Choosing a Theoretical Orientation
In this post, I discuss choosing a theoretical
orientation. Students should try to think about choosing a
theoretical orientation. Some programs will want student applicants that
are interested in practicing under a particular orientation style, while other
programs will not be that specific. I do not recommend that students rush
into choosing a theory; however, think about the subjects discussed in this
paper for future reference.
Also, be careful about speaking too adamantly for or
against an orientation when writing a statement of purpose or
interviewing. You may offend an admissions committee member that either
disagrees with your theory or thinks you are not objective enough about a
specific theory.
The bottom line is to do your research on the programs you
are interested in attending. Be familiar with any practice preferences
for the program and among specific faculty members. Some programs only
want students interested in Neuropsychology and Cognitive Behavioral
methods. Other programs might be looking for something else. Still,
some programs are not specific. So, be thoughtful in your communication
about your orientation, if asked to discuss it. If you are not asked
about an orientation, then speak on your other strengths as a candidate. Overall,
always display yourself as positive and objective!
Choosing
a Theoretical Orientation
Every psychology graduate
student undergoes the process of selecting a theoretical orientation in which
to practice psychotherapy. Because of the diverse offerings of
theoretical orientations (e.g., Psychodynamic (PD), Cognitive Behavioral
therapy (CBT), and Existential-Humanistic (E-H)), students often grapple with
how to narrow their practice down to one orientation. One issue that
makes choosing an orientation challenging is that PD, CBT, and E-H have
intersecting concepts, which results in students being attracted to several
theories (Bitar, Bean, & Bermudez, 2007). Also, students struggle with following a theory based on
their personal viewpoints versus the popularity of the theoretical orientation
(Jacob & Kuruvilla, 2012). Contemporary
psychotherapy literature can aid students in identifying the most essential
factors in choosing a theoretical orientation. The scholarly literature
highlights influences that lead to students choosing a meaningful theory like
personal factors (learning style, family experience, value system, and cultural
perspectives) and professional factors (building a working hypothesis,
education, supervision, personal therapy experiences, exposure to clinical
scenarios) (Bitar, Bean, & Bermudez, 2007; Heffler & Sandell, 2009; Jacob & Kuruvilla,
2012).
Personal
Factors in Choosing an Orientation
Choosing a theoretical orientation largely involves
personal factors (Bitar et al., 2007). A student’s contextual factors
cannot be separated from their decision to choose a psychological
orientation. In fact, scholarly literature cautions students not to
dismiss their personal values in this decision process (Bitar et al.,
2007). Another way to think about the influence of a student clinician’s
personal life and choosing an orientation is to view it as ontological (Heffler & Sandell, 2009). The concept of “being” or factors that make a
student practitioner unique are important in identify a theoretical approach
(Heffler & Sandell, 2009). More specifically, understanding and
interpreting the role of culture, family/developmental experiences, and
language in a student therapist’s life is essential in selecting a
psychological viewpoint for practice (Jacob & Kuruvilla, 2012). No
personal student experience is exempt from influencing how one views,
conceptualizes, and resolves psychological issues that arise in therapy
training (i.e., according to a specific approach) (Bitar et al., 2007; Jacob & Kuruvilla, 2012). The ontological influence
is separate from any training or knowledge base for identifying important
psychological themes.
Learning Style or Personality Traits
Heffler and Sandell (2009) identify learning style as a
leading factor in choosing one’s psychological orientation style.
According to Heffler and Sandell (2009), Kolb’s (1984) theory on Experience
Learning Style is helpful in understanding how learning style or
personality traits affect theory choice. Kolb’s learning style traits are
dichotomized into polar axes based on one’s psychological approach, such as
think-feel or do-watch axes (Heffler & Sandell, 2009). More
specifically, the four stages in Kolb’s theory include: concrete experience
(feel), reflective observation (watch), abstract conceptualization (think), and
active experimentation (do) (Heffler & Sandell, 2009). Kolb believed
that persons fall within two dimensions of these learning style cycles similar
to the think-feel or do-watch axes previously mentioned (Heffler & Sandell,
2009). Other personality trait combinations are possible like watch-feel
or feel-think.
While using Kolb’s learning style theory for choosing an
orientation is commendable, there are issues with reliability (Heffler & Sandell, 2009). Thus, students should use this method cautiously, since
this method is not amply supported in the empirical literature for selecting
one’s psychological orientation. Thus, psychology students to go beyond theory or proclivities in choosing
an orientation, as there are other factors that contribute to adopting a
theory.
Value System
Bitar, Bean, and
Bermudez (2007) reiterate the importance of adopting a theory focused on one’s
personal values and experiences. Values differ from a proclivity to
research or psychotherapy topic because values are at the core of one’s
worldview system. Students should choose a theory that connects with
their experiences and beliefs about the world, people, nature of people (good
and evil), helping others, metaphysical views (origin of humankind), and so
forth (Jacob & Kuruvilla, 2012).
Connecting one’s practice to a personal value is critical because it makes
therapy work meaningful and purposeful for the student ( Jacob & Kuruvilla, 2012).
Considering Population and Clinician Values
Interestingly, Jacob and Kuruvilla (2012) recommend that
psychotherapy practitioners not just choose a therapy based on their values,
but one that connects their beliefs to the shared ideas of the client base in
which they are working. For instance, a therapist working with a client
that had a history of prostitution mentioned using narrative therapy or an E-H
paradigm to aid the client in rebuilding a new life story for herself (Bitar et
al., 2007). In this manner, choosing a theory is purposeful in that the
student is considering both their own values and that of the client population
in which they work (Jacob & Kuruvilla, 2012). Students can take into
consideration factors like language, symbolism, cultural, and spiritual views
in narrowing a theory that connects with their values and that of their clients
(Jacob & Kuruvilla, 2012).
Professional
Factors
On the other hand, choosing a psychological orientation
involves professional factors. Bitar et al. (2007) attributes professional
factors like supervision, graduate education, sessions with clients, and
professional training as cardinal to the process of growing as a
clinician. In fact, Bitar et al. (2007) notes that the influence of
supervisor/instructor comments, content, and symbolism in course/internship
curriculum all influence a student’s perspective on a theoretical
orientation. Yet, Heffler and Sandell (2009) recommends that it is ideal
if students are exposed to all learning styles in graduate training. Students
should get adequate exposure to various theories in order to adopt one that
best fits their goals and values as a student therapist (Heffler & Sandell,
2009). Bitar et al. (2007) mentions an often overlooked idea-that is
therapist’s preferred orientation often brings them satisfaction. When
students are practicing based on their values and goals, it energizes them
about the whole process of conducting psychotherapy (Bitar et al.,
2007).
Building a Working Hypothesis and
Conceptualization
Jacob and Kuruvilla (2012) cite the need for student’s to
develop a working hypothesis for how their theory relates to the practice they
engage in with clients. This requires students to narrow down the form
and content of the theory they are going to choose (Jacob & Kuruvilla, 2012). Students should go beyond adopting a
vague orientation like E-H, Systems theory; instead, psychology students should
adhere to a particular theorist, model, and conceptualization style for their
practice. Thus, a student could select Virginia Satir’s Conjoint Family
Therapy model and conceptualization style focused on family communication and
good intentions of nuclear family unit. Furthermore, Jacob and Kuruvilla
(2012) clarify that choosing a theory involves a clinician’s focus on the form
of therapy and the common psychotherapeutic language in practice, while working
with clients to focus on content. For example, a clinician may use Albert
Ellis’ A-B-C model. The student therapist should not focus on explaining
all aspects of the form of therapy and the problem, but can conceptualize the
content of the client’s issue in terms that have shared meaning for both client
and therapist (Jacob & Kuruvilla, 2012).
Issues with Professional Factors
A caveat to the epistemological or knowledge perspective
(via education and training) of choosing an orientation is that there are many
factors to sway a student towards a particular orientation. This is the
issue with supervision, course curriculum, and professional training
opportunities. It is imperative that students consider the reasons for
adhering to the theory of a mentor, professor, seminar instructor, personal
therapist, or colleague. Issues like
popularity in the field of psychology, fear of ridicule, career prospects,
concern over empirical support, and insurance reimbursement among other issues
“may” un-proportionately influence a student’s decision more than their
personal values and goals. Also, Jacob and Kuruvilla (2012) mention how
the recommendation to become multicultural in practice may “seemingly”
influence novice practitioners to haphazardly choose an orientation that fits
professional standards on diversity, but the orientation might not fit with the
student’s values and professional goals. While adopting a multicultural
stance is a positive move for the field of psychology, more guidance is needed
in psychology programs on how to integrate multiculturalism into one’s existing
theoretical orientation.
Overview
of Choosing a Theory
Choosing a psychological orientation involves namely two
factors, professional and personal factors. While professional factors
should not be ignored in choosing a theory, often times personal factors are
cited as more useful in determining one’s theory (
Jacob & Kuruvilla, 2012). Even with knowing the factors associated
with choosing a theoretical orientation, there are implications for making a
decision. Students must weigh personal values with the professional
climate for choosing a theory because some orientations are preferred in work
and reimbursement contexts. Essentially, students should carefully
consider the personal and professional factors, view the literature on choosing
an orientation, and think about their therapeutic goals and working hypothesis
for practice before committing to a therapy orientation. By taking these
factors into consideration, students will make an informed decision on choosing
a theoretical orientation
References
Bitar, G. W., Bean, R. A., & Bermudez,
J. M. (2007). Influences and processes in theoretical orientation development:
A grounded theory pilot study. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 35,
109-121.
Heffler,
B., & Sandell, R. (2009). The role of learning style in choosing one's
therapeutic orientation. Psychotherapy Research, 19,
283-292.
Jacob,
K. S., & Kuruvilla, A. (2012). Psychotherapy across cultures: the form-Content
dichotomy. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy, 19, 91-95.
