Psychologists versus psychologists: evaluating the claims of psychologists who publicly criticize their profession.

Abstract

Since the 1990s, 7 psychologists have written books for a public audience expressing great dissatisfaction with mental health practitioners. These critics represent 4 English-speaking countries: Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Those psychologists make 3 basic arguments: (a) any improvements attributed to psychotherapy are due to placebo effect, (b) psychological assessments have little value, and (c) clinicians do not meet the legal standards to qualify as experts in a court of law. The present author examines these arguments and concludes that these concerns are unfounded. The exception is that several forensic psychologists had been using tests that were invalid for legal purposes, but this situation has shown gradual improvement in the past 15 years.