 |
General
Information | Questions
about the Match | Match
Statistics | Travel
Discounts | Info
for Non-APPIC Member Programs
2004 APPIC Match: Survey of Internship Applicants
March 15, 2004
This survey of applicants who were registered for the 2004 APPIC
Match was conducted via the internet between February 23 and March
15, 2004. All 3,258 applicants who registered for the APPIC Match
were sent an e-mail message (along with one reminder e-mail) about
the availability of the survey at a specific internet address.
Results of the survey are presented below. A total of 1,515
internship applicants (47%) completed the survey. (Approximately
200-250 applicants were prevented from taking the survey due to a
technical problem with the Zoomerang web site on March 3, 2004; it is
unknown how many of these applicants successfully completed the
survey at a later time, after the problem was fixed).
Some of the more interesting findings from this survey include:
- This year, applicants reported fewer violations of APPIC Match
Policies by programs than in any other year since the Match was
first conducted in 1999 (see question 9a).
- Ninety percent of applicants reported that they submitted a work
sample (e.g., testing report, psychotherapy summary) to at least
one site. Of these, 14% reported difficulty submitting this work
sample due to the new HIPAA law, with 9% being "unsure" (see
questions 12a and 12b).
- Applicants generally supported the adoption of a "Centralized
Application Service" if there was no cost to applicants. However,
support for such a system dropped dramatically as the potential
cost to applicants increased (see question 16).
- Applicants reported spending an average of $1,341.72 on the entire
application process, including application and travel expenses (see
question 15).
- Approximately 5% of applicants indicated that the optimal
internship structure for them would be a two-year, half-time
internship (see question 14).
- Applicants submitted an average of 12.4 internship applications,
compared to an average of 12.1 in the 2003 Match, 13.1 in the
2002 Match, and 13.8 in the 1999 Match (see question 18).
- Applicants reported that approximately 87.9% of sites complied
with the Match Policy that required them to notify applicants
of their interview status (e.g., received an interview, no
longer under consideration) no later than the date listed in
sites' APPIC Directory listings. This compares to 87.6%
last year (the first year the policy was implemented).
- Only a small percentage of applicants used the APPIC Travel
Discounts that were available (see question 17).
Missing data and "Not Applicable" responses were eliminated, and
percentages do not necessarily total 100% due to rounding. Survey
questions 10 and 24-29 requested open-ended comments and thus the
results are not included below.
| 1. |
Type of Doctoral Program: |
| |
Clinical |
1142 |
76 % |
| |
Counseling |
247 |
16 % |
| |
School |
63 |
4 % |
| |
Combined |
39 |
3 % |
| |
Other |
21 |
1 % |
INTERPRETATION NOTE: A "combined" program could mean: (a) a doctoral
program that defines itself as a "combined" program (e.g., clinical-
school), or (b) an arrangement negotiated by a student in which he/she
integrates the curricula of two separate doctoral programs at his/her
school.
| 2. |
Degree Sought : |
| |
Ph.D. |
963 |
64 % |
| |
Psy.D. |
540 |
36 % |
| |
Ed.D. |
1 |
0 % |
| |
Other |
8 |
1 % |
| 3. |
Is your doctoral
program APA- or CPA-accredited?
|
| |
Yes |
1414 |
94 % |
| |
No |
94 |
6 % |
| 4. |
Is your doctoral program: |
| |
University Affiliated or University Based |
1320 |
87 % |
| |
Free-Standing |
158 |
10 % |
| |
Other |
30 |
2 % |
INTERPRETATION NOTE: It appears that this item was poorly worded and
was misunderstood by many respondents. Thus, it appears that the results from this item are invalid.
| 5. |
Please check the item that applies to you (Please respond even if you withdrew from the Match or did not submit a Rank Order List): |
| |
This is my first time participating in the match |
1440 |
95 % |
| |
This is my SECOND time participating in the Match |
63 |
4 % |
| |
Other |
7 |
0 % |
NOTE: Three of the respondents who designated "other" indicated
that this was their third time participating in the Match.
| 6. |
Were you matched
to an internship program by the APPIC Match? (i.e.,
did your official notification from National Matching
Services indicate that you were successfully matched
to an internship program?)
|
| |
Yes |
1306 |
87 % |
| |
No |
185 |
12 % |
| |
Withdrew / No rankings
submitted |
16 |
1 % |
INTERPRETATION NOTE: It appears that unmatched applicants may
have been underrepresented in this survey (2004 APPIC Match
statistics indicated that 20% of participating applicants were
not matched).
| 7a. |
The materials
and instructions provided by National Matching Services
(NMS) were clear and comprehensive.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
978 |
65 % |
| |
Agree |
467 |
31 % |
| |
Neutral |
24 |
2 % |
| |
Disagree |
18 |
1 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
25 |
2 % |
| 7b. |
The registration
process with NMS went smoothly.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
1120 |
74 % |
| |
Agree |
318 |
21 % |
| |
Neutral |
28 |
2 % |
| |
Disagree |
14 |
1 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
31 |
2 % |
| 7c. |
The submission
of my Rank Order List to NMS went smoothly.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
1183 |
79 % |
| |
Agree |
265 |
18 % |
| |
Neutral |
15 |
1 % |
| |
Disagree |
7 |
0 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
29 |
2 % |
| 7d. |
NMS was responsive
to my questions and concerns (choose "N/A"
if you never contacted NMS).
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
192 |
61 % |
| |
Agree |
72 |
23 % |
| |
Neutral |
29 |
9 % |
| |
Disagree |
10 |
3 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
11 |
4 % |
| 7e. |
I am satisfied
with the Match result that I received from the Matching
Program.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
857 |
58 % |
| |
Agree |
287 |
19 % |
| |
Neutral |
92 |
6 % |
| |
Disagree |
93 |
6 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
151 |
10 % |
|
| 7f. |
Overall, I am
satisfied with the APPIC Matching Program.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
726 |
48 % |
| |
Agree |
433 |
29 % |
| |
Neutral |
165 |
11 % |
| |
Disagree |
107 |
7 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
72 |
5 % |
| 8a. |
In December, NMS mailed a packet to each applicant registered for
the Match that contained the applicant's password and instructions
for submitting lists and obtaining Match results. The instructions
were also available on the NMS web site. For next year, NMS is
considering eliminating the mailing of packets in December, and
only providing this information to applicants via the internet.
Would it be acceptable to you to have the instructions
for submitting lists and obtaining results available for
viewing and/or printing ONLY from the NMS web site, and not
sent via regular mail?
|
| |
Yes |
906 |
60 % |
| |
No |
481 |
32 % |
| |
Unsure |
125 |
8 % |
| 8b. |
Based on security considerations, would you be comfortable
receiving your ROLIC (Rank Order List Input and Confirmation
system) password from NMS via e-mail only, instead of via
regular mail?
|
| |
Yes |
933 |
62 % |
| |
No |
470 |
31 % |
| |
Unsure |
109 |
7 % |
| 9a. |
In your judgement,
did you experience any violation(s) of APPIC Match Policies
by any site?
|
| |
Yes |
117 |
8 % |
| |
No |
1296 |
86 % |
| |
Unsure |
99 |
7 % |
NOTE: This is the highest percentage of applicants responding
"No" than in any previous APPIC survey of applicants since the first
APPIC Match in 1999. Results to this question from previous surveys:
| |
In your judgement, did you experience any violation(s) of APPIC Match Policies by any site? |
| |
Yes |
No |
Unsure |
| 2003 |
11 % |
77 % |
12 % |
| 2002 |
11 % |
78 % |
12 % |
| 2001 |
10 % |
76 % |
14 % |
| 2000 |
15 % |
74 % |
12 % |
| 1999 |
12 % |
77 % |
11 % |
NOTE: It should also be noted that Match Policy 3d was changed this year to
allow internship sites that offer more than one program in the Match to
ask applicants to designate their preferences regarding the programs at
the site for which they wished to be interviewed.
| 9b. |
Did you reveal
any ranking information (e.g. You are my first choice")
to any site?
|
| |
Yes |
15 |
1 % |
| |
No |
1485 |
98 % |
| |
Unsure |
11 |
1 % |
| 9c. |
Did you experience
inappropriate pressure from any site to reveal your
rankings?
|
| |
Yes |
28 |
2 % |
| |
No |
1452 |
96 % |
| |
Unsure |
28 |
2 % |
| 9d. |
Did any site reveal
ranking information to you (e.g. "You are our first
choice")?
|
| |
Yes |
34 |
2 % |
| |
No |
1443 |
96 % |
| |
Unsure |
29 |
2 % |
| 11a. |
In general, my
doctoral program faculty provided a high level of support
for my internship application and interview experience.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
500 |
33 % |
| |
Agree |
531 |
35 % |
| |
Neutral |
214 |
14 % |
| |
Disagree |
181 |
12 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
86 |
6 % |
| 11b. |
I worked closely
with other students in my program throughout the process
(e.g. sharing information, giving and receiving support).
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
469 |
31 % |
| |
Agree |
543 |
36 % |
| |
Neutral |
208 |
14 % |
| |
Disagree |
204 |
14 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
86 |
6 % |
| 11c. |
I took the selection
process very seriously (i.e. I worked hard on my application;
invested much time and energy, etc.).
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
1214 |
80 % |
| |
Agree |
253 |
17 % |
| |
Neutral |
27 |
2 % |
| |
Disagree |
5 |
0 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
12 |
1 % |
| 11d. |
I attended local
or national workshops that focused on the internship
selection process.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
163 |
11 % |
| |
Agree |
218 |
15 % |
| |
Neutral |
114 |
8 % |
| |
Disagree |
342 |
23 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
666 |
44 % |
| 11e. |
I used reference
materials (e.g. the APAGS workbook, other books) to educate myself about the internship
selection process.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
551 |
36 % |
| |
Agree |
440 |
29 % |
| |
Neutral |
122 |
8 % |
| |
Disagree |
183 |
12 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
214 |
14 % |
NOTE: A total of 65% responded "Strongly Agree" or "Agree" to this
item, compared to 54% who responded that way to a similar question in
last year's survey.
| 12a. |
AT LEAST ONE site to which I applied requested that I include a "work sample" (e.g., testing report, psychotherapy summary) as part
of my application materials.
|
| |
Yes |
1356 |
90 % |
| |
No |
145 |
10 % |
| |
Unsure |
5 |
0 % |
| 12b. |
(Please answer this next item ONLY if you WERE required to submit a
work sample to any site): The new federal HIPAA laws (Health
Insurance Portability and Accountability Act) made it difficult for
me to submit a work sample.
|
| |
Yes |
192 |
14 % |
| |
No |
1070 |
77 % |
| |
Unsure |
121 |
9 % |
| 13a. |
If you used the APPIC Online
Directory, please answer the questions below:
The APPIC Online Directory was easy to navigate.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
600 |
40 % |
| |
Agree |
741 |
49 % |
| |
Neutral |
100 |
7 % |
| |
Disagree |
44 |
3 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
15 |
1 % |
| 13b. |
The information provided in
the APPIC Online Directory was comprehensive enough for me to successfully locate
internship programs of interest.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
550 |
37 % |
| |
Agree |
737 |
49 % |
| |
Neutral |
123 |
8 % |
| |
Disagree |
73 |
5 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
18 |
1 % |
| 13c. |
The
information provided in the APPIC Online Directory was
accurate and up-to-date.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
281 |
19 % |
| |
Agree |
738 |
49 % |
| |
Neutral |
272 |
18 % |
| |
Disagree |
187 |
12 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
22 |
1 % |
| 13d. |
In general, the Online Directory's
links to programs' web sites and e-mail addresses functioned
properly.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
453 |
30 % |
| |
Agree |
826 |
55 % |
| |
Neutral |
153 |
10 % |
| |
Disagree |
58 |
4 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
6 |
0 % |
| 13e. |
Overall, I am satisfied with
the APPIC Online Directory.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
482 |
32 % |
| |
Agree |
848 |
57 % |
| |
Neutral |
120 |
8 % |
| |
Disagree |
33 |
2 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
10 |
1 % |
| 14. |
If you could have designated the optimal internship structure for
yourself, which of the following would you have preferred?
|
| |
A one-year, full-time internship |
1387 |
92 % |
| |
A two-year, half-time internship |
69 |
5 % |
| |
Other |
48 |
3 % |
| 15a. |
APPIC would like to know how much you spent on various aspects of
the application and selection process.
Application costs involve preparing and submitting applications to
sites, and may include such items as obtaining official copies of
transcripts, printing, copying, regular and overnight mailing, etc.
Travel costs may include such items as air or train fare, car
rental, taxi, gasoline, hotel, etc.
Please enter your BEST ESTIMATE of the dollar amount spent, digits
only, in each of the following areas (e.g., one hundred dollars
would be entered as simply 100).
Application Costs:
|
| |
Mean |
= |
$218.44 |
| |
SD |
= |
$150.24 |
| |
Mode |
= |
$200.00 |
| |
Median |
= |
$200.00 |
| |
Range |
= |
$0-$1200 |
| 15b. |
|
| |
Mean |
= |
$1049.47 |
| |
SD |
= |
$1140.66 |
| |
Mode |
= |
$2000.00 |
| |
Median |
= |
$700.00 |
| |
Range |
= |
$0-$10,000 |
| 15c. |
Other Costs (e.g., phone calls, etc):
|
| |
Mean |
= |
$73.80 |
| |
SD |
= |
$190.27 |
| |
Mode |
= |
$0.00 |
| |
Median |
= |
$25.00 |
| |
Range |
= |
$0-$3,000 |
| 16a. |
APPIC is considering the adoption of a "Centralized Application
Service" that would allow you to create and update your AAPI entirely
through the internet. In other words, instead of using your word
processor, you would enter your application information into APPIC's
web site and, when ready to submit your applications, you would have
them transmitted directly to selected internship sites via the
internet. Similarly, your transcripts, letters of recommendation,
verification form, etc. all would be uploaded to APPIC's web site and
transmitted electronically to sites. Applicants would maintain complete
control as to which internship sites would be permitted to view their
application materials.
Thus, you would not need to pay any mailing costs, and you would only
be required to purchase one copy of your transcript from your
university (since that single copy would be electronically transmitted
to all of your sites).
APPIC has been researching various options in providing this service,
and has found that costs and functionality vary widely. Keeping in mind
how much you spent this year in preparing and submitting your
applications, please let us know whether or not you believe that APPIC
should adopt such a system, based on the various cost options listed
below:
APPIC should adopt this system if there was NO COST to the
applicant. |
| |
Strongly Agree |
1017 |
68 % |
| |
Agree |
289 |
19 % |
| |
Neutral |
109 |
7 % |
| |
Disagree |
53 |
4 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
29 |
2 % |
16b.
|
APPIC should adopt this system if there was a cost of $100 to
each applicant.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
333 |
23 % |
| |
Agree |
502 |
33 % |
| |
Neutral |
256 |
17 % |
| |
Disagree |
228 |
15 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
182 |
12 % |
| 16c. |
APPIC should adopt this system if there was a cost of $200 to
each applicant.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
95 |
6 % |
| |
Agree |
146 |
10 % |
| |
Neutral |
228 |
15 % |
| |
Disagree |
464 |
31 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
560 |
38 % |
| 16d. |
APPIC should adopt this system if there was a cost of $300 to each applicant.
|
| |
Strongly Agree |
44 |
3 % |
| |
Agree |
48 |
3 % |
| |
Neutral |
134 |
9 % |
| |
Disagree |
330 |
22 % |
| |
Strongly Disagree |
935 |
63 % |
| 17. |
Did you use any
of the APPIC travel discounts to purchase an airline ticket,
hotel room, and/or rental car?
|
| |
Yes |
89 |
6 % |
| |
No |
1290 |
86 % |
| |
Didn't know about it |
123 |
8 % |
| 18. |
How many internship
sites did you apply to (i.e., how many separate internship
applications did you submit)?
|
| |
Mean |
= |
12.4 |
| |
Median |
= |
12 |
| |
Mode |
= |
12 |
| |
SD |
= |
5.1 |
| |
Range |
= |
0-67 |
NTERPRETATION NOTE: Only one applicant reported applying to
more than 35 internship sites.
| 19. |
Considering ALL
of the sites that you applied to, how many
notified you of your interview status (e.g., received
an interview, no longer under consideration) on or before
the "interview notification date" listed in
their APPIC Directory information? (Please estimate
if you don't know the exact number).
|
| |
Mean |
= |
10.9 |
| |
Median |
= |
11 |
| |
Mode |
= |
12 |
| |
SD |
= |
5.0 |
| 20. |
How many interviews
(telephone or on-site) were you offered?
|
| |
Mean |
= |
6.7 |
| |
Median |
= |
6 |
| |
Mode |
= |
5 |
| |
SD |
= |
3.6 |
| 21. |
How many programs
did you include on your final Rank Order List (i.e.,
how many program code numbers were listed)?
|
| |
Mean |
= |
6.7 |
| |
Median |
= |
6 |
| |
Mode |
= |
5 |
| |
SD |
= |
3.7 |
NOTE: Use caution when comparing these numbers
with the results from questions 18-20, since some sites used
multiple program code numbers.
| 22. |
What was the rank
of the program that you were matched to?
|
| |
(Please see the 2004 APPIC
Match Statistics for this information) |
|
|
| 23. |
How many separate
round-trip airline tickets did you purchase in order to
attend on-site interviews or open houses?
|
| |
Mean |
= |
1.6 |
| |
Median |
= |
1 |
| |
Mode |
= |
0 |
| |
SD |
= |
2.1 |
| |
Range |
= |
0 - 15 |
A total of 42.6% purchased no airline tickets, while 16.4% purchased
one ticket.
22 May 2004
| |
