Building a Two-way Bridge between Practice and Research
Marvin R. Goldfried, PhD, ABPP
Stony Brook University
President, Society of Clinical Psychology
One of the long-standing problematic themes in clinical psychology has involved the gap between research and practice. John Norcross, Past-President of the Society of Clinical Psychology, has been a strong advocate of the need to close this gap. In assuming the presidency in 2010, my goal is to help us work toward some resolution of this unfortunate and long-standing state of affairs. One step in that direction is that the Society’s theme for the forthcoming APA convention in August will be on building a two-way bridge between practice and research.
As I have indicated in the past, this strained alliance between research and practice has plagued me ever since graduate school. A particularly distressing event during my graduate career occurred when Paul Meehl—a very strong advocate of the need for empirical evidence in clinical psychology--visited our program. I had read virtually everything he had written, I was particularly fortunate to be among the small group of graduate students to sit with him at dinner. At one point during the evening, somebody asked: “Dr. Meehl, to what extent does research inform how you practice clinically?” Without hesitation, Meehl replied: “Not at all!” As someone who was aspiring to become a scientist-practitioner, I was crushed. Indeed, I continue to be effected by this some 50 years (!) later.