Examination of Clinical Psychology Paper

[pic 1]

EXAMINATION OF CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY PAPER

[pic 2]                       Ronald Berry[pic 3]

University of Phoenix

PSY/480

Instructor: Janice Williams

03/23/2015

  When it comes to clinical psychology the architect of its beginning was Lightner Witmer, he attempted educational experiments, and evaluated their effectiveness over several days or even weeks. He believed, that the right educational approach needed to be “teach to weakness” (Johnson, 2012). In today’s psychology his method would be at best called “learning disabilities”, but Witmer extended this approach to fit a more traditional topic regarding psychology, such as the nature of delusions. During Witmers days they did not have the two facets of clinical psychology, which many studiers of psychology understand in today’s psychology. The first step, which was completely ignored was the dynamic approach using convenient shorthand label. The next missing piece would be there was no clinical collaboration with “analytically oriented” psychiatrist, but instead Witmer relied on men who were primarily neurologist in working out the medical stage of his professional collaboration. This is why many scientist and psychologist who admit he is the creator of clinical psychology, but also believe his major influence embodies a paradox. Finally, many in the psychology community believe Witmer has little influence regarding the body of workers today called clinical psychologist.  

The History of Clinical Psychology and its Evolving Nature

When it comes to the history of clinical psychology, it could be organized under a small number of headings. There seven pioneers who have arguably had the biggest influence on the development of this field. Lightner Witmer is usually recognized as the main architect attributed to the creation of clinical psychology (Routh, 2012). Hippocrates was the ancient Greek founder of medicine, undeniable a close cousin to clinical psychology and a scientific model for psychology in general. Theodule Ribot led the development of psychology as an academic discipline in 19th – century France, as one primarily focused on clinical issues. Alfred Binet, also in France, devised the first practical “intelligence” test in 1905; administering such tests was among the most common activities of early clinical psychologist. Leta Hollingworth was an early practitioner who played a large role in the development of organized clinical psychology beginning in 1917. Sigmund Freud founded psychoanalysis, the first influential form of psychotherapy practiced by clinical psychologist, among others. Finally, Hans Eysenck was among the earliest to conceptualize behavior therapy and to promote the use of what have come to be known as evidence – based methods of intervention in clinical psychology. Clinical psychology has an intrinsic mechanism that creates its ongoing evolving nature, defined by its association with modern medicine and its use of the scientific method (Kazdin, 2008). As the high-tech standards of modern medicine and neuroscience continue to unearth new discoveries about the human brain and its connection to thought and behavior, clinical psychology evolves its applications according to new empirical evidence. "Central to this evolution has been the titanic human struggle to understand abnormal behavior in the context of the mind and the body" (Plante, 2011, p. 31). Contemporary clinical psychology embodies the scientific advances of science while incorporating a deeper understanding of the human psyche, and even the spiritual nature of humanity, which is enveloped in the context of the evolving human condition. As research and practice unite to provide continued improvement to patient care, the relationship between the two is an essential component to its evolving nature (Kazdin, 2008). According to Kazdin (2008), one of the conundrums between clinical psychology and research is the clinician's best effort to "tailor treatment to meet the needs of individual patients" (p. 17) when such individuality has no defined protocol supported by empirical research.