一个心理学专业,多种标准:培训、许可和实践标准及其对国际流动性的影响的叙述性回顾。

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Inquiry-The Journal of Health Care Organization Provision and Financing Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1177/00469580241284188
Tamaki Hosoda-Urban, Makiko Watanabe, Ellen H O'Donnell
{"title":"一个心理学专业,多种标准:培训、许可和实践标准及其对国际流动性的影响的叙述性回顾。","authors":"Tamaki Hosoda-Urban, Makiko Watanabe, Ellen H O'Donnell","doi":"10.1177/00469580241284188","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This narrative review paper contrasts the professional prospects of psychologists in Japan and the U.S., discussing how divergent training, licensing, and practice standards appear to influence psychologists' profession in each country. Licensed psychologists in the U.S. practice with significant autonomy, which can be seen as a reflection of rigorous training requirements. In contrast, certified public psychologists in Japan complete a shorter-duration training regimen yet encounter more restrictive professional standards and greater financial challenges. These varying standards often create barriers to professional practice that impact psychologists on a global scale. Limited international mobility restricts opportunities for psychologists to learn abroad, exchange knowledge, and deliver culturally sensitive care to diverse populations, despite the need for such services among foreign individuals or immigrants in both countries. Furthermore, these disparities impede broader collaborative efforts to address global mental health challenges. Aligning training and licensing standards globally could enhance psychologists' international mobility, ensure consistent quality of care, and foster global collaboration. This alignment could improve access to culturally sensitive psychological services and help bridge the mental health care gap worldwide. This review emphasizes the necessity of further cross-cultural comparisons to understand the impact of training and licensing standards on clinical practice quality and accessibility. By presenting this comparative analysis, the study aims to inspire similar efforts, promoting global licensing reciprocity and the integration of professional psychology in an increasingly interconnected world.</p>","PeriodicalId":54976,"journal":{"name":"Inquiry-The Journal of Health Care Organization Provision and Financing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11425754/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"One Psychology Profession, Many Standards: A Narrative Review of Training, Licensing, and Practice Standards and Their Implications for International Mobility.\",\"authors\":\"Tamaki Hosoda-Urban, Makiko Watanabe, Ellen H O'Donnell\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00469580241284188\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This narrative review paper contrasts the professional prospects of psychologists in Japan and the U.S., discussing how divergent training, licensing, and practice standards appear to influence psychologists' profession in each country. Licensed psychologists in the U.S. practice with significant autonomy, which can be seen as a reflection of rigorous training requirements. In contrast, certified public psychologists in Japan complete a shorter-duration training regimen yet encounter more restrictive professional standards and greater financial challenges. These varying standards often create barriers to professional practice that impact psychologists on a global scale. Limited international mobility restricts opportunities for psychologists to learn abroad, exchange knowledge, and deliver culturally sensitive care to diverse populations, despite the need for such services among foreign individuals or immigrants in both countries. Furthermore, these disparities impede broader collaborative efforts to address global mental health challenges. Aligning training and licensing standards globally could enhance psychologists' international mobility, ensure consistent quality of care, and foster global collaboration. This alignment could improve access to culturally sensitive psychological services and help bridge the mental health care gap worldwide. This review emphasizes the necessity of further cross-cultural comparisons to understand the impact of training and licensing standards on clinical practice quality and accessibility. By presenting this comparative analysis, the study aims to inspire similar efforts, promoting global licensing reciprocity and the integration of professional psychology in an increasingly interconnected world.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54976,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Inquiry-The Journal of Health Care Organization Provision and Financing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11425754/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Inquiry-The Journal of Health Care Organization Provision and Financing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00469580241284188\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Inquiry-The Journal of Health Care Organization Provision and Financing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00469580241284188","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这篇叙述性评论文章对比了日本和美国心理学家的职业前景,讨论了不同的培训、执照和实践标准似乎是如何影响两国心理学家的职业的。美国的持证心理学家在执业时有很大的自主权,这可以看作是严格培训要求的体现。相比之下,日本的认证公共心理学家完成的培训时间较短,但却面临着更严格的专业标准和更大的经济挑战。这些不同的标准往往会对专业实践造成障碍,影响到全球范围内的心理学家。有限的国际流动性限制了心理学家到国外学习、交流知识以及为不同人群提供文化敏感性护理的机会,尽管这两个国家的外国人或移民都需要此类服务。此外,这些差异还阻碍了应对全球心理健康挑战的更广泛合作。在全球范围内统一培训和许可标准可以提高心理学家的国际流动性,确保一致的医疗质量,并促进全球合作。这种统一可以提高对文化敏感的心理服务的可及性,并有助于缩小全球范围内的心理健康医疗差距。本综述强调了进一步进行跨文化比较的必要性,以了解培训和许可标准对临床实践质量和可及性的影响。本研究旨在通过比较分析,激励类似的努力,促进全球执照互惠,并将专业心理学融入日益相互关联的世界。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
One Psychology Profession, Many Standards: A Narrative Review of Training, Licensing, and Practice Standards and Their Implications for International Mobility.

This narrative review paper contrasts the professional prospects of psychologists in Japan and the U.S., discussing how divergent training, licensing, and practice standards appear to influence psychologists' profession in each country. Licensed psychologists in the U.S. practice with significant autonomy, which can be seen as a reflection of rigorous training requirements. In contrast, certified public psychologists in Japan complete a shorter-duration training regimen yet encounter more restrictive professional standards and greater financial challenges. These varying standards often create barriers to professional practice that impact psychologists on a global scale. Limited international mobility restricts opportunities for psychologists to learn abroad, exchange knowledge, and deliver culturally sensitive care to diverse populations, despite the need for such services among foreign individuals or immigrants in both countries. Furthermore, these disparities impede broader collaborative efforts to address global mental health challenges. Aligning training and licensing standards globally could enhance psychologists' international mobility, ensure consistent quality of care, and foster global collaboration. This alignment could improve access to culturally sensitive psychological services and help bridge the mental health care gap worldwide. This review emphasizes the necessity of further cross-cultural comparisons to understand the impact of training and licensing standards on clinical practice quality and accessibility. By presenting this comparative analysis, the study aims to inspire similar efforts, promoting global licensing reciprocity and the integration of professional psychology in an increasingly interconnected world.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
192
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: INQUIRY is a peer-reviewed open access journal whose msision is to to improve health by sharing research spanning health care, including public health, health services, and health policy.
期刊最新文献
Patient Autonomy in Medical Education: Navigating Ethical Challenges in the Age of Artificial Intelligence Developing the First Digital Occupational Therapy Dictionary Worldwide: A Promising Mobile Application Model for Occupational Therapy Service Providers and Recipients Highlighting the Neuropsychological Consequences of COVID-19: Evidence From a Narrative Review Adverse Drug Reactions Resulting From the Use of Chiral Medicines Amoxicillin, Amoxicillin-Clavulanic Acid, and Ceftriaxone: A Mixed Prospective-Retrospective Cohort Study Social Determinants Influencing the Non-Adoption of Norms Favorable to the Prevention and Control of Type 2 Diabetes: Qualitative Research
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1