
10.1007/s10879-009-9129-1
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The recent emphasis on evidence-based practice revolves around an integration of three domains: client characteristics, relevant research, and clinical expertise. Unfortunately, most reports focus on the examination of current research, while few guidelines exist for clarifying or developing expertise in clinical psychology. Although expertise is more advanced than competence, basic clinical competence can set the foundation for the development of more sophisticated skills. It is best to strive for narrow domains of expertise instead of global ratings of a professional as an "expert". Five criteria are proposed for evaluating, developing, and maintaining clinical expertise: (1) the professional must possess a terminal degree in the field, (2) the professional has accumulated multiple years of clinical experience in the direct provision of clinical assessment, psychological testing, or psychological treatment, (3) the professional has attained advanced credentials in a specific area of psychology, (4) the professional is visible in the professional community at a national level, and (5) the professional has demonstrated evidence of superior clinical skills in a specific application of psychology. Together, these five criteria help to objectify the evaluation and cultivation of clinical expertise in psychology. Because each criterion is weak and flawed if used alone, it is recommended that multiple criteria are used in combination to define clinical expertise. © Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009.
引用
收藏
页码:131 / 139
页数:8
相关论文
共 56 条
[1]  
APA Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice, American Psychologist, 61, 4, pp. 271-285, (2006)
[2]  
Blatt S., Sanislow C., Zuroff D., Pilkonis P., Characteristics of effective therapists, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 6, pp. 1276-1284, (1996)
[3]  
Brammer R., Case Conceptualization Strategies: The Relationship between Psychologists' Experience Levels, Academic Training, and Mode of Clinical Inquiry, Educational Psychology Review, 9, 4, pp. 333-351, (1997)
[4]  
Burlingame G., Barlow S., Outcome and process differences between professional and nonprofessional therapists in time-limited group psychotherapy, International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 46, 4, pp. 455-478, (1996)
[5]  
Dubin S., Obsolescence or lifelong education: A choice for the professional, American Psychologist, 27, pp. 486-498, (1972)
[6]  
Dumont F., Expertise in psychotherapy: Inherent liabilities of becoming experienced, Psychotherapy, 28, 3, pp. 422-428, (1991)
[7]  
Eells T., Lambert K., Case formulation and treatment concepts among novice, experienced, and expert cognitivebehavioral and psychodynamic therapists, Psychotherapy Research, 13, 2, pp. 187-204, (2003)
[8]  
Eells T., Lambert K., Kendjelic E., Turner L., Lucas C., The quality of psychotherapy case formulations, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73, 4, pp. 579-589, (2005)
[9]  
Ericsson K.A., Charness N., Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition, American Psychologist, 49, 8, pp. 725-747, (1994)
[10]  
Faust D., Ziskin J., The expert witness in psychology and psychiatry, Science, 241, 4861, pp. 31-35, (1988)