Related Experiment Videos
The Houston Conference revisited.
Ralph M Reitan1, Jim Hom, Janet Van De Voorde
1Reitan Neuropsychology Laboratory, P.O. Box 66080, Tucson, AZ 85728-6080, USA. reitanlabs@aol.com
Summary
This review critiques the Houston Conference on Specialty Education and Training in Clinical Neuropsychology, finding its policies controversial and highlighting diverse opinions on neuropsychologist training. Further professional discussion is needed before adopting final education standards.
Area of Science:
- Neuropsychology
- Clinical Psychology
- Professional Education Standards
Background:
- The Houston Conference on Specialty Education and Training in Clinical Neuropsychology aimed to establish training standards.
- The Clinical Neuropsychology Synarchy (CNS) plays a role in professional governance.
- Existing policies and their applicability are subject to review.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review and critique the outcomes of the Houston Conference.
- To present an informal summary of expert opinions on clinical neuropsychology training.
- To identify deficiencies and limitations in the conference's policy statement.
Main Methods:
- Critical review of the Houston Conference's findings and policies.
- Informal survey of neuropsychologists' opinions on training and education.
- Analysis of issues concerning the CNS and policy applicability.
Main Results:
- The Houston Conference's conclusions are considered controversial.
- An informal survey revealed significant diversity in opinions among neuropsychologists regarding training.
- Several limitations and deficiencies were identified in the conference's policy statement.
Conclusions:
- The field of clinical neuropsychology exhibits considerable diversity of opinion on proper training.
- The Houston Conference's recommendations are not universally accepted.
- Further professional dialogue is essential before finalizing education and training criteria for neuropsychologists.