Digital Commons @ George Fox University Faculty Publications - Grad School of Clinical Graduate School of Clinical Psychology Psychology

2004 Research Training in Explicitly Christian Doctoral Programs Peter C. Hill Biola University

Mark R. McMinn George Fox University, [email protected]

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/gscp_fac Part of the Psychology Commons

Recommended Citation Hill, Peter C. and McMinn, Mark R., "Research Training in Explicitly Christian Doctoral Programs" (2004). Faculty Publications - Grad School of Clinical Psychology. Paper 216. http://digitalcommons.georgefox.edu/gscp_fac/216

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School of Clinical Psychology at Digital Commons @ George Fox University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications - Grad School of Clinical Psychology by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ George Fox University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Research Training in Explicitly Christian Doctoral Programs Peter C. Hill Mark R. McMinn Rosemead School ofPsychology Wheaton College Biola University

The importance of research training at explicitly Christian doctoral programs is suggested on the basis of four reasons: the need to hold science and practice together, the need for skills to evaluate interventions, the need to serve a society with a growing interest in religion and spirituality, and the need to assess the effec­ tiveness of explicitly Christian doctoral programs. A discussion of these issues serves as an introduction to the rest of this special issue that focuses on research training at seven explicitly Christian programs.

The past three decades have brought rapid chologist model in which students are trained to growth in the number of doctoral programs in be psychologists with some awareness of reli­ professional psychology. Reporting the number gious issues. This training model is primarily psy­ of programs accredited by the American Psycho­ chological in nature, but with the addition of logical Association (APA)'s Committee on some religious training. At the other end of the Accreditation, Peterson (2003) notes an increase continuum is the Psychologically Minded Pastor from 1 PsyD program in 1973 to 56 programs in model, where students are trained to minister to 2001, and a surprisingly sharp increase in PhD the needs of the church. This training model is programs during the same time period, from primarily religious and theological in nature, but approximately 100 to almost 300 programs. with the addition of some psychological training. Mirroring this larger trend, there has also been In the middle of the continuum is what Johnson an increase in the number of explicitly Christian et al. (1997) call the Faith Identified Psychologist doctoral programs in clinical psychology. Fuller model. This model calls for a degree of sophisti­ Theological Seminary began clinical psychology cation in both psychology and theology in which doctoral training in the 1960s, followed shortly graduates are prepared to work within a particu­ thereafter by Rosemead Graduate School of Pro­ lar faith context as psychologists, but because fessional Psychology. Presently there are 9 pro­ they receive adequate breadth and depth of psy­ grams housed in 7 distinctively Christian chological training these graduates should also be institutions where faculty must endorse particular competent to work with those who do not share faith beliefs as a condition of employment and their particular faith values. It is this middle cate­ the integration of psychology and Christianity is gory, the Faith Identified Psychologist model, an explicit goal of training. J'hese include Azusa which best characterizes the training mission of Pacific University (PsyD program), Fuller Theo­ most explicitly Christian doctoral programs. logical Seminary (PhD and PsyD programs), Graduates of explicitly Christian doctoral pro­ George Fox University (PsyD program), Regent grams are trained to identify with both the Chris­ University (PsyD program), Rosemead School of tian faith and the guild of psychology and, Psychology at Biola University (PhD and PsyD therefore, it is important that they learn and programs), Seattle Pacific University (PhD pro­ value the epistemologies of each. The Christian gram), and Wheaton College (PsyD program). religion emphasizes church history, systematic Most of these programs are accredited by the theological and philosophical reasoning, and American Psychological Association (APA). divine revelation through scripture. Psychology To articulate the niche of explicitly Christian emphasizes knowledge through scientific meth­ doctoral programs, Johnson, Campbell, and Dyk­ ods of systematic research. stra (1997) proposed a continuum describing The purpose of this special issue of the journal various possible training missions. At one end of of Psychology and Christiani~y is to explore the the continuum is the Religiously Sensitive Psy- extent to which explicitly Christian doctoral pro­ grams are training their students in the scientific Correspondence regarding this article should be research methods of psychology. As an introduc­ sent to Mark R. McMinn, Ph.D., Department of Psy­ tion to this special issue, we suggest four reasons chology, Wheaton College, Wheaton, IL 60187. that research is important in explicitly Christian psychology training programs. These include some say it has?" (p. 793). If these questions are holding science and practice together, gaining the being posed of professional psychology pro­ skills to evaluate interventions, serving a society grams in general, they certainly should be asked with growing interests in spirituality, and assess~ of explicitly" Christian programs as well. ing the effectiveness of explicitly Christian psy­ Evaluating Interventions chology training programs. In recent years, psychologists have empha­ Holding Science and Practice Together sized the importance of using interventions that A strong conviction that science and practice have demonstrated effectiveness through empiri­ should be held together in a single discipline has cal research. To this end, the Society of Clinical caused some (e.g., Talley, Strupp, & Butler, Psychology (Division 12 of the APA) commis­ 1994) to lament the apparent split between prac­ sioned a task force to identify empirically validat­ tice and science in clinical psychology. The ed treatment procedures, resulting in a list of accreditation guidelines of the APA (2002) state: treatments that are documented to be effective (Chambless et a!., 1996, 1998; Chambless & Hol­ Science and practice are not opposing lon, 1998; Crits-Christoph, Chambless, Frank, poles; rather, together they equally Brody, & Karp, 1995; Task Force, 1995). One contribute to excellence in training in psychologist-closely identified with Division professional psychology. Therefore, 12-observed that, along with managed care; education and training . . . should be there is "no issue more central to me practice of based on the existing and evolving clinical psychology" than evidence-based body of general knowledge and practice (Barlow, 2000, p. 24). methods in the science and practice It should be noted that this movement toward of psychology ... All programs should empirically validated treatment procedures has enable their students to understand engendered controversy, in part because the tl1e value of science for the practice rigid scientific constraints required by the Divi­ of psychology and the value of prac­ sion 12 task force may render research laborato­ tice for the science of psychology, ry interventions irrelevant for "real-life" clinical recognizing that the value of science practice (Garfield, 1996; Havik & VandenBos, for the practice of psychology 1996; Silverman, 1996). Some have offered per­ requires attention to the empirical suasive research-based arguments that dispute basis for all metl1ods involved in psy­ the research-based findings of the task force chological practice. (p. 3) (Norcross, 2002; Westen & Morrison, 2001). It is noteworthy that these accreditation Clearly, sorting through a complex issue such as guidelines apply to all APA-accredited doctoral this requires some sophistication in scientific programs in professional psychology, regardless methods which, in turn, obliges doctoral pro­ of whether they are scientist-practitioner pro­ grams in clinical psychology to provide effective grams (Boulder model), practitioner programs research training. (Vail model), or some amalgam of both. Many The controversy surrounding empirically sup­ of the explicitly Christian doctoral programs ported treatments raises an important tension: offer a PsyD degree and are based on a practi­ How do clinical psychologists root their inter­ tioner model of training, but are nonetheless ventions in methods demonstrated to be effec­ expected to have sufficient training in the sci­ tive while remaining open to the creativity and ence of psychology. relational sensitivity required to work with One of the criticisms levied against profession­ human individuals? If the .empirically supported al psychology doctoral programs is that they do treatment movement errs too far in the rigors of not compare favorably with traditional universi­ science, there are no shortages of examples at ty-based PhD programs with regard to faculty the other extreme. Creative approaches to clini­ research productivity, admissions selectivity, and cal work quickly become controversial when faculty/ student ratios (Maher, 1999; Peterson, practice patterns outpace research advances .. 2003). Peterson (2003) ponders, "Are the critics Controversial topics of recent years include ther­ right? Has the practice of psychology slipped its apies that attempt to recover repressed memories scientific moorings? Has the education of profes­ (Knapp & VandeCreek, 2000), eye-movement sional psychologists deteriorated as badly as desensitization and reprocessing (Shapiro, 2001), and thought field therapy (Diepold, 2002), predict (Hill, in press; Hill & Hood, 1999). Hill among others. In addition to controversial thera­ and Pargament (2003) note that, for example, in peutic interventions, psychologists have also the literature on religion and health, we are no developed assessment methods that have engen­ longer asking if, but rather why, a connection dered fierce debate. Chief among these are pro­ exists. That is, researchers are beginning "to get jective methods, such as the Rorschach Inkblot closer to religious and spiritual life, articulating Method (Exner, 2002). dimensions and measures of religion and spiritu­ Beyond these controversial topics within main­ ality that are linked theoretically and functionally stream psychology, faith informed psychologists to physical and mental health" (pp. 71-72). The are faced with an array of other controversies. importance of religion and spirituality is not lim­ These include theophostic ministry and other ited to their connection with health and, as healing of memory approaches (see Garzon & research on religion and spirituality continues to Burkett, 2002), allegations of satanic ritual abuse grow, explicitly Christian programs have the (Rogers, 1992), spiritual direction combined with opportunity, but also the responsibility, to psychotherapy (Cook, 2004), and differing views impact the field. of how best to integrate faith into practice (John­ Assess Effectiveness of Training Programs son & Jones, 2000). In the midst of all these controversies and Though each of the explicitly Christian doctoral potential fads, how does one evaluate the credi­ programs has a unique mission statement, the bility of creative clinical interventions? For most commonality is found in their desire to prepare faith informed psychologists, the answer is found psychologists to address the psychology and spiri­ in a combination of theological evaluation and tual needs of people-including those of Christian rigorous research. Thus, effective doctoral train­ faith, other faiths, or no religious faith. Johnson et ing should equip students with the research al. (1997) refer to the gap between psychologists' skills to participate in science and critically eval­ religious values and the more devout religious uate scientific conclusions offered by other beliefs of the general public, demonstrating a researchers. need for psychologists who understand and value religious faith commitments. Serving Society Each of the explicitly Christian doctoral pro­ Psychology has noted society's growing inter­ grams engages in a self-study process required est in spirituality and religion. Since 1996, several for APA-accreditation, but it also seems wise to books have been published by the American engage in meta-study-looking at how these Psychological Association (Miller, 1999; Richards programs are functioning collectively (Johnson & Bergin, 1997, 2000, 2004; Shafranske, 1996) & McMinn, 2003). It seems reasonable that inte­ with the most recent (Miller & Delaney, 2005) grative training ought to make some sort of dif­ being perhaps the most explicit in terms of ference in the way a psychologist functions acknowledging the possible veracity of religious after graduation. Measuring these differences is worldviews. It would appear that graduates of a research task, which again highlights the explicitly Christian doctoral programs are in the importance of training students in research unique position of contributing to this growing methods. literature. Few others with a high level of Some of the dissertation research emerging research sophistication also have the spiritual from explicitly Christian doctoral programs has sensitivities that are required for a deep under­ demonstrated that graduates are reasonably satis­ standing of a substantive religious and spiritual fied with their training experiences (Fallow & experience, particularly if such experience Johnson, 2000), and that students experience fac­ occurs within the Christian religious tradition as ulty to be supportive and encouraging (Meek & it does for so many. McMinn, 1999). A good deal more research could Conceptualizing and measuring both the con­ be done to assess how explicitly Christian doctor­ tent and the function of religious experience is al programs are doing. The dissertation require­ crucial to a scientific understanding. Fortunately, ment of these programs provides an excellent psychologists, of religion have long been work­ opportunity for doing some of this research, ing-albeit in relative obscurity-developing the­ which again speaks to the importance of provid­ oretical models and measurement instruments of ing effective research training to students in greater substance and quantity than many would explicitly Christian doctoral programs. Conclusion Exner, ]. E., Jr. (2002). The Rorschach: A comp1·ehen­ sive system (Volume 1). New York: Wiley. As the name of the organization that sponsors Fallow, G. 0., & johnson, W. B. (2000). Mentor rela­ this publication (the Christian Association for Psy­ tionships in secular and religious professional psychol­ chological Studies, or CAPS) implies, the discipline ogy programs. journal of Psychology and Christianity, of psychology and particularly a Christian 19, 363-376. approach, demands the very best of our intellectu­ Garfield, S. L. (1996). Some problems associated al resources as we attempt to further understand with "validated" forms of psychotherapy. Clinical Psy­ human complexity. Thus, while many are quick to chology: Science and Practice, 3, 218-229. identify the key role of explicitly Christian doctoral Garzon, F., & Burkett, L. (2002). Healing of memo­ programs in making a difference in the applied ries: Models, research, future directions. journal ofP sy­ chology and Christianity, 21, 42-49. clinical setting, we ask to what extent should these Havik, 0. E., & VandenBos, G. H. 0996). Limitations programs also identify their mission in terms of of manualized psychotherapy for everyday clinical producing outstanding researchers as well . In practice. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 3, making a case for the need for a strong research 264-267. component, we recognize that excellent training Hill, P. C. (in press). Measurement assessment and can be provided through a number of different issues in the psychology of religion and spirituality. In modalities. To this end, representatives of each of H. F. Paloutzian & C. L. Park (Eds.), Handbook of the the seven explicitly Christian programs will later in psychology of religion. New York: Guilford Publica­ this issue describe their efforts in training tions. Hill, P. C., & Hood, R. W., Jr. (Eds.). (1999). Mea­ researchers as well as competent clinicians. sures of religiosity. Birmingham, AL: Religious Educa­ tion Press. References Hill, P. C. , & Pargament, K. I. (2003). Advances in the conceptualization and measurement of religion and American Psychological Association Committee on spirituality. American Psychologist, 58, 64-74. Accreditation (2002). Guidelines and principles for johnson, E. L., & j ones, S. L. (Eds.). (2000). Psychol­ accreditation of programs in pmfessional psychology. ogy & Christian i~y: Four views. Downe rs Grove, IL: Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. InterVarsity Press. Barlow, D. H. (2000). Evidence-based practice: A johnson, W. B., Campbell, C. D., & Dykstra, M.. L. world view. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, (1997). Professional training in religious institutions: 7, 241-242. Articulating models and outcomes. journal ofPsycholo­ Chambless, D. L., Baker, M. ]., Baucom, D. H., Beut­ gy and Theology, 25, 260-271. ler, L. E., Calhoun, K. S., Crits-Christoph, P. , et al. Johnson, W. B., & McMinn, M. R. (2003). Thirty years (1998). Update on empirically validated therapies, II. of integrative doctrinal training: Historic developments, The Clinical Psychologist, 51, 3-16. assessment of outcomes, and recommendations for the Chambless, D. L., & Hollon, S. D. 0998). Defining future. journal of Psychology and Theology, 31, 83-96. empirically supported therapies. journal of Consulting Knapp, S. , & VandeCreek, L. (2000). Recovered and Clinical Psychology, 66, 7-18. memories of childhood abuse: Is there an underlying Chambless, D. L., Sanderson, W. C. , Shoham, V., professio nal consensus? Professional Psychology: Johnson, S. B., Pope, K. S., Crits-Christoph, P. , et al. . Research and Practice, 31, 366-371. (1996). An update on empirically-validated therapies. Maher, B. A. 0999). Changing trends in doctoral The Clinical Psychologist, 49, 5-18. training programs in psychology: A comparative analy­ Crits-Christoph, P., Chambless, D. L. , Frank, E., sis of research-oriented versus professional-applied Brody, D., & Karp, J. F. (1995). Training in empirically­ programs. Psychological Science, 10, 475-481. validated treatments: What are clinical psychology stu­ Meek, K. R. , & McMinn, M. R. (1999). The effective­ dents learning? Professional Psychology: Research and ness of religious and nonreligious graduate training Practice, 26, 514-522. programs in preparing psychologists to deal with expe­ Cook, D. A. (2004). Crossing traditions: Ignatian riences of sexual attraction: Survey findings and impli­ prayer with a Protestant African American counseling cations. Pmf essional Psychology : Resea rch and dyad. In P. S. Richards & A. E. Bergin (Eds.), Casebook Practice, 30, 423-427. fo1' a spiritual strategy in counseling in psychotherapy Miller, W. R. (Ed.). (1999). Integrating spirituality in (pp. 173-186). Washington, DC: American Psychologi­ treatment: Resources for practitioners. Washington, DC: cal Association. American Psychological Association. Diepold, ]. H., Jr. (2002). Thought field therapy: Miller, W. R , & Delaney, H. D., (Eds.). (2005).judeo­ Advancements in theory and practice. In F. P. Gallo Christian perspectives on psychology: Human nature, (Ed.), Energy psychology in psychotherapy: A compre­ motivation, and change. Washington, DC: American hensive sow·cebook (pp. 3-34). New York: Norton. Psychological Association. Norcross, ]. C. (Ed.). (2002). Psychotherapy relation­ Task Force on Promotion and Dissemination of Psy­ ships that work: Therapist contributions and responsive­ chological Procedures, Division of Clinical Psychology, ness to patients. New York: Oxford. American Psychological Association. 0 995). Training in Peterson, D. R. (2003). Unintended consequences: and dissemination of empirically-validated psychologi­ Ventures and misadventures in the education of profes­ cal treatments: Report and recommendations. The Clin­ sional psychologists. American Psychologist, 58, 791- ical Psychologist, 48, 3-23. 800. Richards, P. S., & Bergin, A. E. (1997). A spiritual Westen, D., & Morrison, K. (2001). A multidimen­ strategy for counseling and psychotherapy. Washington, sional meta-analysis of treatments for de pressio n, DC: American Psychological Association. panic, and generalized anxiety disorder: An empirical Richards, P. S., & Bergin, A. E. (Eds.). (2000). Hand­ examination of the status of empirically supported book ofpsychotherapy and religious diversity. Washing­ therapies. journal of Consulting and Clinical Psycholo­ ton, DC: American Psychological Association. gy, 69, 875-899. Richards, P. S., & Bergin, A. E. (Eds.). (2004). Case­ book for a spiritual strategy for counseling and psy­ chotherapy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Authors Association. Mark R. McMinn (Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology, Van­ Rogers, M. L. (Ed.). (1992), Satanic ritual abuse: The derbilt University, 1983) is the Rech Prof essor of Psy­ current state of knowledge [Special issue]. journal of chology at Wheaton College (IL). Dr. McMinn is a Psychology and Theology, 2fX3). licensed clinical psychologist with research interests in Shafranske, E. P. (Ed.). (1996). Religion and the clini­ cal practice of psychology. Washington, DC: American cognitive therapy, professional ethics, church-psycholo­ Psychological Association. gy collaboration, and integration of psychology and Shapiro, F. (;~001). Eye movement desensitization Christian spirituality. and reprocessing: Basic principles, protocols, and pro­ Peter C. Hill (Ph.D. in Social Psychology, University cedures (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford. of Houston, 1979) is Professor of Psychology at the Silverman, W. H. (1996). Cookbooks, manuals, and paint-by-numbers: Psychotherapy in the 90's. Psy­ Rosemead School of Psychology, Biola University (CA) chotherapy, 33, 207-215. and editor of the Journal of Psycho logy and Talley, P. F., Strupp, H. H., & Butler, S. F. (1994). Psy­ Christianity. Dr. Hill's interests include measurement chotherapy research and practice (pp. 1-18). New issues, the integration of psychology and religion, the York: Basic Books. psychology of religion, and positive psychology.