the anticipated future of counselling psychology in the united states: a delphi poll

This article was downloaded by: [University of Connecticut]On: 08 October 2014, At: 00:31Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK

Counselling PsychologyQuarterlyPublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ccpq20

The anticipated future ofcounselling psychology in theUnited States: A Delphi pollGreg J Neimeyer & Amy K DiamondPublished online: 01 Jul 2010.

To cite this article: Greg J Neimeyer & Amy K Diamond (2001) The anticipated futureof counselling psychology in the United States: A Delphi poll, Counselling PsychologyQuarterly, 14:1, 49-65

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09515070125262

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ccpq20

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09515070125262

expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

RESEARCH REPORT

The anticipated future ofcounselling psychology in theUnited States: a Delphi poll

GREG J. NEIMEYER & AMY K. DIAMONDDepartment of Psychology, University of Florida, USA

abstract A Delphi poll of the institutional members of the Council of CounsellingPsychology Training Programmes in the United States revealed anticipations regarding thefuture of the speciality in relation to three broad areas of contemporary concern. These included thespeciality’s anticipated core identity, the future role of science and research training in thespeciality, and its probable developments in relation to professional training. In general, acommitment to cultural diversity and life-span development occupied pre-eminent positions inrelation to the speciality’s anticipated identity. Signi� cant attention to methodological diversityand scienti� c and professional reform were also noted within the context of continuing challengesto the speciality’s identity and its future.

Forecasting the future requires imagination rather than straightforwarddeductive reasoning, and the forecasts themselves can in� uence the shape ofthings to come.

(Tyler, 1980, p. 19)

Introduction

The history of counselling psychology as a speciality in the United States has been markedby ongoing re� ection and anticipation regarding its foundational features, its corecontributions, and its future trajectories (Fretz, 1977; 1993; Super, 1977; Ivey, 1980;Whitely, 1980; 1984; Borgen, 1984; Watkins, 1994). Milestone moments in this ongoingprocess of appraisal have been marked by national conferences such as the Northwesternconference in 1951, the Greyston conference in 1964 and the Georgia conference in1987, as well as by special journal issues dedicated to re� ection about the � eld (e.g., TheCounselling Psychologist, 8(4), 1980 and 16(3), 1988), its methodological subscriptions(Hoshmand, 1989; Polkinghorne, 1991), and a variety of more circumscribed aspects of

Counselling Psychology Quarterly ISSN 0951–5070 print/ISSN 1469–3674 online # 2001 Taylor & Francis Ltdhttp://www.tandf.co.uk/journals

DOI: 10.1080/09515070110057513

Counselling Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 14, No. 1, 2001, pp. 49–65

Correspondence to: Greg J. Neimeyer, Department of Psychology, University of Florida, Gaines-ville, FL 32611, USA

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

its form, function, and possible future (Neimeyer and Norcross, 1997). This process ofcontinued reappraisal is re� ected within international communities, as well. Attention hasbeen focused, for example, on the speciality’s diverse expressions throughout the world,and its developing identity as an international community of scholars and practitioners(Palmer and Varma, 1997) in sometimes uneasy relationships with allied behaviouralhealth traditions (Kwiatkowski, 1998).

This article is designed to contribute to this re� ection by exploring areas ofconsensus and dissensus regarding the anticipated future of counselling psychologywithin the United States (Weissberg et al., 1988). While this is not the � rst time thatthe speciality has undertaken the explicit task of formulating its future (see The CounsellingPsychologist, 8(4), 1980), the current effort was distinguished by its use of a formalforecasting methodology, the Delphi Method, for this purpose. The Delphi Method wasutilized to help develop an image of the � eld’s future in relation to several topics ofcontemporary signi� cance. These topics clustered around three major areas that weredrawn from historical reviews (e.g., The Counselling Psychologist, 8(4), 1980), re-appraisals(e.g., The Counselling Psychologist, 16(4), 1988) and projections (e.g., Davis et al., 1992;Watkins, 1994; Palmer and Varma, 1997) regarding the � eld of counselling psychology.Topics included an examination of the � eld’s future identity, the nature of its anticipatedresearch training, and aspects of its professional training. In each of these areas the � eld ofcounselling psychology has a recorded history that re� ects some struggle and accom-plishment, and the purpose of the present research was to forecast future movement inrelation to these issues.

Core identity commitments

The speciality has experienced a longstanding and well-documented effort to de� ne itscore features and to distinguish them from those of other mental health professions(see Fretz, 1977; Hamilton, 1987; Whitely, 1980). Foundational features that haveenjoyed some enduring currency include the � eld’s allegiance to a lifespan developmentalapproach, its focus on vocational and career concerns, and its distinctive attention toissues of diversity (Meara et al., 1988; Watkins, 1994). But even these foundationalfeatures are not without challenges, challenges that are borne from within the specialityas well as those wrought from without. The continuing diversi� cation of functionenjoyed by counselling psychologists, for example (see Fretz, 1977), may at once beboon and bane to a profession tied to traditional roots. ‘The major implication ofthis diversity’, noted Fretz (1980, p. 9) ‘is that there is little collective, long-sustainedeffort by any signi� cant proportion of our profession toward any one goal’ (originalemphasis).

Calls for counselling psychology to align more closely with other health careprofessions (Alcorn, 1991; Altmaier, 1991, Harris, 1991), including neuropsychology(Agresti, 1992; Larson, 1992), and child clinical psychology (Kaczmarek and Wagner,1994), encourage an additional kind of elasticity in the � eld’s identity that pose furtherchallenges to the integrity and coherence of its core moorings. The consequence, as Fretz(1980, p. 9) noted wryly, is that ‘Counselling psychology, it seems, is in the eye of thebeholder’.

50 G. J. Neimeyer & A. K. Diamond

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Efforts at identity expansion have been complemented by efforts at identity reclama-tion, efforts directed at re-infusing the � eld with doses of its traditional medicine. Therole of vocational and career counselling � gure pre-eminently in this regard. While thehistory of counselling psychology clearly documents the centrality of vocational concernsto the � eld’s early development (Whitely, 1980, 1984), interest in career concerns seemto have diminished signi� cantly in recent years, at least in certain respects (Fitzgerald andOsipow, 1986; Watkins et al., 1986a; cf. Watkins, 1987, 1993, 1994). This decline hasoccurred despite cogent arguments on behalf of the vocational realm by some of theleading scholars in the � eld of counselling psychology (Osipow, 1979; Watkins, 1987;Blustein, 1992), prompting Blustein (1992) to address this atrophy by developing ‘a set ofproposals for the reinvigoration of the vocational realm of counselling psychology’ (p. 712).

Although numerous indicators attest to the contemporary vitality of the study ofvocational and career processes (Borgen, 1991; Osipow and Betz, 1991) per se, thisvitality is not as clearly translated into the training and practice of counselling psychol-ogists. Watkins (1993) noted, for example, that while the majority of counsellingpsychology programmes continue to offer coursework in vocational assessment, this‘curricular emphasis . . . seems to far outweigh students’ interests in the area’ (p. 110), aconclusion documented elsewhere in the literature as well (Fitzgerald and Osipow, 1986;Schneider et al., 1988). This has prompted a number of researchers to ponder thediscrepancy between counselling psychology’s historical and contemporary identi� cationwith the career area, and to wonder why an area ‘so integrally linked with counsellingpsychology history and training’ (Watkins, 1993, p. 113) is not more central to its currentinterests and identity (see Slaney and MacKinnon-Slaney, 1990, for a discussion ofthis issue).

The struggle to articulate distinct and stable identity moorings has registered animpact outside the � eld of counselling psychology, as well as within it. In commenting onthe public’s perception of counselling psychology, for example, Lent (1990) noted thatthe speciality’s image has been compromised by what Hamilton (1987) has dubbed ‘ourchronic problem’. ‘It must be dif� cult for the public to know us’, noted Lent (1990, p.326), ‘when we, ourselves, have had trouble deciding how we want to be known’ (seeBenjamin, 1986; Fitzgerald and Osipow, 1986, Watkins et al., 1986; Neimeyer andWalling, 1990, for additional discussion and data bearing on perceived subspecializationdifferences).

One longstanding concern in the � eld has been the possible role of this identitydiffusion in the assimilation of the speciality into other areas, most notably clinicalpsychology. Many authors have predicted the extinction (Mosher, 1980) or absorption ofcounselling psychology into clinical psychology (Fitzgerald and Osipow, 1986), par-ticularly given the increasing convergence of the specialities in relation to workplace andfunction (Fitzgerald and Osipow, 1986). As Hahn (1980, p. 36) noted, ‘the distinctionbetween clinical and counselling psychology is vanishing steadily’, a development that haslong been predicted with a mixture of enthusiasm (Fox et al., 1985) and lament (Osipow,1980; Lent, 1990). This concern has redoubled the � eld’s efforts to forge a distinctidentity. ‘It is important that counselling psychology be able to de� ne its uniqueness’,noted Brammer et al. (1988, p. 411), ‘if it is to avoid efforts by some to merge the currentapplied specialities’.

Counselling psychology 51

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Scienti� c subscriptions

As part and parcel of its ongoing self-re� ection, the � eld of counselling psychology hasturned special attention to particular facets of its functioning. Nowhere is this re� ectionmore clearly felt than in relation to the role of science and scienti� c inquiry in thespeciality (see Hanish et al., 1995). More than half a century ago the AmericanPsychological Association of� cially adopted the scientist-practitioner model (1947), amodel that was quickly extended to the training of doctoral psychologists at The BoulderConference in 1949. With the Northwestern (1951) and Greyston (1964) conferencesreaf� rming that commitment, it remained for the Vail Conference (1973) to articulate analternative model based largely on the primacy of the practitioner among the ranks of the� eld’s graduates (Bernstein and Kerr, 1993; Watkins et al., 1986b). While most sub-sequent writings have again advocated on behalf of the scientist-practitioner model, theyhave varied widely in their advocacy of which term should receive the greater in� ection.Harmon (1982, p. 32), for example, sought ‘to reaf� rm the primacy of the ‘‘scientist’’ inthe counselling psychologist role’, while others advocated otherwise (see Bernstein andKerr, 1993). An important role was played in this regard by The Third NationalConference for Counselling Psychology in Georgia (1987). The conference revitalizedthe � eld’s twin commitments, emphasizing integration between the tandem terms thancomprise the phrase, ‘scientist-practitioner’. ‘Those at the Georgia conference agreed’,noted Meara et al. (1988, p. 368), ‘that because psychology is a science, both thegeneration and application of psychological knowledge are based upon scienti� c views ofthe world. Psychologists, whatever their work, are professionals and their attitude towardtheir work is scienti� c’.

Efforts to effect this integration have been considerable, occupying a position ofprominence within the speciality for nearly a decade (see The Counselling Psychologist,20(3), 1992). Speci� c recommendations for negotiating the (re)union between scienceand practice were drafted by a group of active contributors to this dialogue (Heppner etal., 1992) and published as ‘A proposal to integrate science and practice in counsellingpsychology’. Continued discussion of alternative models of training (e.g., scholar-practi-tioner, practitioner-researcher, etc.), however, attest to the irresolute nature of this issue,as noted in the concluding comments of Heppner et al. (1992, p. 121): ‘Science andpractice cannot continue together without a major attitudinal shift, a broadeningperspective of science and practice and how these two activities can be integrated tostrengthen each other’ (cf. Watkins, 1994).

It seems likely that part of this broadening may already be underway, at least if amore inclusive notion of science articulates with this objective. For nearly two decadesleading scholars in counselling psychology have initiated a critical reappraisal of the � eld’scommitments to what constitutes science. Derived largely from a positivistic world view,earlier, ‘modern’ accounts of science imposed signi� cant restrictions on the conduct ofinquiry (Howard, 1985; Mahoney, 1991; Neimeyer, 1993; Polkinghorne, 1984, 1991).Awareness of these limitations has prompted recent efforts to harvest meaningful modesof inquiry from disciplines less wedded to objectivist stances. As a result, prominentscholarship has been directed toward issues of postmodernism, hermeneutics and self-agency, and toward theories of intentional action, narrative knowing and constructivism


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

(Howard, 1985; Polkinghorne, 1988; Hoshmand, 1989; Neimeyer, 1993). The impact ofthis critical re� ection is clearly registered in renewed calls for methodological diversity inthe � eld (Gelso et al., 1989), particularly the inclusion of more naturalistic, ethnographicand qualitative methodologies (Hoshmand, 1989).

While it is generally accepted that ‘this trend toward ‘‘alternative methodologies’’ islargely a healthy one’ (Gelso et al., 1988, p. 395), many scholars and practitioners alikehave been quick to point out that the movement neither advocates nor legitimizes theascendancy of qualitative (non-traditional) methodology over quantitative (traditional)methodology. ‘As counselling psychologists seek for greater understanding of humanbeings’, noted Polkinghore, 1991, p. 113, ‘we need to encourage diversity of approaches,not the precedence of one methodological logic over others’, adding that, ‘only the call fordiversity is consistent with contemporary philosophy of science’ (p. 103).

Professional training

In addition to a reappraisal of its scienti� c moorings, the � eld of counselling psychologyhas continued active re� ection on other key features of its functioning, including selectedissues of professional training, special populations, and organizational and professionalin� uences. Among the � rst of these has been an ongoing debate regarding the preparationof students for pre-doctoral internship and for subsequent placement in the work force.Both internship and market forces have placed important emphasis on clinical skills(Petzel and Bernett, 1980; Sturgis et al., 1980), for example, and this emphasis has posedsigni� cant challenges to doctoral training programmes in counselling psychology. ‘Be-cause of the obvious emphasis on provision of services’, noted Holloway and Roehlke(1987, p. 221), ‘many believe that the practitioner model of training is the bestpreparation’. With practitioner-oriented professional schools now generating approxi-mately 50% of the doctoral students in clinical psychology (Fox et al., 1985), students andtraining programmes alike are experiencing pressure to address the quality and quantityof predoctoral professional training. And, as Holloway and Roehlke (1987) note,‘counselling psychology students will expect and be expected by internship sites tohave acquired background and preinternship experience similar to that of clinicalpsychology students’ (p. 221).

Market forces reinforce this pressure because the primary placement of counsellingpsychology graduates is in service contexts (Watkins et al., 1986a; Cameron, 1989;Bernstein and Kerr, 1993). Watkins et al. (1986b), for example, reported that counsellingpsychologists identi� ed themselves as ‘clinical practitioners’ nearly twice as often as anyother designation, a � nding that is generally consistent with what Cameron et al. (1989)reported as the ‘striking increase’ of counselling psychologists in private practice settings.

In practice and other settings it is increasingly likely that counselling psychologistswill need to be prepared to work effectively within contexts of diversity. Already, ethnic-minority members account for more than one quarter of those individuals accessingpublic mental health facilities (Cheung, 1991), and that demand is likely to increase in theforeseeable future (US Department of Commerce, 1989). The � eld of counsellingpsychology is positioned to contribute centrally to this need insofar as its attention toissues of diversity may already constitute one of the � eld’s signature contributions


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

(Quintana and Bernal, 1995). Watkins (1994), for example, nominates this focus as oneof the de� ning features of the speciality, noting the � eld’s continuing contributions in thisarea. These include the development of: (a) models of minority and majority develop-ment (Atkinson et al., 1989; Helms, 1990); (b) models of women’s development(Downing and Roush, 1985); (c) models of ageing and life satisfaction (Fry, 1992); (d)materials on training students to work with minorities (Buhrke and Douce, 1991); (e) aconsiderable body of research on ethnic and nonethnic minorities; and (f) numerousspecial journal issues dedicated to special populations. These contributions support therecommendations of the Third National Conference on Counselling Psychology (seeMeara et al., 1988) regarding training and accreditation in the speciality. Although thetranslation of these advances into the development of culturally competent therapistsremains an open issue (see Allison et al., 1994; Quintana and Bernal, 1995), the � eld’scontinuing commitment to issues of diversity seems to represent one of only a few areas ofemerging consensus regarding its likely identi� cations in the foreseeable future. Thiscommitment notwithstanding, the directions of this movement remain unclear. As Heathet al. (1988) noted in their Delphi study of the future of cross-cultural counselling, the� eld ‘is expanding rapidly and is in a stage of considerable � ux. Although there arechanges along theoretical, practical, and empirical lines, there is not an identi� edconsensus of opinions regarding the directions of these changes’ (p. 27).

The purpose of the present research is to contribute to this ongoing re� ection andanticipation regarding the future of counselling psychology. More speci� cally, the projectwas designed to explore areas of consensus and dissensus regarding the speciality ofcounselling psychology 10 years from now. Attention was directed at four broad featuresof the speciality, including its core identity commitments, the future role of science in thespeciality, probable developments in professional training, and issues of diversity andmulticulturalism.

Methods

The purpose of this study was to predict future developments in counselling psychology over the next 10 years.The study utilized the best available forecasting tool, the Delphi Poll, for this purpose. The Delphi Method wasdeveloped by the Rand Corporation in the 1950s and was maintained as a classi� ed secret until the US Airforcedeclassi� ed it in 1962 (Dalkey and Helmer, 1963). To date, well over 1000 Delphi Polls have been conducted,producing forecasts in relation to technological and economic (Dalkey and Helmer, 1963), as well as politicaland social developments (Smil, 1977; Preble, 1983). Recent applications have included projections in the areasof mental health (Anderson et al., 1981), psychotherapy (Prochaska and Norcross, 1982; Daniel and Weikel,1983), and cross cultural counselling (Heath et al., 1988).

The Delphi Poll solicits and combines the opinions of a group of experts to develop consensus about futuredevelopments in a designated � eld. The method requires repeated administration of a questionnaire to eachmember of an identi� ed panel of experts, without enabling face-to-face interaction among panel members. Aftereach round of the questionnaire feedback is given to the panellists regarding group responses (e.g., meanresponses from all panel members). Panellists are then asked to re-evaluate their responses in light of thisfeedback, and these responses constitute the panel’s predictions.

This method preserves the advantages of group decision making without incurring the disadvantagesassociated with committee interaction. Advantages of the Delphi Poll include anonymity, controlled feedback,statistical representation of results, and exposure to differing opinions. Anonymity eliminates the in� uence ofdominant individuals and group pressure to conform. Controlled feedback reduces inapplicable communica-tions and maintains task focus (Dalkey, 1972). Statistical representation of results minimizes group pressure toconform because unanimity is not being sought (Leape et al., 1992); instead panel members are encouraged to


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

inspect anonymous summaries of other panel members’ opinions and to reconsider their own opinion in relationto these without fear of reprisal or negative interaction (Leape et al., 1992). Finally, the Delphi technique iseconomical in terms of time and expense (Fish and Piercy, 1987). In effect, the Delphi Method is based on thenotion that: (1) several minds are better than one in making subjective estimates or predictions about futureprobabilities; and that (2) experts within a controlled communication environment, free from personal pressuresand interpersonal in� uence attempts, can achieve greater genuine consensus and forge more effective predic-tions than can lone individuals or interactive groups.

Panel membership

Martino (1972, p. 54) has underscored the importance of the expert panel membership to the Delphi Method,noting that this represents ‘the most important decision the panel director will make’. In our study, it wasdecided to sample current Directors of Training in doctoral programmes in counselling psychology. Thisdecision was based on four considerations. First, several facets of the Delphi Poll focused on issues of futuretraining in the � eld of counselling psychology (see below), and Directors of Training seemed ideally suited forpanel membership for this reason. Second, it was assumed that Directors of Training would generally berelatively senior and established in the � eld, and for that reason would be able to provide the breadth and depthof vision needed for the poll. Third, selecting Directors of Training assured that only one member of any givenuniversity or training programme participated, thereby ensuring the broad-based distribution of participants.And fourth, by sampling Directors of Training we could survey the entire population rather than having to relyon a random sample drawn from that population.

For that reason, a Delphi Poll was constructed and sent to the Directors of Training of all 72 InstitutionalMembers of the Council of Counselling Psychology Training Programmes. The Delphi Poll consisted ofquestions clustered into three major areas: Counselling Psychology Core, Research and Training, andProfessional Training. These areas were developed from a review of the literature concerning historical andanticipated directions in the � eld of counselling psychology. Particular emphasis was placed on: (1) themesprominent in early projections (e.g., The Counselling Psychologist, 8(4), 1980); (2) systematic re-appraisals of thespeciality (e.g., The Counselling Psychologist, 16(3), 1988); and (3) recent re� ection on developments within the� eld (e.g., Watkins, 1994). In two of the three domains participants were asked to respond to a series ofstatements about the � eld of counselling psychology by estimating ‘how likely each of these is to occur over thecourse of the next 10 years’, using a � ve-point rating scale ranging from 1 (decrease), through 3 (stay the same)to 5 (increase). In the case of questions concerning Counselling Psychology Core, respondents were instructedto indicate ‘what you believe will de� ne the core elements of counselling psychology 10 years from now’ byindicating ‘how peripheral or central to that core’ you believe each component will be using a scale ranging from1 (peripheral) to 5 (central). In all cases participants were asked to consider ‘expected or anticipated’ changes‘regardless of how desirable or undesirable these expected changes might be to you’.

In all, 37 of the expert panellists who were solicited agreed to participate in the � rst round of DelphiPolling. Thirty-one of the original 37 respondents also completed the second round of polling, resulting in an83.3% return rate. The representativeness of this sample vis-aÁ-vis the total population of training directors wasre� ected in their similar gender distribution (32% female for the sample, 34% for the population) and thenumber of years in the � eld following graduation (19.77 for the sample; 20.2 for the population). The secondround of polling presented the identical 28-item survey, but this time accompanied by the mean score of theentire expert sample for each of the items.

Results and discussion

Table I presents each of the questions contained on the Delphi Poll, together with themean responses (and standard deviations) of the expert panel from round 1 and round 2of the polling. The table preserves the demarcations contained on the Delphi survey itself:Counselling Psychology Core, Research and Training, and Professional Training. Thegeneral decrease in the standard deviations of ratings across pollings re� ects theeffectiveness of the method in forging consensus among panel experts. Only Round 2results are interpreted and, as in other Delphi work, are presented and interpreteddescriptively (Dalkey and Helmer, 1963).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

The future core of counselling psychology

Concerning issues of counselling psychology’s core, projections were widely variableregarding the speciality’s future identi� cations. The single greatest future identi� cationwas expected to be the � eld’s ‘commitment to issues of diversity’; panel membersnominated this issue as the feature most central to the identity of counselling psychology10 years from now …M ˆ 4:39†. This prediction articulates well with Heath et al.’s (1988)projections concerning the future of cross-cultural counselling in the speciality, and withWatkins’ (1994) recent appraisal of this area as one of the speciality’s major contributionsto the larger discipline. In discussing various themes or trends that characterize counsel-ling psychology, Watkins (1994, p. 327) nominated the attention to diversity and specialpopulations as one of only a select handful of areas that re� ect ‘much of the real identityand substance of what counselling psychology has been, is, and will be’. Quintana andBernal (1995) have recently adduced evidence in support of this claim, writing that‘multicultural training is viewed by many in counselling psychology as critical to thefuture of the speciality’ (p. 102).

‘A commitment to life-span development’ constituted a second central component ofthe speciality’s future identity …M ˆ 4:29†, echoing longstanding sentiment regarding thecentrality of this feature to counselling psychology’s past (Whitely, 1984) present (Mearaet al., 1988), and future (Davis et al., 1992). Given this, a life-span developmentalorientation may well constitute the most enduring and visible of the speciality’s features.As Meara et al. (1988) concluded in their statement regarding speciality training incounselling psychology, ‘The psychological development of persons across the life spanprovides a conceptual basis for the work and speciality training of counselling psychol-ogists’ (p. 371).

While commitments to diversity and life-span developmental orientations occupiedthe most central features of the speciality’s future, ‘identi� cation with adjustment andpreventative mental health models’ …M ˆ 3:97†, occupied the third position, followedby the centrality of ‘supervision skills’ …M ˆ 3:94†. A ‘commitment to the scientist-practitioner model’ occupied a middle position in the � eld’s predicted future …M ˆ 3:90†,possibly indicating the � eld’s projected ambivalence regarding its future dedication to asingle model in the face of its increasing ‘professionalism’. Watkins (1987), for example,exhorted the speciality to consider ‘the discrepancy between our rhetoric about counsel-ling psychology and the ever-emerging reality of service’ (p. 335), and called for acorresponding modi� cation in the � eld’s training model. ‘Practitioner’, ‘scholar-practi-tioner’, and ‘practitioner-scientist’ models all represent alternative training philosophiesthat re� ect a greater emphasis on practice, and each is competing in the marketplace ofdoctoral training at this time. Given this, it may not be so surprising that currentDirectors of Training predict a less central role in the � eld’s future for an exclusiveallegiance to the historically pre-eminent scientist-practitioner model.

Following this, predictions included moderately central roles for ‘research andprogram evaluation skills’ …M ˆ 3:74†, and ‘family counselling and psychotherapy’ skills…M ˆ 3:74† in counselling psychology’s future core, followed by ‘group counselling’…M ˆ 3:67† and ‘individual counselling’ …M ˆ 3:55† skills. Out of the 11 areas sampled inthis section of the Delphi Poll, the least central roles were predicted for ‘vocational and


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

career counselling’ …M ˆ 3:45† and ‘organizational management and administrativeskills’ …M ˆ 3:27†, with these two features anchoring the bottom positions in terms oftheir predicted centrality to the � eld’s future core identity.

The relatively peripheral roles accorded traditional areas of strength, particularlyvocational and career counselling, are intriguing. The role of vocational counselling in the


Table I. Mean Delphi Poll ratings on round 1 and 2

Round Round1 2

Counselling psychology core M SD M SD

1. A commitment to life-span development 4.27 0.89 4.29 0.752. Identi� cation with adjustment and preventative 4.11 0.86 3.97 0.77

mental health methods3. Vocational and career counselling 3.50 0.94 3.45 0.494. Research and programme evaluation skills 3.68 0.82 3.74 0.815. Commitment to scientist-practitioner model 3.43 0.84 3.90 0.826. Commitment to issues of diversity 4.32 0.91 4.39 0.797. Individual counselling and psychotherapy 3.70 0.77 3.55 0.628. Group counselling and psychotherapy 3.65 0.81 3.67 0.579. Family counselling and psychotherapy 3.65 0.78 3.74 0.62

10. Supervision skills 3.77 0.59 3.94 0.6511. Skills in organizational management and administration 3.14 0.69 3.27 0.72

Research and training12. Attention to statistical and quantitative sophistication 3.37 0.78 3.68 0.5913. Attention to descriptive and qualitative sophistication 4.24 0.99 4.43 0.6914. Attention to methodological diversity and triangulation 4.00 0.78 4.35 0.7015. Commitment to the scientist-practitioner model 3.00 0.79 3.48 0.62

of training16. Exploration of alternative models of training 3.94 0.75 4.00 0.73

(i.e., practitioner-scientist; professional-practitioner)17. Critique of the Received View of science and 3.71 0.79 3.90 0.64

efforts to transform and rede� ne what constitutesthe domain and/or practice of science

Professional training18. Attention to objective methods of personality 3.30 0.80 3.29 0.77

and intellectual assessment19. Attention to projective methods of personality 2.89 0.94 2.84 0.86

assessment20. Consideration of neuropsychological assessment 3.95 0.75 3.81 0.7521. Attention to vocational assessment 3.22 0.75 3.13 0.6722. Attention to behavioural forms of assessment 3.22 0.45 3.16 0.6123. Attention to training in supervision 3.78 0.96 3.84 0.7824. Attention to training in group therapy 3.32 0.91 3.39 1.0225. Attention to training in consultation 3.73 0.88 3.77 0.8926. Changes in the required number of practicum hours 3.97 0.97 3.97 0.73

in preparation for the pre-doctoral internship27. Inclusion of ‘captive’ practica in professional training 3.51 1.01 3.67 0.7028. Inclusion of ‘captive’ internships in professional training 3.38 0.82 3.53 0.56

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

speciality’s future has been a subject of continuing debate for several decades now.Although historically strong, interest in vocational and career issues has been unevenacross the years within counselling psychology. Even recent data re� ect the � eld’sambivalence in this regard (Watkins, 1987; 1994). On the one hand, Borgen’s (1991)20-year retrospective of counselling psychology, for example, reiterated his earlierconclusion (Borgen, 1984, p. 589) that ‘vocational psychology has deep roots thatcontinue to nourish its current life’ within the � eld. And this assessment is supportedby the recent work of Watkins (1994) who concluded that, ‘The vocational arm of ourspeciality continues to be a signi� cant part of who and what we are, continues to providerich, fertile opportunities for practice and research, and continues to thrive and � ourishwithin counselling psychology’ (p. 322).

In contrast to this perspective, the � ndings of Watkins et al. (1986a) were lesssanguine regarding the centrality of this area to the future of the speciality. Notwith-standing his more recent speculations, Watkins’ (1994) earlier data prompted a moresombre assessment: ‘If subsequent research shows that vocational work continues to beengaged in minimally and is increasingly uninteresting and unattractive to counsellingpsychologists (cf. Gelso et al., 1985; Pinkey and Jacobs, 1985), a re-evaluation of its placein counselling psychology and counselling psychology training may be needed’ (p. 307).The present work supports the possibility that such a reevaluation may already beunderway, at least in relation to the � eld’s imagined future.

Research and training

In general, vigorous increases were predicted in the speciality’s future attention to issuesof research and training. The single greatest increases were predicted in relation to thedevelopment of ‘descriptive and qualitative sophistication’ …M ˆ 4:43† in researchmethodology, followed closely by ‘attention to methodological diversity and tri-angulation’ …M ˆ 4:35†. Calls for expanding available methodologies are now anenduring feature of the speciality’s anticipated future (Fretz, 1977; Super, 1980;Neimeyer and Resnikoff, 1982; Gelso et al., 1988), extending a commitment alreadyvisible in the � eld’s scholarship. Considerable attention has already been directed towardsthis topic, with special issues of the area’s � agship journals having been dedicated toexploring and incorporating alternative research methodologies (e.g., The CounsellingPsychologist, 17(1), 1989).

The expected attention to diverse and qualitative methods likely articulates with thespeciality’s broader re� ections regarding the nature of science and its role in core trainingin counselling psychology. Consistent with this notion is the � nding that Directors ofTraining in the current study predicted that the future would be marked by substantialincreases in the ‘exploration of alternative models of training (i.e., practitioner-scientist,professional-practitioner)’ …M ˆ 4:0† as well as continued ‘critique of the received view ofscience’ that has anchored the � eld’s historical methodological commitments…M ˆ 3:90†.

One consequence of this critique may be a relative erosion of con� dence in the � eld’sfuture ‘commitment to the scientist-practitioner model of training’ …M ˆ 3:48†, andperhaps its associated ‘attention to statistical and quantitative sophistication’ …M ˆ 3:68†,


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

since these two areas occupied the bottom positions in terms of their expected attention inthe � eld of counselling psychology. In neither case, however, were these commitmentsexpected to decrease in an absolute way (i.e., ratings below the midpoint rating of 3), onlyto remain relatively stable while more vigorous attention was being devoted towardexpanding notions of science, scienti� c methods, and their role in doctoral training.

Professional training

Professional training constituted the third area of study in the Delphi Poll, and this areacan be divided into two primary foci. The � rst addresses aspects of psychologicalassessment and the second concerns the broader and allied areas of professional trainingin psychotherapy, supervision, and consultation.

Regarding the � rst of these, predictions concerning the � eld’s future attention toareas of psychological assessment were widely variable. Out of the � ve areas of assessmentstudied (objective, projective, neuropsychological, vocational and behavioural), only onewas nominated for substantially greater future attention. This was the area of neuro-psychological assessment …M ˆ 3:81†, a prediction that is supported by the work ofLarson (1992) and Agresti (1992), and a wide spectrum of scholars and practitioners whosupport the development of counselling psychology more broadly within the � eldsde� ned by the allied health professions (see Alcorn, 1991; Altmaier, 1991).

In contrast to neuropsychological assessment, relative stasis was predicted in theareas of ‘objective personality and intellectual assessment’ …M ˆ 3:29†, ‘behaviouralforms of assessment’ …M ˆ 3:16†, and ‘vocational assessment’ …M ˆ 3:13†. These pre-dictions were anchored by predictions regarding the future ‘attention to projectivemethods of personality assessment’ …M ˆ 2:84†, the only area in the entire Delphi Pollto distinguish itself by an expected decrease in future attention within the � eld.

These � ndings concerning the future of assessment within counselling psychologysupport and extend related studies of the role that psychological assessment plays in theprofessional lives of current counselling psychologists. For example, Fitzgerald andOsipow (1986) reported in their study of Division 17 members that substantial percen-tages of their respondents utilized objective personality inventories (66.7%), vocationalinterest inventories (61.8%) and intelligence tests (57%) in their practice, with relativelyfewer incorporating projective techniques (45.6%). In all cases, however, the amount oftime devoted to these activities was minimal (2–3%), and their perceived importance andcentrality to their identity was moderately low. Likewise, Watkins et al. (1986b) reportedthat, while nearly half of the counselling psychologists in their sample reported beinginvolved with diagnosis/assessment (46%), these same individuals estimated that onlyabout 6% of their time was dedicated to these activities. The corresponding estimates forvocational assessment were relatively lower; less than 30% reported using vocationalmeasures and this use occupied only about 2% of their time (Watkins et al., 1986a). Insummarizing his review of more than � fty years of survey data concerning vocationalassessment, Watkins (1993) concluded that ‘vocational assessment is still very muchalive, still being taught in most counselling psychology programmes, and still beingpractised by a fair number of counselling psychologists’ (p. 114). This optimistic appraisalwas tempered by the realization, however, that this ‘is not an area in which counselling


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

psychology students seem to be highly interested’ (p. 113). Moreover, it is a � eld markedby the predominance of a single instrument (the strong interest inventory) and by uncleartheoretical alliances. ‘What, exactly, all of this means for future vocational assessmentpractice’, concluded Watkins (1993, p. 114), ‘is hard to say now’. For this reason theclearest conclusion may be that the future will forge different roles for different forms ofassessment within the speciality. While the use of some forms of assessment may wax (i.e.,neuropsychological), others may wane (i.e., projective methods), with relative stability inthe mainstay of the � eld’s methods of psychological assessment (i.e., objective andintellectual). The future of vocational assessment within the � eld, per se, may be expectedto articulate with the broader role of vocational counselling itself, an issue that remainsuncertain (see above).

The second major focus of the questions concerning professional training involvedaspects of psychotherapeutic practice, supervision, and consultation. While all areas werenominated for moderately greater attention in the � eld’s future, the single greatestincrease was predicted in relation to ‘the number of required practicum hours inpreparation for predoctoral internship’ …M ˆ 3:97†. This � nding supports the � ndingsof Watkins et al. (1986a), and the anticipations of Holloway and Roehlke (1987)regarding the increasing ‘professionalization’ of the � eld and the corresponding pressuresthat this places on doctoral training in the speciality. Following this, attention to ‘trainingin supervision’ …M ˆ 3:84† was expected to experience the next largest increase, followedby ‘training in consultation’ …M ˆ 3:77†. These two predictions are supported by the� ndings concerning the increasing use of these skills by current counselling psychologists.Approximately 70% of all counselling psychologists engage in supervision and consulta-tion, for example, with the median person spending nearly 10% or his or her time in eachof these functions (Fitzgerald and Osipow, 1986). Particularly given the increasingattention to ethical and legal issues concerning the practice of psychotherapy supervision(Sherry, 1991), it seems likely that the future will support this prediction regardingincreased attention to training in this area.

The ‘inclusion of ‘‘captive’’ practica’ …M ˆ 3:67† and internships …M ˆ 3:53† (i.e.,offered within the academic training programmes rather than outside of them in thecommunity) received somewhat less robust predictions, with only moderately greaterattention to these developments being predicted within the speciality’s foreseeable future.‘Attention to training in group therapy’ received the lowest ratings in this regard…M ˆ 3:39†, but even this re� ected an anticipated increase over the next 10 years(since stasis would be re� ected by a rating of 3.0).

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to explore areas of consensus regarding the expected futureof counselling psychology. An image emerged that characterizes the � eld’s future corecommitments and its anticipated developments in relation to scienti� c and professionaldomains. In general, issues of diversity constituted the most robust domain of anticipatedattention in the � eld’s foreseeable future, and the commitment to values of culturalpluralism and life-span development occupied pre-eminent positions in relation to the� eld’s anticipated identity. These predictions cohere to form a focal point for the


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

speciality’s future within an increasingly multicultural society dedicated to ongoingpersonal development and adjustment.

Ongoing examination of the � eld’s scienti� c commitments were re� ected in pre-dicted increases in methodological diversity. These, in turn, were supported by continuedand vigorous explorations of alternative notions of science and, correspondingly, ofscienti� c training in the speciality. Pressures toward ‘professionalization’ were expectedto continue, with corresponding increases in selected aspects of psychotherapeuticassessment and intervention.

But these and other predictions need to be understood within the limitations of thecurrent study. Several of these limitations follow from the particular methodology usedand from the sample studied. The Delphi method, for example, is only as effective as thequestions it asks (Loughlin and Moore, 1979) and the experts it samples (Cicarelli,1984). While the construction of the instrument was guided by the literature, it isundoubtedly true that the items contained on the measure in no way exhaust thepopulation of important questions currently facing the � eld, let alone those that arelikely to emerge over the course of the coming decade. Different questions wouldundoubtedly yield different answers and in this way shape and frame the � eld’s futureimage in somewhat different ways.

Second, as Cicarelli (1984, p. 140) has noted, ‘A Delphi is its panel’, and in thisregard the nature of the panel membership needs to be underscored. As current Directorsof training of doctoral programmes in counselling psychology, participants in this studybest re� ect the perspective of training within the speciality, not necessarily broadercontingents of practitioners that might be represented within or outside of the Division ofCounselling Psychology. Indeed, one intriguing future direction suggested by the currentstudy might be the study of perspectival differences regarding the imagined future of thespeciality. Differences could emerge from similar Delphi Pollings, for example, inter-national differences in the anticipated future of the � eld, current students within thespeciality, and/or from counselling psychology graduates who have not actively main-tained their identi� cation within the speciality. Different anticipated futures likely followfrom different contemporary moorings, and the current study is not exempt from thatlikelihood.

And � nally, there is an inherent limitation associated with this study that is unrelatedto its methodology, per se. As Allen (1980) noted, prediction is an inherently dif� cult anduncertain enterprise, all the moreso since ‘any prediction, it seems, must take intoaccount that the world in which counselling psychology moves is in the throes of radicaltransformation’ (p. 38). This study was conducted with respect to that transformation inhopes of contributing to a growing understanding of its nature and course and theimplications that it holds for the future of the speciality.

References

Agresti, A.A. (1992) Integrating neuropsychological training into a counselling psychology curriculum.The Counselling Psychologist, 20, 605–619.

Alcorn, J.D. (1991) Counselling psychology and health applications. The Counselling Psychologist, 19,325–341.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Allen, T.W. (1980) A counselling psychology for the new age? The Counselling Psychology, 8, 38–43.Allison, K.W., Crawford, I., Eichemendia, R., Robinson, L. & Knepp, D. (1994) Human diversity

and professional competence: training in clinical and counselling psychology revisited. AmericanPsychologist, 49, 792–796.

Altmaier, E.M. (1991) Research and practice roles for counselling psychologists in health care settings.The Counselling Psychologist, 19, 342–364.

Anderson, J.K., Parente, F.J. & Gordon, C. (1981) A forecast of the future of the neutral healthprofession. American Psychology, 36, 848–855.

Atkinson, D.R., Morten, G. & Sue, D.W. (1989) Counselling American Minorities, third edition.Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown.

Benjamin, L.T. (1986) Why don’t they understand us? A history of psychology’s public image. AmericanPsychologist, 41, 941–946.

Bernstein, B.L. & Kerr, B. (1993) Counselling psychology and the scientist-practitioner model:implementation and implications. The Counselling Psychologist, 21, 136–151.

Blustein, D.L. (1992) Reinvigorating the vocational realm. The Counselling Psychologist, 20, 712–723.Borgen, F.H. (1984) Counselling psychology. Annual Reviews of Psychology, 35, 579–604.Borgen, F.H. (1991) Megatrends and Milestones in vocational behaviour: a 20-year counselling

psychology retrospective. Journal of Vocational Behaviour, 39, 263–290.Brammer, L., Alcorn, J., Birk, J., Gazda, G., Hurst, J., LaFromboise, T., Newmann, R., Osipow, S.,

Packard , T., Romero, D. & Scott, N. (1988) Organizational and political issues in counsellingpsychology: recommendations for change. The Counselling Psychologist, 16, 407–422.

Buhrke, R.A. & Douce, L.A. (1991) Training issues for counselling psychologists in working withlesbian women and gay men. The Counselling Psychologist, 19, 216–234.

Cameron, A.S., Galassi , J.P., Birk, J.N. & Waggener, N.M. (1989) The council of counsellingpsychology training programmes survey, 1975–1987. The Counselling Psychologist, 17, 301–313.

Cheung, F.K. (1991) The use of mental health services by ethnic minorities. In H.F. Myers, P.Wohlford, L.P. Guzman & R. J. Echemendia (eds), Ethnic Minority Perspectives on ClinicalTraining Services in Psychology (pp. 23–31). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Cicarelli , J. (1984) The future of economics. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 25, 139–157.The Counselling Psychologist, 8(4), 1980.The Counselling Psychologist, 16(3), 1988.The Counselling Psychologist, 17(1), 1989.The Counselling Psychologist, 20(3), 1992.Dalkey, N. (1972) Studies in the Quality of Life. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.Dalkey, N. & Helmer, O. (1963) An experimental application of the Delphi Method to the use of

experts. Management Science, 9, 458–467.Daniel, R.W. & Weikel, W.J. (1983) Trends in counselling: a Delphi study. The Personal and Guidance

Journal, 61, 327–331.Davis, K.L., Alcorn, J.D., Brook, L. & Meara, N.M. (1992) Crystal ball gazing: training and

accreditation in 2000 AD. The Counselling Psychologist, 20, 352–371.Downing, N.E. & Roush, K.L. (1985) From passive acceptance to active commitment: A model of

feminist identity development for women. The Counselling Psychologist, 13, 695–710.Fish, L.S. & Piercy, F.P. (1987) The theory and practice of structural and strategic family therapies: a

Delphi Study. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 13, 113–125.Fitzgerald, L.F. & Osipow, S.H. (1986) An occupational analysis of counselling psychology: how

special is the specialty? American Psychologist, 41, 535–544.Fox, R., Kovacs, A. & Graham , S. (1985) Proposals for a revolution in the preparation and regulation of

professional psychologists. American Psychologist, 40, 1042–1050.Fretz, B.R. (Ed.) (1977) Professional identity. The Counselling Psychologist, 7, 9–94.Fretz, B.R. (1980) Counselling psychology: 2001. The Counselling Psychologist, 8, 2–11.Fretz, B.R. (1993) Counselling psychology: a transformation for the Third Age. The Counselling

Psychologist, 20, 154–170.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Fry, P.S. (1992) Major social theories of ageing and their implications for counselling concepts andpractice: a critical review. The Counselling Psychologist, 20, 246–329.

Gelso, C.J., Prince, J., Corn®eld, J.L., Payne, A.B., Royalty, G. & Wiley, M.O. (1985) Quality ofcounselor’s intake evaluations for clients with problems that are primarily vocational versus personal.Journal of Counselling Psychology, 32, 339–347.

Gelso, C.J., Betz, N.E., Friedlander, M.L., Helms, J.E., Hill, C.E., Patton, M.J., Super, D.E. &Wampold, B.E. (1988) Research in counselling psychology: prospects and recommendations. TheCounselling Psychologist, 16, 385–406.

Hahn, M.E. (1980) Counselling psychology: 2000 AD. The Counselling Psychologist, 8, 36–37.Hamilton, M.K. (1987) Some suggestions for our chronic problem. The Counselling Psychologist, 15,

341–346.Hanish, C., Horan, J., Keen, B., St. Peter, C., Ceperich, S. & Beasley, J. (1995) The scienti� c stature

of Counselling Psychology Training Programmes. The Counselling Psychologist, 23, 82–101.Harmon, L. (1982) Scienti� c affairs: the next decade. The Counselling Psychologist, 10, 31–37.Harris, J.K. (1991) Evolution of a health focus: old values – new practices in counselling psychology

education and training. The Counselling Psychologist, 19, 365–375.Heath , A.E., Neimeyer, G.J. & Pedersen, P.B. (1988) The future of cross-cultural counselling: a Delphi

Poll. Journal of Counselling and Development, 67, 27–30.Helms, J.E. (Ed.) (1990) Black and White Racial Identity: Theory, Research, and Practice. Westport, CT:

Greenwood Press.Heppner, P.P., Carter, J.A., Claiborn, C.D., Brooks, L., Gelso, C.J., Fassinger, R.E., Holloway,

E.L., Stone, G.L., Wampold, B.E. & Galassi , J.P. (1992) A proposal to integrate science andpractice in counselling psychology. The Counselling Psychologist, 20, 107–122.

Holloway, E.L. & Roehlke, H.J. (1987) Internship: the applied training of a counselling psychologist.The Counselling Psychologist, 15, 205–260.

Hoshmand, L.T. (1989) Alternate research paradigms: a review and teaching proposal. The CounsellingPsychologist, 17, 3–79.

Howard, G. (1985) Can research in the human sciences become more relevant to practice? Journal ofCounselling and Development, 63, 539–544.

Ivey, A.E. (1980) Counselling 2000: time to take charge! The Counselling Psychologist, 8, 12-17.Kaczmarek, P.G. & Wagner, W.G. (1994) Future training requirements for counselling psychologists:

competence with children. The Counselling Psychologist, 22, 426–443.Kwiatkowski, R. (1998) Counselling and psychotherapy: are they different and should we care?

Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 11, 5–14.Larson, P.C. (1992) Neuropsychological counselling in hospital settings. The Counselling Psychologist, 20,

556–559.Leape, L.L., Freshour, M.A., Yntema, D. & Hsiao, W. (1992) Small-group judgement methods for

determining resource-based relative values. Medical Care, 30, 7528–7538.Lent, R.W. (1990) Further re� ections of the public image of counselling psychology. The Counselling

Psychologist, 18, 324–332.Mahoney, M.J. (1991) Human Change Processes. New York: Basic Books.Martino, J.P. (1972) Technological Forecasting for Decision Making. New York: American Elsevier

Publishing Company.Meara, N.M., Schmidt, L.D., Carrington, C.H., Davis, K.L., Dixon, D.N., Fretz, B.R., Myers,

R.A., Ridley, C.R. & Suinn, R.M. (1988) Training and accreditation in counselling psychology.The Counselling Psychologist, 16, 366–384.

Mosher, R. (1980) On beating dead horses. The Counselling Psychologist, 8, 16–18.Neimeyer, G.J. (1993) (ed.) Constructivist Assessment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Neimeyer, G.J. & Norcross, J.C. (1997) The future of psychotherapy and counselling in the USA. In S.

Palmer & V. Varma (eds), The Future of Counselling and Psychotherapy (pp. 65-82). London: SagePublications.

Neimeyer, G.J. & Resnikoff, A. (1982) Qualitative Strategies in Counselling Research. The CounselingPsychologist, 10, 75–86.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Neimeyer, G. & Walling, C. (1990) Perceived social in� uence: the professionals’ perspective. SocialBehaviour and Personality, 18, 217–224.

Osipow, S.H. (1979) Occupational and mental health: another role for counselling psychologists. TheCounselling Psychologist, 10, 65–70.

Osipow, S.H. (1980) Toward counselling psychology in the year 2000. The Counselling Psychologist, 8, 18–19.

Osipow, S.H. & Betz, N.E. (1991) Career counselling research. In C.E. Watkins, Jr & L.J. Schneider

(eds) Research in Counselling (pp. 205–233). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Palmer, S. & Varm a, V. (1997) (Eds) The Future of Counselling and Psychotherapy. London: Sage

Publications.Petzel, T. & Bernett, D. (1980) American Psychological Association internship selection criteria:

relative importance of academic and clinical preparation. Professional Psychology, 11, 792-795.Pinkey, J.W. & Jacobs, D. (1985) New counsellors and personal interest in the task of career counselling.

Journal of Counselling, 32, 454–457.Polkinghorne, D.E. (1984) Further extensions of methodological diversity for counselling psychology.

Journal of Counselling Psychology, 31, 416–429.Polkinghorne, D.E. (1988) Narrative Knowing and the Human Sciences. New York: State University of

New York Press.Polkinghorne, D.E. (1991) Two con� icting calls for methodological reform. The Counselling Psychol-

ogist, 19, 103–114.Preble, J.F. (1983) Public sector use of the Delphi Technique. Technological Forecasting and Social

Change, 23, 25–88.Prochaska, J.O. & Norcross, J.C. (1982) The future of psychotherapy: a Delphi poll. Professional

Psychology, 13, 89–94.Quintana, S.M. & Bernal, M.E. (1995) Ethnic minority training in counselling psychology. The

Counselling Psychologist, 23, 102–121.Rude, S.S., Weissburg, M. & Gazda, G.M. (1988) Looking to the future: themes from the Third

National Conference for Counselling Psychology. The Counselling Psychologist, 16, 423–430.Schneider, L.J., Watkins, C.E. Jr. & Gelso, C.J. (1988) Counselling psychology from 1971 to 1986:

perspective on and appraisal of current training emphases. Professional Psychology: Research andPractice, 19, 584–588.

Sherry, P. (1991) Ethical issues in the conduct of supervision. The Counselling Psychologist, 19, 566–584.Slaney, R.B. & Mackinnon-Slaney, F. (1990) The use of vocational card sorts in career counselling. In

C.E. Watkins Jr & V.L. Campbell (eds), Testing in Counselling Practice (pp. 317–371). Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.

Smil, V. (1977) China’s future: a Delphi forecast. Futures, 9, 474–489.Sturgis, D., Verstegan, J., Randolph, D. & Garvin, R. (1980) Professional psychology internships.

Professional Psychology, 11, 567–573.Super, D.E. (1977) The identity crisis of counselling psychologists. The Counselling Psychologist, 7, 13-15.Super, D.E. (1980) The year 2000 and all that. The Counselling Psychologist, 8, 22–24.Tyler, L.E. (1980) The next twenty years. The Counselling Psychologist, 8, 19–21.US Department of Commerce (1989) Bureau of Census Statistical Abstract of the United States for 1989.

Washington, DC: Author.Watkins, C.E. Jr (1987) On myopia, rhetoric, and reality in counselling psychology. The Counselling

Psychologist, 15, 332–336.Watkins, C.E. Jr (1993) What have surveys taught us about the teaching and practice of vocational

assessment? The Counselling Psychologist, 21, 109–117.Watkins, C.E. Jr (1994) On hope, promise, and possibility in counselling psychology or some simple,

but meaningful observations about our speciality. The Counselling Psychologist, 22, 315–334.Watkins, C.E., Jr, Campbell, V.L. & McGregor, P. (1988) Counselling psychologists’ uses of and

opinions about psychological tests: a contemporary perspective. The Counselling Psychologist, 16, 476–486.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

Watkins, C.E. Jr, Lopez, F.G., Campbell, V.L. & Himmel, C.D. (1986a) Contemporary counsellingpsychology: results of a national survey. Journal of Counselling Psychology, 33, 301–309.

Watkins, C.E. Jr, Lopez, F.G, Campbell, V.L. & Himmel, C.D. (1986b) Counselling psychology andclinical psychology: some preliminary comparative data. American Psychologist, 41, 581–582.

Weissberg, M., Rude, S.S., Gazda, G.M., Bozarth , J.D., McDougal, K.S., Slavit, M.R., Smith, J.L.& Walsh , D.J. (1988) An overview of the Third National Conference for Counselling Psychology:planning for the future. The Counselling Psychologist, 16, 325-331.

Whitely, J.M. (1980) Counselling psychology in the year 2000 AD. The Counselling Psychologist, 8, 2-8.Whitely, J.M. (1984) A historical perspective on the development of counselling psychology as a

profession. In S.D. Brown & R.W. Lent (eds), Handbook of Counselling Psychology (pp. 3–55).NewYork: John Wiley,


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f C

onne

ctic

ut]

at 0

0:31

08

Oct

ober

201

4

the anticipated future of counselling psychology in the united states: a delphi poll

Documents