Psychology Training Misses the Mark on Policy Advocacy Skills

When psychologists graduate from their training programs, they're equipped with skills to help individuals through therapy and assessment. But a new study reveals a significant gap in their preparation: most receive little to no training on how to influence public policy, despite growing calls for mental health professionals to advocate for broader social change.

Researchers interviewed 18 school and counseling psychologists from the United States and United Kingdom who have experience working with policy makers. These professionals work primarily with children and young people, and all had actively engaged in efforts to influence public policy as part of their professional roles.

The Training Gap

The findings paint a clear picture of missed opportunities in graduate education. Nearly all participants reported that their initial training programs failed to address policy advocacy work. Most said they never heard terms like "public policy" or "advocacy" during their graduate studies.

Instead, their programs focused heavily on traditional individual work such as therapy sessions and psychological assessments. While these skills remain important, participants felt their education treated policy work as completely outside their professional scope.

Some programs mentioned policy work as an "aspirational idea" without providing any practical guidance on how to actually engage with policy makers or influence legislation. This left many psychologists feeling unprepared when they later wanted to address systemic issues affecting their clients and communities.

Skills That Transfer

Despite the lack of explicit policy training, participants found that some aspects of their psychological education proved valuable in policy settings. Communication skills, active listening abilities, and training in facilitating difficult conversations all helped when working with legislators and government officials.

Their education in systems thinking particularly stood out as beneficial. Psychologists learn to understand how different environmental factors influence individual problems, and this perspective naturally extends to understanding how policy changes might address broader social issues.

Research skills also proved transferable, as psychologists could effectively communicate evidence-based findings to policy makers who needed data to support their decisions.

Confidence and Professional Identity

One major barrier identified by participants was a lack of confidence in their ability to influence policy. Many psychologists don't see themselves as having valid contributions to make in political settings, despite their extensive knowledge and experience working with affected populations.

The study suggests this confidence issue stems partly from how policy work is positioned during training. When something isn't taught as part of core professional responsibilities, it signals to students that it's optional rather than essential.

Some participants argued strongly that policy advocacy should be viewed as a moral obligation for psychologists, not an extra activity. They believe mental health professionals have a duty to use their knowledge to improve lives on a broader scale, not just within individual therapy rooms.

Missing Practical Knowledge

While psychologists develop transferable soft skills during training, they lack what participants called "hard skills" for policy work. Many admitted they didn't understand basic processes like how bills become laws or who the key decision makers are in government systems.

This practical knowledge gap means that even psychologists motivated to engage with policy issues don't know where to start or whom to contact. They must seek additional training or learn through trial and error, which creates unnecessary barriers to participation.

Geographic Differences

The study revealed some differences between countries. American participants noted that professional organizations like the National Association of School Psychologists had begun offering policy advocacy training opportunities. However, participants from the United Kingdom felt their professional organizations could do much more to support policy engagement.

Implications for the Future

The research suggests two main areas for improvement. First, psychology training programs need to decide whether policy advocacy is truly part of their profession's core mission. If so, they should integrate relevant coursework and practical experiences into their curricula.

Second, professional organizations should provide ongoing support for practitioners interested in policy work. This could include training workshops, resource guides, and opportunities to connect with experienced policy advocates.

A Complex Challenge

The intersection of psychology and politics creates some complexity. Some participants acknowledged tension around maintaining professional neutrality while engaging in inherently political processes. However, others argued that psychologists can advocate for evidence-based policies without aligning with particular political parties.

The study also highlighted practical constraints on training programs. Graduate psychology education already covers extensive material in limited time, making it challenging to add new content areas.

Moving Forward

The researchers suggest several strategies for improving policy advocacy training. Programs could invite guest speakers who have policy experience, create classroom activities that simulate policy engagement, or develop practicum placements in policy-focused settings.

They also recommend that professional regulatory bodies update their competency standards to explicitly include policy advocacy skills, signaling that this work is indeed part of psychologists' professional responsibilities.

The study's findings suggest that psychology as a profession stands at a crossroads. Mental health professionals increasingly recognize that individual therapy alone cannot address the systemic issues affecting their clients' wellbeing. However, their training hasn't evolved to prepare them for broader advocacy roles.

Whether policy work becomes integrated into standard psychological practice will likely depend on decisions made by training programs, professional organizations, and regulatory bodies in the coming years. The voices of practicing psychologists who have successfully engaged with policy suggest there's both need and appetite for change in how the profession prepares its future practitioners.

The research indicates that psychologists possess many skills relevant to policy advocacy but lack the specific knowledge and confidence needed to effectively engage with governmental systems. Addressing these gaps could help the profession fulfill its potential to create positive change on both individual and societal levels.