Premium
Can a matrix make a training model?: “No.” let's not throw out the Boulder model
Author(s) -
Meichenbaum Donald
Publication year - 2005
Publication title -
journal of clinical psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.124
H-Index - 119
eISSN - 1097-4679
pISSN - 0021-9762
DOI - 10.1002/jclp.20155
Subject(s) - psychology , matrix model , training (meteorology) , graduate students , trace (psycholinguistics) , medical education , field (mathematics) , mental health , matrix (chemical analysis) , applied psychology , mental model , psychotherapist , cognitive science , pedagogy , medicine , mathematics , philosophy , pure mathematics , linguistics , physics , meteorology , mathematical physics , string (physics) , materials science , composite material
In response to the call by C.R. Snyder and T.R. Elliott (this issue) for a new clinical training program, I propose the need to keep the Boulder model. I trace my involvement with the Boulder model from my clinical graduate training through my 30 years as a professor. One of the major tasks of clinical training is to teach graduate students to think in a critical rigorous fashion in order to avoid the fads in the mental health field. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Clin Psychol.