Higher Education Academy Psychology Network miniproject scheme

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...1 Higher Education Academy Psychology Network miniproject scheme To be, or not to be, a psychologist : Psychology students implicit theories of being a psychologist. Dr John Maltby School of Psychology University of Leicester Dr Liz Day Psychology Subject Group Sheffield Hallam University. Dr. David Giles Department of Psychology University of Winchester Sophia Gowers School of Psychology University of Leicester and Poona m Gill School of Psychology University of Leicester

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...2 ABSTRACT The current research seeks to examine undergraduate psychology students implicit theories of what skills and attributes underpin a number of psychological domains, including many of the main professions within the discipline. The first study (n = 90) produced a number of skill and attribute descriptors related to each of the domains. A second study (n = 1202) found that undergraduate students distinguished between two main sets of attributes and skills of Intelligent-Knowledge-Scientific and Caring-Empathetic. However, the results also show that these two aspects are highly correlated. Further information is provided on specific factors underpinning each of the domains in the profession of psychology as well as comparisons for sex, age, year of study and pre- and post 1992 institutions.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...3 INTRODUCTION Psychology is the third most popular undergraduate subject studied at universities within the United Kingdom (UCAS, 2007). The course offers students the opportunity to develop a broad range of skills including problem solving, data handling, research analysis, communication and team work (Higher Education Academy, 2004). This unique skills set should make Psychology graduates highly employable, however it has been noted that many students feel unclear about the skills which they have developed as a result of the undergraduate course (Hugh-Jones & Sunderland, 2007). It has previously been suggested that the sheer breadth of Psychology as a subject hinders students ability to isolate and identify specifically the types of skills which may be important both to their academic success and future employability (Hugh-Jones & Sunderland, 2007). The premise of Personal Development Planning (PDP) activities is to assist students in developing and identifying strong skills set as part of their overall academic and career development. However, the credibility of such activities appears to rely on students perceptions of their needs and ambitions. Understanding the emphasis students place on what is required to be a psychologist in a number of domains will help inform psychology schools and departments about the expectations and assessments students may have, whilst enrolled on the undergraduate Psychology course. Investigating undergraduate students perceptions about the skills required to be a successful psychology student or psychologist will assist psychology schools and departments to address the needs of current undergraduate students and consequently assist students in developing a stronger skills set. Implicit theories are defined as personal interpretations, constructions and beliefs about phenomena which reside in the minds of individuals. Implicit theories have also been described as folk theories, lay ideas surrounding a particular topic area (Sternberg, 2001). Sternberg (2001) suggested four reasons why implicit theories are important to study. Firstly, they are important in understanding everyday life. For example, implicit theories of intelligence drive the way in which people perceive and evaluate their own beliefs and those of others. Subsequently, people use such perceptions and evaluations to draw conclusions about themselves and others as well as making judgments about everyday life. Secondly, implicit theories can give rise to more formal theories which researchers can investigate allowing the researcher to condense theories into a descriptive framework. Thirdly, implicit theories can be

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...4 perceived as a possible and plausible research avenue when there is concern regarding an explicit theory. Lastly, implicit theories can assist researchers to conceptualise psychological constructs. The usefulness of implicit theories has been shown in a number of domains, including intelligence (Sternberg, 2001), interpersonal and romantic relationships (Puccio & Cheminto, 2001), the processing of social information (McConnell, 2001) and stereotypes (Levy, Plaks & Dweck, 1999). In the literature regarding intelligence, implicit theories have been useful in demonstrating differences between Western and Eastern cultures conceptions of intelligence (Sternberg, 2001). In the examination of social cognition and stereotypes, the study of implicit theories has been fruitful in leading to testable theoretical models, illustrating how perceiver differences have important implications for social information processing that occurs when forming impressions of others (McConnell, 2001) and helps explain individual differences in social stereotyping and stereotype endorsement (Levy et al., 1998). The implicit theories approach can be used to systematically examine the everyday ideas that students have about being a psychologist in a variety of contexts. We would suggest that these contexts could be based not only on students current activity but the possible career paths open to them within the current psychology profession. The current research comprised three studies. The aim of the first study was to collate initial descriptors of different skills and attributes of being a psychologist under a number of different psychology domains. The aim of the second study was to explore (using the descriptors collated from the first study) the dimensions that underpin the skills and attributes of different psychological domains. The aim of study three was to perform a validity check on the findings. STUDY ONE The aim of the first study was to collate initial descriptors of different skills and attributes relevant to being a psychologist in a variety of contexts. Method Sample Participants were 90 1 st, 2 nd and 3 rd year (each n = 30) psychology students (23 males and

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...5 63 females, aged 18 to 35 years, M = 20.22, SD = 2.3) from two universities. Measures Each respondent was asked to write on a series of blank sheets answers to the following three questions: What behaviours and attitudes are characteristic of a person who is an ideal psychology student? What knowledge and attributes does a person who is an ideal psychology student demonstrate? What skills does a person who is an ideal psychology student demonstrate? These questions were repeated for the following 7 terms, replacing the term psychology student with either: psychologist, clinical psychologist, educational psychologist, forensic psychologist, health psychologist, occupational psychology and teaching/research psychologist. Results Responses were then compiled into eight lists, representing each of the psychology domains. Three raters looked for overlaps and similar meanings to identify duplicate or similar terms. Descriptors were only included if more than five people had provided a particular descriptor. This criterion led to around 20 descriptors per domain. The raters further developed the descriptors by making them as short as possible and unambiguous in meaning. The descriptors were then administered to a group of 10 university undergraduate students, who assessed suitability for language, wording and clarity. Decisions on whether an item was suitably worded required 80% agreement between raters. A full list of the descriptors for each of the eight domains in Table 1 and are presented in order of popularity.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...6 Table 1. Descriptors from Study One for the eight psychology domains. Clinical Educational Forensic Health 1. Communication 1. Intelligent skills 2. Confident 2. Empathy 3. Open minded 3. Patient 4. Understanding 4. Get on well with 5. Dedication children 6. Logical 5. Open minded 7. Patience 6. Understanding 8. Scientific 7. Good listener 9. Emotionally 8. Caring strong 9. Understand children 10. Communication 10. Enthusiasm skills 11. Knowledgeable 11. Strong minded 12. Interpersonal skills 12. Accurate 13. Approachable 13. Analytical 14. Professional 14. Empathy 15. Friendly 15. Hard working 16. Supportive 16. Critical 17. Sensitive 17. Imaginative 18. Dedication 18. Objective 19. Calm 20. Intelligent 1. Open minded 2. Empathy 3. People skills 4. Understanding 5. Communication skills 6. Patient 7. Good listener 8. Intelligent 9. Calm 10. Caring 11. Helpful 12. Hard working 13. Detach emotions 14. Approachable 15. Knowledge 16. Kind 17. Responsible 18. Scientific 19. Sensitive 20. Strong minded 21. Considerate 22. Experienced 1. Communication skills 2. Organised 3. Interpersonal skills 4. Wide knowledge 5. Inventive 6. Adaptable 7. Hard working 8. Open minded 9. Occupational knowledge 10. Interested in business 11. Leadership skills 12. Confident 13. Enthusiastic 14. Intelligent 15. Professional 16. Approachable 17. Teamwork 18. Empathy 19. Analytic 20. Driven 1. Medical knowledge 2. Communication skills 3. Caring 4. Interpersonal skills 5. Understanding 6. Hard working 7. Intelligent 8. Dedicated 9. Sensitive 10. Helpful 11. Empathy 12. Persuasive 13. Approachable 14. Teamwork 15. Calm 16. Knowledge of psychology 17. Non-judgemental 18. Patient 19. Trustworthy Occupational Psychologist Psychology Student Teaching/Research 1. Open minded 1. Hardworking 1. Communication 2. Caring 2. Open minded skills 3. Logical 3. Thoughtful 2. Enthusiastic 4. Intelligent 4. Intelligent 3. Interested 5. Empathy 5. Interested 4. Knowledgeable 6. Understanding 6. Reliable 5. Organisation 7. Non-judgemental 7. Sociable 6. Confident 8. Good listener 8. Enthusiastic 7. Intelligent 9. Hardworking 9. Construct 8. Interpersonal skills 10. Inquisitive arguments 9. Patience 11. Objective 10. Confident 10. Hard working 12. Critical 11. Outgoing 11. Open mind 13. Adhere to rules 12. Determined 12. Public speaker 14. Communication 13. Understanding 13. Teaching skills skills 14. Caring 14. Dedication 15. Interest in people 15. Organised 15. Analytic 16. Helpful 16. Communication 16. Creative 17. Determination skills 17. Ethical 18. Emotionally stable 17. Motivated 18. Research skills 19. Creative 18. Observant 19. Willing to learn 20. Patient 19. Independent 20. Friendly 21. Sensitive thought 20. Creative 21. Analytical 22. Empathetic

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...7 STUDY TWO The aim of the second study was to explore (using the descriptors collated from the first study) the dimensions that underpin the skills and attributes of different psychological domains. Method Participants Participants were 1202 undergraduate students (230 males, 972 females) from 38 universities across the United Kingdom, with 26 universities contributing samples of n > 10. Respondents were aged from 18 to 57 years (M = 23.54, SD = 7.7). 608 respondents reported being in their first year of study, 338 respondents reported being in their second year of study and 256 respondents reported being in their third year of study.. Measures Respondents filled in an online questionnaire in which each set of descriptors from Study 1 was presented. For each descriptor, respondents were asked to indicate on a scale of 1 ( not characteristic at all ) to 9 ( extremely characteristic ) how characteristic that descriptor was of its parent psychology domain. So for example, for clinical psychologist, respondents were asked to indicate to what extent the descriptors were characteristic of an ideal clinical psychologist. The data was examined for inappropriate responses. Any demographic data that seemed suspicious (e.g., implausible age) were checked against responses, particularly open ended statements regarding the University they were attending. Also responses that included long runs of the same response were also excluded. In total 49 responses were excluded from the analysis. Results The analysis of this data was split into two sections. The first part of analysis explored the factor structure of the descriptor ratings for each of the domains. The second part of the analysis then went on to explore the relationship between scales that could be computed from the emerging factors and demographic variables, e.g. age, sex, type of university, and year of study.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...8 Stage 1: The factor structure of the descriptor ratings for each of the domains. What attributes and skills are characteristic of the ideal psychologist? Three criteria were used to determine the number of factors that best explained the variance in the data,. Throughout this assessment a Principal Components Analysis was used to extract the factors. To establish the number of factors present, eigenvalues above 1, the Scree Test (Cattell, 1966) and parallel analysis (Horn, 1965) were applied for each set of variables. Four components had eigenvalues above 1 (8.82, 2.25, 1.15 and 1.01), suggesting a possible 4-factor solution. The Scree Test (see Appendix A.1) suggested that either a 2- or 3-factor solution was more parsimonious. A parallel analysis of Monte Carlo simulations, that allow the comparison of the eigenvalues to those that might be expected from purely random data with no structure (See Table 1), found that the third eigenvalue did not exceed the second random eigenvalue (Component 1, 8.82 > 1.24; Component 2, 2.25 > 1.20; Component 3, 1.15 < 1.17). Therefore, on the basis of the Scree Test and the Monte Carlo simulations, a 2-factor solution was believed to offer the best description of the data. These factors were then subjected to oblique (oblimin) and varimax (orthogonal) rotation with delta set to 0. In interpreting solutions, factor loadings of >.4 were considered relevant to the factor (Child, 1990; 2006). However, where an item loaded >.4 on more than one component this item was seen as potentially ambiguous and was not included in the final interpretation of a component 1. Both rotation methods produced clear solutions and provided similar interpretations in terms of which items loaded on which factors. However, on this occasion the oblimin rotation produced the clearest loadings on the components, and this yielded a meaningful solution with evident simple structure. Table 2 presents the full set of item loadings on the rotated factors. 1 These criteria was used for all the subsequent analyses.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...9 Table 2 Pattern Matrix for Rotated Factors for ideal Psychologist 1 2 1. Caring.823 -.098 2. Empathy.812 -.088 3. Understanding.809.046 4. Good listener.799 -.051 5. Helpful.796.015 6. Patient.771.024 7. Non-judgemental.706.073 8. Sensitive.706 -.141 9. Communication skills.627.190 10. Emotionally stable.609.054 11. Interested in people.531.254 12. Open minded.504.289 13. Creative.405.257 14. Critical -.267.830 15. Inquisitive -.030.756 16. Objective.049.737 17. Logical.142.685 18. Hardworking.176.680 19. Intelligent.104.663 20. Determined.293.562 21. Adhere to rules.223.287 As can be seen from Table 2, two clear components emerge, with relevant items bolded. The first component is clearly an Caring-Empathic factor, on which the descriptors Caring, Empathic, Understanding, Good Listener and Helpful had the highest loadings. The second factor is a Critical-Inquisitive factor, on which Being Critical, Inquisitive, Objective, Logical and Hardworking had the highest loadings. One item failed to load above.4 on either component ( Adhere to rules ). Relevant items (bolded) were then used to compute mean scale scores 2. There was a large correlation between the two subscales, (r =.56, p <.001). What attributes and skills are characteristic of the ideal Psychology student? For being a psychology student, there were three eigenvalues above 1 (10.98, 1.88 and 2 This was also done for all subsequent analysis. This method was preferred over computing factor scores so to understand responses with the Uncharacteristic to Characteristic response and enable comparisons between sub-samples. Mean scores were computed by dividing the total score by the number of items.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...10 1.19). The Scree Test (See Appendix A.2) suggests one or three components. Finally the fourth eiganvalue did not exceed the fourth random eigenvalue generated from the Monte Carlo Analysis (10.98 > 1.25, 1.88 > 1.21, 1.19 > 1.17, and 0.91 < 1.15). Therefore a 3- factor solution seems prudent for this variable. These components were then subjected to oblique (oblimin) and varimax (orthogonal) rotation with delta set to 0. However, it was the oblimin rotation that produced the clearest loadings on the components, and this yielded a meaningful olution with evident simple structure. Table 3 presents the full set of item loadings on the rotated components. Table 3 Pattern Matrix for Rotated Components for ideal Psychology Student 1 2 3 1. Hardworking.895.022.212 2. Motivated.887.006.060 3. Interested.785 -.016 -.029 4. Organised.771.061.076 5. Construct arguments.755 -.072 -.050 6. Determined.740.285.056 7. Independent thought.728 -.245 -.216 8. Analytical.678 -.237 -.224 9. Intelligent.677.060 -.012 10. Enthusiastic.657.267 -.036 11. Reliable.616.209 -.150 12. Communication skills.616.018 -.208 13. Observant.608 -.215 -.395 14. Open minded.590 -.017 -.254 15. Confident.507.362 -.028 16. Outgoing.034.781 -.165 17. Sociable.055.724 -.190 18. Empathetic -.048 -.006 -.863 19. Caring -.102.313 -.794 20. Thoughtful.256.085 -.590 21. Creative.259.019 -.577 22. Understanding.233.180 -.576 As can be seen from Table 3, three clear components emerge, with relevant items bolded. The first component is clearly a Hardworking-Motivated component on which descriptors such as Hardworking, Motivated, Interested, Organised, Construct Arguments load most highly. The second component is an Outgoing-Sociable component, on

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...11 which Out-going and Sociable descriptors have the highest loadings. The third component is an Empathetic-Caring component, on which Empathetic, Caring, Thoughtful, Creative and Understanding descriptors have the highest loadings. Using scale scores, there was a large correlation between the Hardworking- Motivated and Empathetic-Caring scales (r =.70, p <.001), a large correlation between the Empathetic-Caring and Outgoing-Social scales (r =.53, p <.001), and a medium correlation between the Hardworking-Motivated and Outgoing-Social scales (r =.43, p <.001). What attributes and skills are characteristic of the ideal Clinical Psychologist? For the ideal Clinical Psychologist, there were four eigenvalues above 1 (7.13, 2.82, 1.77 and 1.06). The Scree Test (See Appendix A.3) suggests a 3-factor solution. Finally the fourth eigenvalue did not exceed the fourth random eigenvalue generated from the Monte Carlo Analysis (7.13 > 1.25, 2.82 > 1.21, 1.77 > 1.18, and 1.06 < 1.15). Therefore a three component solution among the current data seems prudent. These components were then subjected to oblique (oblimin) and varimax (orthogonal) rotation with delta set to 0. However, it was the oblimin rotation that produced the clearest loadings on the components, and this yielded a meaningful solution with evident simple structure. Table 4 presents the full set of item loadings on the rotated components.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...12 Table 4 Pattern Matrix for Rotated Components for ideal Clinical Psychologist 1 2 3 1. Communication skills.796.116.087 2. Good listener.782 -.034 -.092 3. Patient.769.125.064 4. People skills.741 -.044 -.155 5. Understanding.612 -.014 -.243 6. Approachable.586 -.005 -.273 7. Open minded.518 -.093 -.130 8. Calm.393.281 -.209 9. Scientific -.265.775 -.029 10. Intelligent.068.735.099 11. Knowledge.213.689.101 12. Hard working.064.649 -.160 13. Experienced.039.605 -.012 14. Strong minded -.307.554 -.340 15. Responsible.124.478 -.291 16. Detach emotions.215.451.280 17. Considerate.099.108 -.764 18. Caring.198.068 -.727 19. Kind.126.072 -.710 20. Sensitive.084.023 -.678 21. Helpful.241.268 -.579 22. Empathy.325 -.197 -.509 As can be seen from Table 4, three clear components emerge, with relevant items bolded. The first component is clearly a Communication-Patient component, on which descriptors such as Communication skills, Good listener, Patient, People skills, Understanding have the highest loadings. The second component is a Scientific- Intelligence component, on which the Scientific, Intelligent, Knowledge, Hard-working and Experience descriptors have the highest loadings. The third component is a Considerate-Caring Component component, on which Considerate, Caring, Kind, Sensitive and Helpful descriptors have the highest loadings. Using scale scores, there was a medium correlation between the Communication- Patient subscale and the Scientific-Intelligence scales (r =.30, p <.001), a large correlation between the Communication-Patient and Considerate-Caring component scales (r =.64, p <.001), and a small correlation between the Scientific-Intelligence and Considerate-Caring scales (r =.29, p <.001)

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...13 What attributes and skills are characteristic of the ideal Educational Psychologist? For the ideal Educational Psychologist, there were three eigenvalues above 1 (8.81, 1.71 and 1.15). The Scree Test (See Appendix A.4) suggests one or two components. Finally the third eigenvalue did not exceed the third random eigenvalue generated from the Monte Carlo Analysis (8.81 > 1.23, 1.71 > 1.19 and 1.15 < 1.16). Therefore a 2-factor solution was believed to offer the best description of the data. These components were subjected to oblique (oblimin) and varimax (orthogonal) rotation with delta set to 0. However, it was the oblimin rotation that produced the clearest loadings on the components, yielding a meaningful solution with evident simple structure. Table 5 presents the full set of item loadings on the rotated components. Table 5 Pattern Matrix for Rotated Components for ideal Educational Psychologist 1 2 1. Caring.878 -.174 2. Patient.775 -.147 3. Get on well with children.754 -.102 4. Empathy.751 -.191 5. Good listener.742 -.019 6. Understanding.715.120 7. Approachable.649.259 8. Friendly.641.161 9. Understand children.641.033 10. Open minded.634.088 11. Supportive.622.263 12. Calm.584.152 13. Sensitive.571.066 14. Enthusiasm.447.381 15. Communication skills.444.277 16. Knowledgeable.027.818 17. Intelligent -.057.757 18. Professional -.014.747 19. Interpersonal skills.237.565 20. Dedication.295.415 As can be seen from Table 5, two clear components emerge, with relevant items bolded. The first component is clearly a Caring-Patient component, on which descriptors such as Caring, Patient, Gets on well with children, Empathetic and Good Listener have the highest loadings. The second component is a Knowledgeable,- Intelligence component, on which the Knowledgeable, Intelligent, Professional,

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...14 Interpersonal Skills, Dedication descriptors have the highest loadings. There was a large correlation between the subscales computed from this factor interpretation (r =.69, p <.001) What attributes and skills are characteristic of the ideal Forensic Psychologist? For the ideal Forensic Psychologist, there were three eigenvalues above 1 (6.20, 2.37 and 1.12). The Scree Test (See Appendix A.5) suggests two components. Finally the third eigenvalue did not exceed the 3rd random eigenvalue generated from the Monte Carlo Analysis (6.20> 1.22, 2.37 > 1.18 and 1.12 < 1.15). a 2-factor solution was believed to offer the best description of the data. These components were then subjected to oblique (oblimin) and varimax (orthogonal) rotation with delta set to 0. Both rotation methods produced clear solutions and provided similar interpretations in terms of what items loaded on which components. However, it was the oblimin rotation that produced the clearest loadings on the components, and this yielded a meaningful solution with evident simple structure. Table 6 presents the full set of item loadings on the rotated components. Table 6 Pattern Matrix for Rotated Components for ideal Forensic Psychologist 1 2 1. Scientific.853 -.206 2. Analytical.789 -.024 3. Intelligent.787 -.098 4. Accurate.774.010 5. Logical.760 -.046 6. Objective.614.075 7. Hard working.569.214 8. Critical.564.067 9. Dedication.527.311 10. Confident.408.299 11. Understanding -.130.806 12. Communication skills -.100.786 13. Empathy -.218.780 14. Open minded.117.644 15. Patience.145.536 16. Emotionally strong.260.481 17. Strong minded.240.457 18. Imaginative.167.410

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...15 As can be seen from Table 6, two clear components emerge, with relevant items bolded. The first component is clearly a Scientific-Analytical component, on which descriptors such as Scientific, Analytical, Intelligent, Accurate and Logical have the highest loadings. The second component is an Understanding-Communication skills component, on which Understanding, Communication skills, Empathetic, Open-minded, Patience have the highest loadings. There was a large correlation between the subscales computed from this analysis (r =.48, p <.001) What attributes and skills are characteristic of the ideal Health Psychologist? For the ideal Health Psychologist, there were four eigenvalues above 1 (8.69, 1.63, 1.11 and 1.05). The Scree Test (See Appendix A.6) suggests one or two components. Finally the third eigenvalue did not exceed the third random eigenvalue generated from the Monte Carlo Analysis (8.69 > 1.23, 1.63 > 1.19 and 1.11 < 1.15). Therefore a 2-factor solution was believed to offer the best description of the data. These components were then subjected to oblique (oblimin) and varimax (orthogonal) rotation with delta set to 0. It was the oblimin rotation that produced the clearest loadings on the components, and this yielded a meaningful solution with evident simple structure. The full set of item loadings on the rotated components are presented in Table 7.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...16 Table 7 Pattern Matrix for Rotated Components for ideal Health Psychologist 1 2 1. Empathy.804 -.065 2. Sensitive.792 -.096 3. Approachable.789.001 4. Calm.734 -.007 5. Caring.712.117 6. Helpful.691.114 7. Patient.677.145 8. Understanding.667.241 9. Interpersonal skills.612.288 10. Trustworthy.597.206 11. Non-judgemental.576.229 12. Teamwork.565 -.014 13. Communication skills.495.348 14. Persuasive.480 -.207 15. Intelligent.012.832 16. Medical knowledge -.108.747 17. Dedicated.320.641 18. Knowledge of psychology.148.639 19. Hard working.270.631 As can be seen from Table 7, two clear components emerge, with relevant items bolded. The first component is clearly an Empathy-Sensitive component, on which descriptors such as Empathy, Sensitive, Approachable, Calm and Caring have the highest loadings. The second component is an Intelligence -Medical skills component, on which Intelligence, Medical Knowledge, Dedicated, Knowledge of Psychology and Hardworking have the highest loadings. A large correlation was found between the subscales computed from this analysis (r =.62, p <.001) What attributes and skills are characteristic of the ideal Occupational Psychologist? For the ideal Occupational Psychologist, there were four eigenvalues above 1 (8.74, 1.56, 1.26 and 1.02). The Scree Test (See Appendix A.7) suggests one component. Finally, the 4 th eigenvalue did not exceed the third random eigenvalue generated from the Monte Carlo Analysis (8.74 > 1.19, 1.56 > 1.16, 1.26 > 1.15 and 1.02 < 1.11). Therefore a three factor solution was believed to offer the best description of the data. These components were then subjected to oblique (oblimin) and varimax (orthogonal) rotation with delta set to 0. However, it was the varimax rotation that

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...17 produced the clearest loadings on the components, and this yielded a meaningful solution with evident simple structure. Table 8 presents the full set of item loadings on the rotated components. Table 8 Solution for Rotated Components for ideal Occupational Psychologist 1 2 3 1. Communication skills.796.257.118 2. Organised.742.203.296 3. Interpersonal skills.714.279.079 4. Professional.684.238.304 5. Occupational knowledge.680.025.292 6. Wide knowledge.569.294.283 7. Intelligent.543.291.293 8. Empathy -.003.833 -.008 9. Approachable.292.673 -.004 10. Open minded.307.667.137 11. Teamwork.255.542.354 12. Adaptable.354.519.385 13. Leadership skills.154.162.811 14. Interested in business.179 -.105.779 15. Confident.316.261.703 16. Driven.253.323.536 17. Enthusiastic.293.512.486 18. Hard working.462.479.346 19. Inventive.264.457.413 20. Analytic.294.442.460 As can be seen from Table 8, three components emerge, with relevant items bolded, but also noting that four items, listed at the bottom of table, substantially crossload across the components. The first component is clearly a Communication Skills-Organised component, on which descriptors such as Communication Skills, Organised, Interpersonal Skills, Professional and Occupational knowledge have the highest loadings. The second component is an Empathy-Approachable component, on which Empathy, Approachable, Open-minded, Team work and Adaptable have the highest loadings. The third component is a Leadership skills-business Interest with Leadership Skills, Interested in Business, Confident and Driven have the highest loadings. Four items (Enthusiastic, Hardworking, Inventive and Analytic) loaded >.4 on more than one component. There was a large correlation between all the scales computed from this analysis; Communication Skills-Organised and Empathy-Approachable scales (r =.77, p <.001), Communication Skills-Organised and Leadership-Business

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...18 Interest scales (r =.60, p <.001), and Leadership-Business Interest and Empathy- Approachable scales (r =.54, p <.001). What attributes and skills are characteristic of the ideal Teaching-Research Psychologist? For the ideal Teaching/Research Psychologist, there were three eigenvalues above 1 (9.63, 1.54 and 1.37). The Scree Test (See Appendix A.8) suggests 1 or 3 components. Finally the fourth eigenvalue did not exceed the 3th random eigenvalue generated from the Monte Carlo Analysis (9.63 > 1.23, 1.53 > 1.19, 1.37 > 1.16 and 0.85 < 1.13). Therefore a three factor solution was believed to offer the best description of the data. These components were then subjected to oblique (oblimin) and varimax (orthogonal) rotation with delta set to 0. It was the oblimin rotation that produced the clearest loadings on the components, and this yielded a meaningful solution with evident simple structure. The item loadings on the rotated components are presented in Table 9. Table 9 Pattern Matrix for Rotated Components for ideal Teaching-Research Psychologist 1 2 3 1. Analytic.851 -.059 -.006 2. Research skills.838 -.128 -.056 3. Intelligent.708 -.167 -.249 4. Ethical.659.258.119 5. Knowledgeable.625 -.150 -.448 6. Dedication.545.225 -.175 7. Hard working.524.421.038 8. Interested.511.245 -.236 9. Willing to learn.510.448.152 10. Organisation.425.257 -.294 11. Patience -.081.750 -.214 12. Open mind.258.703.121 13. Friendly -.109.697 -.246 14. Creative.289.469 -.101 15. Public speaker.068 -.068 -.825 16. Teaching skills.099 -.016 -.795 17. Communication skills.014.294 -.659 18. Confident.159.177 -.557 19. Interpersonal skills -.052.485 -.531 20. Enthusiastic.309.318 -.368

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...19 As can be seen from Table 9, three clear components emerge, with relevant items bolded, with one item crossloading across components. The first component is clearly a Analytic-Research component, on which descriptors such as Analytic, Research Skills, Intelligent, Ethical and Knowledgeable have the highest loadings. The second component is an Patience-Open Minded component, on which Patience, Open-minded, Friendly Creative have the highest loadings. The second component is an Public Speaker- Teaching Skills component, on which Public speaker, Teaching Skills, Communication Skills, Confident and Interpersonal Skills have the highest loadings. One item loaded equally, >.3, on all three components, Enthusiastic. There was a large correlation between all the scales computed from the analysis; Analytic-Research and Patience-Open Minded scales (r =.72, p <.001), Analytic- Research and Public Speaker-Teaching scales (r =.71, p <.001), and Public Speaker- Teaching Skills and Patience-Open Minded scales (r =.65, p <.001). Stage 2: The relationship between the scales and age, sex, type of university, and year of study. The second part of the analysis then went on to explore the relationship between scales that could be computed from the emerging components and demographic variables, such as age, sex, type of university, and year of study. Scale scores and sex differences and age The first part of this stage of the analysis compared sex differences for subscales and these subscales relationship to age. Table 10 shows the means and standard deviations for each of the subscales scores for males and females, and t, probability and effect size statistics.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...20 Table 10 Correlations with Age and Mean and standard deviations (with t, probability and effect size statistics) for males and females for each of the subscales. Males (n = 230) Females (n = 972) Scale r / Mean SD Mean SD t p = d age Ideal Psychologist Caring-Empathic -.03 7.33 1.0 7.48 1.0-2.15.032.12 Critical-Inquisitive -.03 7.56 0.9 7.71 0.9-2.20.028.13 Psychology student Hardworking-Motivated -.02 7.40 1.1 7.59 0.9-2.66.008.15 Out-going-Sociable -.07 6.82 1.3 6.75 1.3.73.468.04 Empathetic-Caring -.05 6.96 1.2 7.09 1.1-1.51.132.08 Clinical Psychologist Communication-Patient.03 7.51 1.1 7.77 0.9-3.77.000.21 Scientific-Intelligence.01 7.25 1.0 7.31 0.9 -.87.386.05 Considerate-Caring -.03 6.77 1.3 6.98 1.1-2.53.011.14 Educational Psychologist Caring-Patient.01 7.64 0.9 7.71 0.8-1.25.210.07 Knowledgeable-Intelligence.04 7.42 1.0 7.54 0.9-1.85.065.11 Forensic Psychologist Scientific-Analytical.05 7.88 0.8 7.92 0.8 -.65.518.03 Understanding-Communication.05 6.96 1.0 7.07 1.0-1.46.146.08 Health Psychologist Empathy-Sensitive.04 7.30 0.9 7.40 0.9-1.53.127.09 Intelligence Medical -.01 7.50 1.0 7.71 0.9-1.51.132.09 Occupational Psychologist Communication-Organised.02 7.668 1.0 7.81 0.9-2.27.023.13 Empathy-Approachable.04 7.08 1.0 7.31 0.9-3.26.001.19 Leadership-Business Interest -.06 7.17 1.2 7.24 1.1 -.91.365.05 Teaching-Research Analytic-Research -.01 7.75 0.9 7.92 0.8-2.68.007.15 Patience-Open Minded -.03 7.21 1.1 7.35 1.1-1.83.068.11 Public Speaker-Teaching -.01 7.59 1.1 7.70 1.1-1.40.161.08 Statistically significant differences were found for sex, with females scoring significantly higher than males on Caring-Empathic (Ideal Psychologist), Critical- Inquisitive (Ideal Psychologist), Hardworking-Motivated (Student), Communication- Patient (Clinical), Considerate-Caring (Clinical), Communication-Organised (Occupational), Empathy-Approachable (Empathy-Approachable) and Analytic-Research (Teaching-Research). It is worth noting that the majority of the effect sizes for these differences are small. No significant correlation was found between age and any of the scales.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...21 Scale scores and differences between pre- and post- 1992 Universities. The second part of this analysis compared responses to the subscales by respondents coming from pre- and post- 1992 Universities. Table 11 shows the means and standard deviations for each of the subscales and values of t, p, and effect size by pre and post 1992 universities. The current findings suggest that no significant differences exist between pre- and post-1992 Universities on any of the subscales. Table 11 Mean and standard deviations (with t, probability and effect size statistics) for pre- and post- 1992 Universities for each of the subscales. Post 1992 (n = 443) Pre 1992 (n = 581) Scale Mean SD Mean SD t p = d Ideal Psychologist Caring-Empathic 7.41 0.9 7.49 1.0-1.24.215.08 Critical-Inquisitive 7.64 0.9 7.74 0.9-1.68.093.10 Psychology student Hardworking-Motivated 7.50 1.1 7.57 0.9-1.14.254.07 Out-going-Sociable 6.78 1.3 6.81 1.3 -.36.721.02 Empathetic-Caring 7.01 1.2 7.10 1.1-1.20.232.07 Clinical Psychologist Communication-Patient 7.72 0.9 7.71 0.9.22.823.01 Scientific-Intelligence 7.32 0.9 7.29 1.0.61.544.04 Considerate-Caring 6.92 1.1 6.98 1.1 -.83.405.05 Educational Psychologist Caring-Patient 7.67 0.8 7.71 0.8 -.89.372.06 Knowledgeable-Intelligence 7.53 0.9 7. 50 0.9.61.540.04 Forensic Psychologist Scientific-Analytical 7.87 0.9 7.94 0.8-1.16.245.07 Understanding-Communication 7.02 1.0 7.05 1.0 -.53.594.03 Health Psychologist Empathy-Sensitive 7.36 1.0 7.38 0.9 -.27.786.02 Intelligence Medical 7.66 0.9 7.68 0.9 -.33.745.02 Occupational Psychologist Communication-Organised 7.77 1.0 7.78 0.9 -.28.784.02 Empathy-Approachable 7.23 0.9 7.29 0.9-1.02.309.06 Leadership-Business Interest 7.21 1.1 7.28 1.1-1.04.299.07 Teaching-Research Analytic-Research 7.84 0.9 7.92 0.8-1.30.195.08 Patience-OpenMinded 7.34 1.1 7.30 1.1.61.545.04 Public Speaker-Teaching 7.69 1.1 7.65 1.1.55.585.03

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...22 Scale scores by year of study. The third part of this analysis compared the subscale scores by year of study. Table 12 shows the means and standard deviations for each of the subscales and values of t, p, and effect size by year of study. Table 12 Mean and standard deviations (with t, probability and effect size statistics) by academic year for each of the subscales. 1 st Year (n = 608) 2 nd Year (n = 368) 3 rd Year (n = 226) Scale Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD F p = Partial Eta Squared Ideal Psychologist Caring-Empathic 7.52 0.9 7.42 0.9 7.32 1.2 3.68.026.006 Critical-Inquisitive 7.71 0.9 7.64 0.9 7.67 1.0.58.558.001 Psychology student Hardworking-Motivated 7.59 0.9 7.53.85 7.49 1.2 1.07.345.002 Out-going-Sociable 6.83 1.3 6.69 1.2 6.69 1.5 1.77.171.003 Empathetic-Caring 7.17 1.0 6.98 1.1 7.07 1.2 5.10.006.009 Clinical Psychologist Communication-Patient 7.77 0.9 7.72 0.8 7.72 0.9 3.48.031.007 Scientific-Intelligence 7.27 1.0 7.31 0.9 7.36 1.0.70.499.001 Considerate-Caring 7.05 1.0 6.88 1.1 6.73 1.4 7.02.001.011 Educational Psychologist Caring-Patient 7.75 0.8 7.68 0.7 7.59 1.0 3.30.037.009 Knowledgeable-Intelligence 7.52 0.9 7.52 0.8 7.53 1.1.01.992.002 Forensic Psychologist Scientific-Analytical 7.93 0.8 7.88 0.8 7.93 0.9.36.697.000 Understanding- Communication 7.08 1.0 7.04 1.0 6.97 1.1.87.418.003 Health Psychologist Empathy-Sensitive 7.44 0.9 7.29 0.9 7.35 1.1 3.12.045.005 Intelligence Medical 7.68 0.9 7.65 0.9 7.70 1.0.21.812.000 Occupational Psychologist Communication -Organised 7.76 0.9 7.79 0.8 7.80 1.0.19.829.001 Empathy-Approachable 7.29 0.9 7.24 0.8 7.23 1.1.44.645.001 Leadership -Business Interest 7.20 1.1 7.26 1.0 7.25 1.2.42.656.001 Teaching-Research Analytic-Research 7.88 0.9 7.90 0.8 7.86 1.0.16.852.001 Patience-OpenMinded 7.38 1.0 7.32 1.0 7.17 1.3 3.14.044.006 Public Speaker-Teaching 7.69 1.1 7.72 1.0 7.59 1.3.92.401.002 There are significant differences for some of the scales by year of study, but there was a common theme to these statistical differences. A significant difference was found for year of study for Caring-Empathic (psychologist), Communication-Patient (clinical), Considerate-Caring (clinical), Caring-Patient (education) and Patience-Open-Minded

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...23 (teaching-research). For each of these differences, post-hoc Scheffe Tests revealed that the significant differences (p <.05) occurred between Year 1 and Year 3. The only exceptions to this consistent finding were for the Empathy-Sensitive (student) where post-hoc Scheffe Tests revealed that the significant differences (p <.05) occurred between Year 1 and both Years 2 and 3, and Empathetic-Caring (health), where post-hoc Scheffe Tests revealed a significant difference (p <.05) between Years 1 and 2. It should be noted that the effect sizes for these differences are very small STUDY THREE Sternberg (1985) notes the probity of any study of implicit theories of psychological constructs depends on whether the findings demonstrate any external validity and can demonstrate that they do not just reside passively in participants thinking or are created as a result of participation in a psychological experiment. Therefore Study three sought to test the validity of the findings of Study 2 by showing that individuals actively use those constructs identified in Study 2. Consequently, the procedures described in Study 3 adopt a similar experimental approach to that used by Sternberg (1985) but not identical due to the number of factors emerging from the analysis. The aim of Study 3 was to test whether the constructs identified in Study 3 demonstrate validity by showing they are actively used by individuals in their evaluation of other people. Method Participants The participants were 40 undergraduate students at a university in the East Midlands (9 males and 31 females), aged between 19 years and 21 years (mean age = 20.3, SD = 0.6). Procedure Respondents were placed into one of eight groups to represent each of the psychology domains. Therefore each group comprised 5 participants. Each participant was then presented with a set of 40 profiles of fictitious people (20 males and 20 females) with a different set of profiles being used for each group. For each profile a pool of items was generated from the top four loading items from each of factors in Study 1, with the exception of the Out-going-Sociable factor as this comprised only 2 items. In addition to these items seven dummy descriptors which were chosen randomly (through the

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...24 generation of random numbers) from a list of descriptors that had been provided in study 1 but had only been provided by one person. These 7 descriptors were sensible, decisive, works well under pressure, interprets information well, loyal, and shows initiative and able to take charge. This meant that for two factor solutions (ideal psychologist, educational, forensic, health) the size of the item pool was 15 items, for the three factor solutions (clinical, occupational and teaching-research) the size of the item pool was 19 items, and the size of the item pool for students being 17 items. Then, using random numbers, each descriptor was randomly assigned to the profile of each fictitious person, until each profile comprised seven descriptors. An example of a profile for the ideal psychologist would be one in which two attributes were chosen from the Caring-Empathic factor, two attributes from the Critical-Inquisitive factor, and three dummy attributes. Rachel is 21 years old from London. She shows the following attributes. She is caring, loyal, sensible, shows initiative, critical, a good listener and objective Participants read the profile for each person and then were asked to rate the person on how suitable that person would be for each psychology domain, on a rating from 1 = Not at all to 9 = Very much so. Therefore, using the example above, participants were asked to rate Rachel on her suitability for being a psychologist. Each group of five participants rated one set of 40 profiles for each domain. Results A series of multiple regressions were used to predict the overall ratings of the fictitious people from the nine descriptors. The sample size for the analysis was 40 (based on the number of profiles, not the number of participants in the experiment). Counts for each of the descriptors used from each factor in the profile were entered as predictor variables. Therefore, if the profile contained two items from the first factor and one item from the second factor, the predictor variables entered into the regression would have been 2, 1. Additionally, the gender of the person in the profile was also included as a predictor variable. The dependent variable was the average rating given to each profile across the 5 participants.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...25 The regression statistic was significantly different from zero for all psychology domains; psychologist (F (3, 36) = 3.37, p <.05, r 2 =.20), student (F (4, 35) = 14.62, p <.001, r 2 =.63), clinical (F (4, 35) = 9.47, p <.001, r 2 =.52), educational (F (3, 36) = 5.91, p <.01, r 2 =.33), forensic (F (3, 36) = 6.29, p <.01, r 2 =.34), health (F (3, 36) = 5.84, p <.01, r 2 =.33), occupational (F (4, 35) = 14.80, p <.001, r 2 =.62) and teaching-research (F (4, 35) = 16.48, p <.001, r 2 =.65). Table 13: Unstandardised multiple regression for each of the psychology domains. Included in this table is the unstandardised regression coefficient (B), the sstandardised regression coefficents (β), t and probability (p) values. B β t p = Ideal Psychologist Sex -.310 -.086 -.558.580 Caring-Empathic.899.399 2.525.016 Critical-Inquisitive.747.332 2.150.038 Psychology student Sex.102.026.232.818 Hardworking-Motivated.933.406 3.547.001 Out-going-Sociable.604.250 2.128.040 Empathetic-Caring.925.420 3.507.001 Clinical Psychologist Sex.756.178 1.439.159 Communication-Patient.726.278 2.160.038 Scientific-Intelligence.841.310 2.177.036 Considerate-Caring 1.004.374 2.504.017 Educational Psychologist Sex -.368 -.087 -.619.540 Caring-Patient 1.491.567 3.915.000 Knowledgeable-Intelligence.891.338 2.397.022 Forensic Psychologist Sex -.542 -.140 -.982.333 Scientific-Analytical 1.226.523 3.657.001 Understanding-Communication.903.385 2.780.009 Health Psychologist Sex.114.028.203.840 Empathy-Sensitive.831.352 2.514.017 Intelligence Medical.900.394 2.816.008 Occupational Psychologist Sex -.111 -.023 -.200.842 Communication -Organised 1.096.345 3.079.004 Empathy-Approachable 1.700.551 4.888.000 Leadership -Business Interest.664.240 2.042.049 Teaching-Research Sex.149.040.385.702 Analytic-Research.639.306 2.868.007 Patience-Open Minded.862.378 2.536.016 Public Speaker-Teaching.747.327 2.223.033

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...26 Table 13 shows the full results for an unstandardised multiple regression. Included in this table is the unstandardised regression coefficient (B), the Standardised regression coefficents (β), the semipartial correlations (sr 2 ), r, r 2 and adjusted r 2. The present findings suggest that all regression weights, with the exception of sex, were statistically significant. This finding suggests that all factors predicted unique variance in the extent to which the fictitious persons were believed to be suitable for each of the psychology domains. DISCUSSION Study one collated descriptors of different descriptors of being a psychologist across a number of different psychology domains. Study two explored the factors that underpin these descriptors across the psychological domains. Study three found evidence that all the factors identified in Study two were able to predict suitability of fictitious persons for each of the psychology domains, providing validity for these factors as the findings suggest these descriptors are actively used by individuals in their evaluation of other individuals. The first consistent finding from these results is that the main distinction made by students across all aspects of the psychology professions is the distinction between the Intelligent-Knowledge-Scientific and Caring-Empathetic characteristics. These distinctions are not separate, with the effect size of correlations between these components being generally medium to large across all the domains. Consequently, it appears that undergraduate psychology students perceive psychology professions as both Knowledge-Scientific and Caring-Empathetic, but both these sets of concepts are related in students minds. Perhaps of further interest, another set of attributes and skills was associated with the Clinical, Forensic, Occupational and Teaching/Research occupations, which was Communication (whether in a one-to -one setting or as a public speaker). These findings have been summarised in Table 14. Table 14 The main components and their occurrence across the characteristic rating of idea person with in the subdisciplines.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...27 Intelligent-Knowledge-Scientific Caring-Empathetic Other Areas Critical-Inquisitive (Psychologist) Hardworking-Motivated (Student) Scientific-Intelligence (Clinical) Knowledgeable-Intelligence (Educational) Scientific-Analytical (Forensic) Intelligence Medical (Health) Analytic-Research (Teaching/Research) Caring-Empathic (Psychologist) Empathetic-Caring (Student) Considerate-Caring (Clinical) Caring-Patient (Educational) Empathy-Sensitive (Health) Empathy-Approachable (Occupational) Communication-Patient (Clinical) Understanding-Communication (Forensic) Communication-Organised (Occupational) Public Speaker-Teaching (Teaching-Research) Subsequent analyses of the different components by sex, age, pre-/post-1992 universities, and year of study revealed that any significant differences found for these components were associated with very small effect sizes, and their significance can be attributed to the large sample size. Examining these more closely, the only change of note is that during later undergraduate study, students scored lower on Caring- Empathetic dimensions compared to those students in their first year of their undergraduate study. This finding indicates that undergraduates perceptions of psychology professions as caring and empathetic lowers slightly across the three years. However as the mean ratings of these are usually high (i.e. > 7) this suggest that these dimensions are overemphasised by students at the beginning of their undergraduate study. In terms of students implicit theories of various psychology professions (e.g. Clinical, Forensic, Occupational, Health, Educational, Teaching-Research) the findings provide information regarding what skills and attributes students believe are important for these psychological professions. From the current findings it can be argued that, in the view of undergraduate students, knowledge and critical thinking-based skills, combined with people and communication based skills, appear to be relevant to psychology professions. However, it may be the opinion of course teams that there needs to be an additional or another emphasis. Psychology schools and departments can use this information to inform Personal Development Planning (PDP) sessions so that they can discuss academic and career development in relation to the notions and expectations (in terms of skills and knowledge) of the undergraduate students. Also for lecturers, these findings can inform us how the ideal lecturer is thought of by students and also tells us

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...28 something about the ideal psychology lecturer. For these students, today s teaching and research-based lecturer, is seen as (i) analytical, research based, knowledgeable, dedicated and hardworking, (ii) patient, open-minded, and friendly, and (iii) able to communicate publically and privately, teach and be confident. The results also indicate what undergraduate students perceive as being the ideal student: motivated, interested, organised, critical, independent and analytical, while also being emphatic, caring, thoughtful and creative, with a sociable and outgoing side. Again this finding can help staff and students to think about academic and career development. This finding also implies that students notions of the ideal student do appear to map on to their notions of the ideal psychologist. The present research can be developed in two ways. The first would be to see how well these implicit theories match on to the perceptions and expectations of experts in each of these psychological domains. Researchers could then identify gaps that may be occurring between students perceptions and the actual skills needed in the various domains. The second development would be to refine the skills and attribute descriptors so that staff and students are able to identify core skills which may need developing or strengthening as part of PDP, particularly at the beginning of a degree course. In summary, the current studies have shown the usefulness of using an implicit theories approach to explore the notions that undergraduate students have about the skills and attributes required across a number of psychology domains. The two studies indicate that students across a range of psychology domains distinguished between two main sets of attributes and skills of Intelligent-Knowledge-Scientific and Caring-Empathetic. However, the results also show that these two aspects are highly correlated. The findings also identify key skills and attributes sets that inform us about psychology professions and teaching.

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...29 References Berg, C.A., & Sternberg, R.J. (1992). Adults conceptions of intelligence across the life span. Psychology and Aging, 7, 221-231. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 140-161. Child, D. (2006). The Essentials of Factor Analysis. (3 rd Edition). New York: Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd. Child, D. (1990). The Essentials of Factor Analysis. (2 nd Edition). New York: Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd. Dweck, C.S., & Elliott, E.S. (1983). Achievement motivation. In E.M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 4. Socialisation, personality, and social development (pp. 643-691). New York: Wiley. Higher Education Academy (2004). Psychology subject centre: Student employability profile. Retrieved January 20, 2009, from http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/york/documents/our work/tla/employability_enterprise/web0374_student_employability_profile_psyc hology.pdf Horn, J. L. (1965). A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis. Psychometrika, 30, 179-185. Hugh-Jones, S., & Sunderland, E. (2007). Employability: How to maximise the employability of Psychology graduates. Retrieved on January 20, 2009, from http://www.psychology.heacademy.ac.uk/docs/pdf/p20070404_employability_mi niproject_final_report.pdf Levy, S., Plaks, J.E., & Dweck, C.S. (1999). Modes of social thought: Implicit theories and social understanding. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process models in social psychology (pp. 179-202). New York: Guilford Press. Quality Assurance Agency (2000). Developing a progress file for HE: Summary report of the consultation exercise. Retrieved January 20, 2009, from http://www.qaa.ac.uk/academic infrastructure/progressfiles/archive/summary/default.asp#pdp

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...30 Siegler, R.S., & Richards, D.D. (1982). The development of intelligence. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 896-971). New York: Cambridge University Press. Sternberg, R.J. (1985). Implicit theories of intelligence, creativity, and wisdom. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 607-627. Sternberg, R.J. (2001). The concept of intelligence. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.), The handbook of intelligence (pp. 3-15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sternberg, R.J., Conway B.E., Ketron, J.L., & Bernstein, M. (1981). People s conceptions of intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 37-55. UCAS (2007). Applications (choices), acceptances and ratios by subject group 2007. Retrieved January 20, 2009, from http://www.ucas.ac.uk/about_us/stat_services/stats_online/data_ tables/appsaccpssubs/appsaccpssubs2007/

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...31 Appendix Appendix A.1: Scree Plot of the Eigenvalues for the Ideal Psychologist. Scree Plot 10 8 Eigenvalue 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Component Number Appendix A.2: Scree Plot of Eigenvalues for ideal Psychology Student. Scree Plot 12 10 8 Eigenvalue 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Component Number

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...32 Figure A.3: Scree Plot of Eigenvalues for ideal Clinical Psychologist. Scree Plot 8 6 Eigenvalue 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Component Number Appendix A.4: Scree Plot of Eigenvalues for ideal Educational Psychologist. Scree Plot 10 8 Eigenvalue 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Component Number

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...33 Appendix A.5: Scree Plot of Eigenvalues for ideal Forensic Psychologist. Scree Plot 7 6 5 Eigenvalue 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Component Number Appendix A.6: Scree Plot of Eigenvalues for ideal Health Psychologist. Scree Plot 10 8 Eigenvalue 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Component Number

To be, or not to be, a psychologist...34 Appendix A.7 Scree Plot of Eigenvalues for ideal Occupational Psychologist. Scree Plot 10 8 Eigenvalue 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Component Number Appendix A.8: Scree Plot of Eigenvalues for ideal Teaching-Research Psychologist. Scree Plot 10 8 Eigenvalue 6 4 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Component Number