Training and Education in Professional Psychology

© 2022 American Psychological Association 2022, Vol. 16, No. 2, 112–120

ISSN: 1931-3918 https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000383

The Development of the Professional Competencies Scale: Foundational,

Functional, and Continuing Competencies
Jennifer M. Taylor1 and Greg J. Neimeyer2
1
Department of Educational Psychology, University of Utah
2
American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, United States

Competence is of paramount importance to training in professional psychology, yet little research has
addressed the development of psychometrically sound instruments for assessing competence, despite
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

repeated calls for work in this area. Many current graduate school and internship training programs rely on
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

cumulated hours of supervised clinical training and successful coursework completion as indicators of
graduate student success, indicators that are widely regarded as poor proxies for the valid assessment of
actual competence (Fouad et al., 2009). The present study aimed to address this gap by developing a
measure that follows from one of the leading conceptualizations of competence in the field of professional
psychology today. Results from an exploratory factor analysis of 491 psychotherapists revealed three related
domains of professional competence: foundational, functional, and continuing competencies. These results
were later used as a guide for confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs) with cohorts of 471 board-certified
psychologists and two samples of predoctoral interns and fellows (N = 647 and 264). Results from the
CFAs led to a 10-item Professional Competencies Scale (PCS) with excellent fit and strong reliability and
validity (see Supplemental Appendix A). Current limitations of the instrument are noted and recommenda-
tions are explored in relation to the domains of training and practice, with attention to the important role of a
continuing commitment to ongoing professional development.

Public Significance Statement

In this four-part study, researchers developed the 10-item Professional Competencies Scale, a
self-assessment tool designed to measure foundational, functional, and continuing competencies for
the field of professional psychology. This scale is a promising tool for researchers studying professional
competence and for students and supervisors as a brief assessment measure in training contexts.

Keywords: competence, professional psychology, scale development, factor analysis, cube model

Supplemental materials: https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000383.supp

Enhancing and maintaining professional competence has been a
recurrent theme in the literature on professional psychology since
the field’s inception (Webster, 1971), and recent developments have
only accelerated attention to the issue (Belar, 2009). In a Delphi Poll
regarding future developments in the field, researchers identified
professional competence as the area expected to gain the greatest
attention within the coming decade (Taylor et al., 2018), continuing
an ascendency fueled by issues of public accountability and
professional dedication that has been well documented over the
course of the previous decade (Roberts et al., 2005).
Many components of professional competence have been discussed
in the literature. Some of the most common aspects include key
personality characteristics, critical thinking skills, interpersonal rela-
tionship skills, knowledge of self, self-assessment skills, and self-care,
as well as field-based knowledge and skill development (Hatcher &
Lassiter, 2007). Other approaches emphasize the demonstration of

Coordinator in the Department of Psychology and was inducted as a

Greg J. Neimeyer https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4333-679X
JENNIFER M. TAYLOR received her Ph.D. in Counseling Psychology from
the University of Florida. She is an Associate Professor of Counseling
Psychology and Counseling at the University of Utah. Her research interests
include professional competence, continuing professional development,
mentoring, continuing education, and lifelong learning.
GREG J. NEIMEYER received his Ph.D. in Counseling Psychology from
the University of Notre Dame. He is an Emeritus Professor of Psychol-
ogy at the University of Florida. A fellow of the American Psychologi-
cal Association, he has served as Director of Training and Graduate
lifetime member into the Academy of Distinguished Teaching Scholars.
His research interests include the study of professional competence and
lifelong learning. He currently serves as Associate Executive Director
and Director of the Office of Continuing Education and the Center for
Learning and Career Development at the American Psychological
Association.
CORRESPONDENCE CONCERNING THIS ARTICLE should be addressed to Jennifer
M. Taylor, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Utah, 1721
Campus Center Drive, Room 3220, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, United States.
Email: Jennifer.M.Taylor@utah.edu

112
 THE PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCIES SCALE
minimal competencies (e.g., ASPPB’s Examination for Professional
Practice in Psychology; EPPP) or developmental models that continue
to build upon these minimal competencies across the course of
professional development (Cox & Grus, 2019).
Although definitions regarding what comprises professional
competencies in psychology can be traced back to the furthest
reaches of the profession (see Ullmann, 1947), a number of influ-
ential competency frameworks have been developed since then.
Edwards (2000), for example, summarized professional competen-
cies stipulated or proposed by Canadian psychology regulatory
boards and offered a competency framework based on themes
that could be used by the boards to promote mobility in a psychol-
ogist’s professional practice.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
In the U.S., a watershed moment in the definition of professional
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
competence occurred in 2002 at the Competencies Conference with
the development of the “Cube Model” (Rodolfa et al., 2005). The
Cube Model is composed of 12 foundational and functional compe-
tencies that emphasize ongoing professional growth, from doctoral
education to continuing competency. Foundational competencies
are defined as professional knowledge, attitudes, skills, and values,
whereas functional competencies are described as the capabilities to
execute the roles or functions of a psychologist. Functional competen-
cies build upon foundational competencies.
Using the Cube Model as a framework, the Assessment of Compe-
tency Benchmarks Workgroup operationalized each of the 12 compe-
tencies and added three further competencies. The foundational
competencies were identified as professionalism, reflective practice,
scientific knowledge and methods, relationships, individual and cul-
tural diversity, ethical and legal standards and policy, and interdisci-
plinary systems (see Fouad et al., 2009). Functional competencies
were stipulated in relation to assessment, intervention, consultation,
research and evaluation, supervision, teaching, management and
administration, and advocacy. Importantly, unique benchmarks
were derived for three major developmental milestones: readiness
for practicum, readiness for licensure, and readiness for practice.
Complementary efforts have been advanced by the Association of
State and Provincial Psychology Boards (ASPPB), both in relation
to its commissioning of the ASPPB Practice Analysis Task Force, as
well as the 2010 Competency Assessment Task Force. The latter
was charged with reviewing and examining the competency model
based on data from a survey data from 4,732 licensed psychologists.
In 2016, another job task analysis was conducted to revalidate the
Examination for Professional Practice in Psychology (EPPP) Part 1
and provide validation for the skills portion of the EPPP. This
resulted in the articulation of a set of competency domains critical to
ongoing maintenance of competence.
The ongoing enhancement of professional competence has
become a prominent discussion within professional psychology
(American Psychological Association [APA], 2006; Cox & Grus,
2019). Kerns et al. (2009) and Taylor and Neimeyer (2015) have
suggested that a type of metacompetency, the ability to recognize
and transcend current professional knowledge and limitations,
should be considered a core part of competence. Provisional data
support this assertion; psychologists who seek to maintain and
enhance their competence demonstrate higher levels of professional
engagement and accomplishment (e.g., Taylor & Neimeyer, 2015).
These findings support related research within allied health fields
that similarly highlight the value of lifelong learning. In their study
of 5,349 medical college alumni, Hojat et al. (2009) found that
113
clinicians who possessed stronger lifelong learning orientations also
had higher levels of professional accomplishments, career satisfac-
tion, and engagement in lifelong learning.
To date, however, the field of professional psychology lacks a
psychometrically sound measure that articulates with the conceptual
models that currently inform the field. Selected elements of these
conceptual models have received support, as when the importance of
cultural competence (a foundational competency in the Cube
Model) was linked to more effective therapeutic interventions
(see Davis et al., 2018). Evidence regarding the value of select
components of the competence model naturally invite a more
comprehensive effort to design an instrument that assesses each
of its elements of competence across the course of professional
education and training, as well as professional practice.
While the field of professional psychology has made continuing
advances concerning the definition and conceptualization of profes-
sional competence, the absence of adequate assessment measures has
continued to hamper the field’s movement toward a “culture of
competence” (Belar, 2009; Roberts et al., 2005). Within the Final
Report on the APA Task Force on the Assessment of Competence in
Professional Psychology (2006), for example, the Task Force re-
commended “that research be conducted to facilitate the development
of psychometrically sound and comprehensive assessment strategies
that have appropriate levels of fidelity” (p. 7). As Kaslow et al. (2009)
has noted, competency assessment fulfills many functions. It pro-
motes learning, provides feedback regarding a professional’s
strengths and weaknesses and training program effectiveness, creates
opportunities for remediation, and protects the public.
To date, a variety of assessments have been developed to measure
aspects of professional competence. For example, the Counselor
Self-Efficacy Scale (Melchert et al., 1996) provides a measure of a
counselor’s confidence in their clinical skills. Likewise, the Global
Therapist Competence Scale for Youth Psychosocial Development
(G-COMP, Brown et al., 2018) measures a therapist’s self-efficacy
for general relationship skills when working with children.
However, these self-assessments have important limitations.
Foremost among these limitations is that they do not articulate
with a broader, developmental conceptualization regarding the
development and maintenance of competence, or the elements or
components that may support it. In addition, as with most compe-
tency assessments, measures like the G-COMP assess competencies
within a specific subspecialty, rather than “meta” competencies that
are relevant across specializations or within general practice for
most psychologists.
The Present Study
The present study aimed to develop an empirically derived, brief
professional competence self-assessment tool that follows from one
of the leading conceptualizations of professional competence in the
field (e.g., Fouad et al., 2009; Rodolfa et al., 2005). Four studies
were conducted to develop and validate a self-assessment measure
of professional competence, The Professional Competencies Scale
(PCS). In Study 1, 491 psychologists were surveyed with an initial
competencies instrument containing items translated directly from
the Cube Model (Fouad et al., 2009), in addition to items assessing
continuing competencies. An exploratory factor analysis was con-
ducted to refine the scale items and assess the preliminary factor
structure. An updated instrument, based on findings from Study 1,
 114 TAYLOR AND NEIMEYER

was used in three follow-up studies of 471 board-certified psychol-
ogists, 647 predoctoral interns and fellows who were beginning their
training year, and 247 predoctoral interns and fellows who were
completing their training year. Confirmatory factor analysis was
utilized to confirm the factor structure in these three studies, and
convergent validity was examined by comparing scores on the
competency scale to a range of conceptually congruent and psy-
chometrically sound instruments.
Method
Participants
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Table 1 and compare favorably with those of a recent workforce
analysis in psychology (APA, 2018).
The Follow-Up Studies
A second survey was conducted to confirm the results of the first
survey within a separate sample of 471 board-certified psychologists
drawn from the membership of the American Board of Professional
Psychology. After confirming the factor structure for the PCS with
the first two samples, the PCS was utilized with a third sample of 647
predoctoral interns and fellows who were beginning their training
year. Training directors were contacted through the Association of
Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers listserv and for-

The Initial Study: Sample 1 Participants warded the study invitation to trainees. In a fourth and final sample,
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

264 predoctoral interns and fellows who were finishing their training
Sample 1’s participants consisted of 491 practicing psychologists
year completed the survey. These participants represented a subset
who were recruited through the listservs of the State, Provincial, and
of participants from Survey 3.
Territorial Psychological Associations, the American Psychological
Association Practice Organization, the Council of Counseling Psy-
chology Training Programs, and the American Board of Profes- Instruments
sional Psychology (ABPP). Prospective participants received an
Sample 1 Survey
email inviting them to participate in an online study exploring
professional competencies and lifelong learning. The demographic The survey for the initial creation of the Professional Competen-
characteristics for all four participant samples are depicted in cies Scale consisted of 108 items, which included demographic

Table 1
Percentages for Samples 1–4 Demographic Variables

Demographic variable Sample 1 (%) Sample 2 (%) Sample 3 (%) Sample 4 (%)

Gender identity
cis man 51.9 58.8 13.8 20.7
cis woman 47.7 40.7 86.2 79.3
Transwoman 0.2 0 0 0
Other 0.2 0.5 0 0
Race/ethnicity
Caucasian/White 86.7 90.9 84.3 76.4
Hispanic/Latinx 6.8 1.9 2.7 4.5
American Indian/Native American/Alaskan Native 0.4 0 0 0
African American/Black 0.8 1.2 3.8 6.2
Biracial/Multiracial 0.8 1.8 2.7 6.2
East Indian/Indian American 0.4 0 0 0
Asian American/Pacific Islander 0.8 1.9 3.8 4.5
Arabic American/Middle Eastern 0.2 0 0 0
Other 1.6 0.9 1.3 2.2
Decline to report 1.8 1.4 0.4 0
Work setting
Independent practice 30.9 30.9 — —
Hospital or medical setting 21.1 49.9 44
University academic dept. 14.9 12.1 — —
Group practice 5.6 5.3 — —
University counseling center/mental health agency 4.2 2.3 21.1 17.4
Community agency 4.2 2.3 13.6 11.1
Consortium — — 3.5 1.4
Prison — — 3.3 3.3
Department of Veterans Affairs — — 2.3 3.9
School setting — — 1.9 1.5
Other 12.7 13.7 4.4 16.5
Specialty area
Clinical psychology — — 80.1 80.1
Counseling psychology — — 13.7 12.2
School psychology — — 3.8 4.4
Other — — 2.5 3.3
Note. Sample 1 = general licensed psychologists from all 50 states; Sample 2 = ABPP psychologists; Sample 3 = predoctoral interns/fellows beginning
their training year; Sample 4 = predoctoral interns/fellows ending their training year. The mean years in practice for Sample 1 was 25.59 (SD = 11.73) and for
Sample 2 was 25.55 (SD = 12.61). The mean age of Sample 2 was 55.51 years old (SD = 12.43).
 THE PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCIES SCALE
items and other scales designed to assess convergent validity
between the PCS developed in this study and other measures
(described below). The 33 items that constituted the original PCS
were modeled after Fouad et al.’s (2009) conceptualization of
professional competence in the psychology and were created as
direct translations of the competency benchmarks proposed by the
scholars for psychologists who were at the stage of readiness for
practice. Each item was arranged along a 5-point scale ranging from
very low levels of the benchmark to very high levels of the
benchmark. Thus, lower scores represented lower self-assessed
competencies. As one example, an item from the Functional Com-
petencies subscale read, “I interpret assessment results accurately,
taking into account the limitations of the evaluation method.” The
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
total survey required approximately 20 min to complete. The reli-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
ability for the 33-item PCS in Sample 1 was r = .91.
Measures for Convergent Validity With the Foundational
Competencies Subscale
Two measures were used to assess convergent validity with the
Foundational Competencies subscale. These instruments were cho-
sen on the basis of the centrality of diversity awareness and self-care
as essential foundational characteristics of effective practice, critical
to the development of a range of functional skills as a practitioner.
Miville-Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale—Short Form
This scale measures appreciation for the differences and com-
monality among oneself and others (Fuertes et al., 2000). A sample
item from the scale is, “I attend events where I might get to know
people from different racial backgrounds.” Studies have also dem-
onstrated convergent validity between the Miville-Guzman
Universality-Diversity Scale—Short Form and other conceptually
related measures, such as ethnocultural empathy, openness to
experience, and agreeableness (Kegel & DeBlaere, 2014). The
reliability for this scale in the present study was r = .79.
Therapist Self-Care Scale
The Therapist Self-Care Scale (Mahoney, 1997) is a 12-item scale
that measures the degree to which therapists are involved in self-care
behaviors. Items are measured on a 4-point scale, from “very rarely/
never” to “often/very often.” A sample item from this scale is, “Over
the previous year, how often have you engaged in physical exer-
cise.” Research indicates moderate convergent validity between The
Therapist Self-Care Scale and the Self-Care subscale of the Occu-
pational Stress Inventory-Revised (see Brucato & Neimeyer, 2009).
The reliability for this scale in the present study was r = .58.
Measure for Convergent Validity With the Functional
Competencies Subscale
In an effort to assess the convergent validity of the Functional
Competencies subscale, the Counselor Self-Efficacy Scale was
chosen. The measure was selected because it reflects a critical
component of functional competencies (e.g., the skills to perform
the roles of a psychologist).
115
Counselor Self-Efficacy Scale
The Counselor Self-Efficacy Scale (Melchert et al., 1996)
assesses psychologists’ confidence in their knowledge and skills
associated with conducting a range of professional services, such as
individual and group therapy. This scale consists of 20 items
measured on a 5-point Likert scale, with higher scores reflecting
higher levels of professional self-efficacy. A sample item from this
scale is “My knowledge of ethical issues related to counseling is
adequate for me to perform professionally.” Studies demonstrate
strong content and convergent validity with the Self-Efficacy
Inventory (Melchert et al., 1996). The Cronbach’s α for this scale
among Sample 1 was r = .88.
Measures for Convergent Validity With the
Continuing Competencies Subscale
Three measures were used to assess the convergent validity of this
subscale.
The Jefferson Scale of Psychotherapist Lifelong Learning
The Jefferson Scale of Psychotherapist Lifelong Learning
(JSPLL; Taylor & Neimeyer, 2015) was used to measure the
psychologist’s orientation toward lifelong learning. A sample
item from this scale is, “I believe I would fall behind if I stopped
learning about new developments in my profession.” In a previous
study, the JSPLL demonstrated convergent validity through its
relationship with a five-item measure of professional and academic
involvement (r = .57; Taylor & Neimeyer, 2015). In the present
study, the reliability for the JSPLL was r = .84.
Engagement in Formal and Informal
Continuing Education (CE)
Participants in Samples 1 and 2 were also asked how many hours
of formal and informal CE they complete, on average, each year.
Engagement in CE was expected to be related to continuing
competence.
Scholarly and Professional Productivity
Lastly, a brief measure of participation in scholarly and profes-
sional activities was included to provide convergent validity for the
Continuing Competencies subscale. This five-item Likert scale
assessed engagement in publishing, presenting papers, receiving
professional awards or honors, serving on professional committees,
and serving as a reviewer for professional journals. Higher scores
indicated higher involvement in these activities and honors. The
reliability for the scale in this study was r = .84.
Sample 1 Results: Exploratory Factor Analysis
An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted with
Sample 1 to assess empirical support for a prevailing theoretical
model of professional competence. In order to construct
the factors, subscales were retained that were consistent with
the theoretical and conceptual literature on the factor structure
of professional competence (i.e., foundational, functional, and
 116 TAYLOR AND NEIMEYER

continuing competencies). SPSS was utilized to predict the num- Sample 2 Results: Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA)
ber of factors in the Professional Competencies Scale. Results
suggested that there were five factors in the scale (see Table 2). The fit statistics of the 19-item CFA model suggested poor fit,
The factor correlation matrix was examined through an oblique χ2(149) = 632.82, p < .001; Root Mean Square Error of Approxi-
mation (RMSEA) = .079 with 90% CI [.072, .085]; Comparative Fit
rotation, and the correlations were greater than .32. There was more
Index (CFI) = .847, Normed Fit Index (NFI) = .811, Incremental Fit
than 10% overlap in variance among the factors, enough variance to
Index (IFI) = .849. Because the model fit was inadequate for the
warrant an oblique rotation. Using a promax rotation, which as-
19-item measure, nine items were dropped to create a more parsi-
sumes that factors are correlated, and using the criteria that loadings
monious, better fitting, and conceptually coherent model. The final
must be greater than .30 (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007), patterns were
10-item, three-factor model included the following foundational
discovered in the factor groupings.
competency items: professional identity, reflective practice, and
Three hypothesized factors (foundational, functional, and con-
scientific mindedness; the following functional competencies:
tinuing competencies) were retained in the EFA model, consistent
assessments skills and consultation skills; and all three continuing
with the prevailing theories on professional competence. Within
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

competencies (see Supplemental Appendix A. The fit statistics of the

the foundational, functional, and continuing competencies factors,
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.

CFA suggested strong model fit, with χ2(32) = 92.983, p < .001;
all competency domains that were conceptually coherent and
RMSEA = .060 with 90% CI [.046, .075]; CFI = .961, NFI = .943,
exceeded factor loadings of .30 were preserved. This resulted in IFI = .962. The squared multiple correlations for Foundational
retaining the following Foundational Competencies: (a) profes- Competencies ranged from .39 to .75;.from 75 to .78 for Functional
sional identity, (b) reflective practice/self-assessment/self-care, Competencies, and from .62 to .77 for Continuing Competencies (see
(c) scientific knowledge and methods, (d) interpersonal relation- Supplemental Appendix B, Figure 1).
ships, and (e) interdisciplinary systems; the following Functional
Competencies: (f) assessment, (g) intervention, and (h) consulta-
tion; and the following Continuing Competencies: (i) learning Sample 3 Results: Confirmatory Factor Analysis
beliefs and motivation, (j) attention to learning opportunities, Model fit was tested with the two additional samples of predoc-
and (k) technical skills in information (a copy of the 19-item toral interns and fellows, utilizing the root-mean-square error of
Professional Competencies Scale available upon request). The approximation RMSEA (ideally .06 or less); the CFI, NFI and IFI
reliability for this 19-item scale in Sample 1 was r = .85. (each ideally .95 or greater; Hu & Bentler, 1999). The fit statistics
suggested that the model fit the data well. In the sample of
predoctoral interns and fellows who were beginning their training
year, the fit statistics were as follows: χ2(32) = 60.413, p < .001;
Table 2 RMSEA = .037 with 90% CI [.022, .051]; CFI = .973, NFI =
Exploratory Factor Analysis Structure Matrix With Oblique Rotation, .945, IFI = .973. The standardized factor loadings and square
Sample 1 multiple correlations were strong for Foundational (r2 ranged
from .42 to .61), Functional (r2 ranged from .63 to .74), and
Factor Factor Factor Factor Factor
Subscale 1 2 3 4 5 Continuing competencies (r2 ranged from .45 to .69) (see Supple-
mental Appendix B, Figure 2).
Professionalism .387 .587 .502 .343 .252
Reflective practice .518 .606 .470 .396 .469
Scientific mindedness .426 .702 .636 .365 .346 Sample 4 Results: Confirmatory Factor Analysis
Relationships .374 .699 .327 .274 .516
Diversity awareness .337 .478 .230 .333 .804 To further confirm the fit of the PCS, a CFA was conducted with
Ethical conduct .559 .517 .315 .349 .384 the predoctoral interns as they completed their internship year
Interdisciplinary systems .492 .573 .401 .242 .403 (N = 264). The fit statistics of the CFA suggested strong model
Assessment .785 .405 .416 .163 .299 fit, χ2(32) = 40.664, p = .140; RMSEA = .032 with 90% CI [.000,
Intervention .696 .484 .355 .273 .538
Consultation .858 .460 .393 .218 .324 .059]; CFI = .976, NFI = .902, IFI = .977. The standardized factor
Research/consultation .507 .596 .728 .519 .405 loadings and square multiple correlations were sufficient for foun-
Supervision .510 .626 .563 .308 .686 dational competencies (r2 ranged from .38 to .71), functional com-
Teaching .474 .627 .672 .202 .398 petencies (r2 ranged from .62 to .71), and continuing competencies
Management .390 .618 .485 .183 .377
Advocacy .297 .583 .228 .464 .422
(r2 ranged from .51 to .75) (see Supplemental Appendix B, Figure 3).
Learning beliefs/ .243 .332 .354 .703 .219 Because the three-factor, 10-item measure repeatedly demon-
motivation strated a strong model fit, the reliability, and validity of the measure
Attn. to learning .252 .375 .385 .602 .377 were also assessed.
opportunities
Technical skills in info .339 .364 .604 .410 .225
seeking Psychometrics of the 10-Item Professional
Formal CE/year .134 .199 .173 .223 .182 Competencies Scale
Informal CE/year .094 .156 .347 .142 .066
Note. Numbers in bold denote the subscales retained for the confirmatory InterItem Reliabilities
factor analysis. The first seven subscales were originally hypothesized in
the literature to be foundational competencies, the next eight subscales were Among Sample 1 participants (N = 491), the interitem reliabilities
hypothesized to be functional competencies, and the last five items were for the revised (10-item) PCS was in the acceptable to good range
hypothesized to be continuing competencies. [Overall PCS r = .79 (10 items); Foundational Competencies r = .57
 THE PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCIES SCALE 117

(3 items), Functional Competencies r = .83 (4 items), Continuing
Competencies r = .63 (3 items)]. Among Sample 2 participants
(N = 471), the interitem reliability for the PCS was also adequate
(Overall PCS r = .83; Foundational Competencies r = .60, Func-
tional Competencies r = .85, Continuing Competencies r = .70).
Among Sample 3 participants (N = 647), the interitem reliability
for the PCS remained adequate (Overall PCS r = .77; Foundational
Competencies r = .63, Functional Competencies r = .77, Continuing
Competencies r = .59). Among Sample 4 participants (N = 264), the
interitem reliability for the PCS also remained adequate (Overall PCS
r = .77; Foundational Competencies r = .59, Functional Competen-
cies r = .77, Continuing Competencies r = .62).
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Lastly, if the PCS measures professional competence, board-
certified psychologists should, theoretically, have higher levels of
competence than interns, fellows, or a general sample of licensed
psychologists This is consistent with Dowd’s (2001) assertion that
board certification in psychology “is recognized as the ‘gold stan-
dard’ of professional practice” (p. 15) that extends to only about 4%
of the field of professional psychologists who have demonstrated
their competence at a more stringent level than licensure alone. To
test whether board-certified psychologists reported higher levels of
competence than other participants, Multivariate Analysis of Vari-
ance was utilized. Results indicated, as expected, that board-certified
psychologists reported significantly higher levels of competence
than each of the other groups, F(3, 1552) = 53.077, p < .001.

10-Item Professional Competencies Subscales Validity Discussion

The sample of 491 practicing psychologists from Sample 1 was
used to assess the validity of the final scale and its three subscales.
Two measures were used to assess convergent validity for the
Foundational Competencies subscale, one measure was used to
assess convergent validity for the Functional Competencies sub-
scale, and three measures were used to assess convergent validity for
the Continuing Competencies subscale. The measures correlated
with the Foundational Competencies subscale were (a) the Miville-
Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale—Short Form (Fuertes et al.,
2000; r = .31, p < .001) and (b) the Therapist Self-Care Scale
(Mahoney, 1997; r = .13, p < .05). The Counselor Self-Efficacy
Scale (Melchert et al., 1996) was used to measure convergent
validity for the Functional Competencies subscale (r = .45,
p < .001). Lastly, the three measures used to assess the convergent
validity of the Continuing Competencies subscale were (a) the
Jefferson Scale of Psychotherapist Lifelong Learning (Taylor &
Neimeyer, 2015; r = .73, p < .001), (b) two questions assessing
each participant’s involvement with formal and informal
CE over the past year (rFormal CE and Continuing Competence = .21,
rInformal CE and Continuing Competence = .21, p < .001), and (c) the
measure assessing involvement in professional and scholarly
activities (r = .24, p < .001). See Table 3 for correlations among
all variables.
Findings from this study address an important gap in the literature
and add empirical support to the theoretical literature on profes-
sional competencies in psychology. Schulte and Daly (2009) and
Kaslow et al. (2009) noted the need for psychometrically sound
competency assessments, and the present study provides promising,
provisional advances in this direction.
Results from the CFAs led to a model of professional competence
composed of three Foundational Competencies, two Functional
Competencies, and three Continuing Competencies. The factor
structure of the CFAs provided provisional support for the field’s
conceptualization of the three constructs (Foundational, Functional,
and Continuing Competencies) and their relation to the broader
construct of professional competence (Fouad et al., 2009; Rodolfa
et al., 2005).
Findings from this study provide some preliminary evidence that
the PCS may be useful as a brief self-assessment tool to monitor and
assess competencies in a broad range of professional activities,
knowledge areas, and skillsets. The internal consistency of the
subscales indicated that the competencies demonstrated acceptable
levels of reliability (across all samples, r = .57–.85) with promising,
if provisional, indications of convergent validity (r = .11–.73,
p < .05) in relation to measures that reflected critical elements of
each competency domain.

Table 3
Sample 1 Correlations Among Variables in the 10-Item Professional Competencies Scale

Found. Funct. Cont. Self- Diversity Self- Prof. Formal CE/ Informal CE/
Variables PCS PCS PCS PCS care awareness efficacy LLL participation year year

PCS 1 .81** .85** .84** .13* .36** .39** .73** .32** .22** .25**
Found. PCS 1 .60** .53** .13* .31** .40** .55** .36** .20** .21**
Funct. PCS 1 .53** .11* .30** .45** .55** .20** .12* .20**
Cont. PCS 1 .10* .28** .12* .73** .24** .21** .21**
Self-care 1 .39** .19** .19** −.06 .06 .04
Diversity awareness 1 .28** .39** .12* .18** .19**
Self-efficacy 1 .30** −.00 .17** .13*
LLL 1 .27** .19** .28**
Prof. participation 1 .17** .22**
Formal CE/year 1 .12*
Informal CE/year 1
Note. Total N = 491. PCS = professional competencies scale; found. PCS = foundational competencies subscale; funct. PCS = functional competencies
subscale; cont. PCS = continuing competencies subscale; self-care = therapist self-care scale; diversity awareness = Miville-Guzman universality-diversity
scale-short form; self-efficacy = counselor self-efficacy scale; LLL = Jefferson scale of psychotherapist lifelong learning; and prof.
Participation = participation in professional activities (e.g., board membership, publications, presentations).
* p < .05. ** p < .001.
 118 TAYLOR AND NEIMEYER
Implications for Training
Cultivating a culture of competence and self-assessment in the
field of psychology has been an increasingly salient feature within
the literature on professional preparation in recent years (see Belar,
2009; Grus et al., 2016; Roberts et al., 2005; Rodolfa et al., 2010).
Based on the internal consistency and convergent validity of the
PCS, the present study provides provisional evidence that the scale
could be used as an efficient self-assessment tool for trainees and
psychologists and may act as an early gauge for identifying areas of
potential remediation. Because the PCS provides the measurement
of continuous variables along three dimensions of competence, it
might call attention to different developmental progress along
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
dimensions of competence and invite ongoing assessment in relation
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
to each of them.
Relatedly, the PCS might assist in providing a “common lan-
guage” between supervisors and supervisees as they explore, estab-
lish, and monitor goals for professional training and may support
important conversations between supervisors and supervisees
regarding trainees’ strengths and areas for improvement. It may
also contribute to the field’s efforts toward accountability by
encouraging the psychometrically sound assessment of competence
as part of a broader approach to the ongoing documentation of the
developmental gains that occur over the course of professional
education and training in preparation for independent practice.
Many training programs depend on cumulated hours of super-
vised clinical training and successful coursework completion as
measures of graduate student success. However, as Fouad et al.
(2009) point out, these indicators are “likely a poor proxy for actual
evaluation of competence” (p. S7). The PCS may offer incremental
value by providing a quantitative indicator of competence that might
usefully augment, triangulate, or validate other available indicators
of developing professional competence across the course of training
and practice. In short, the instrument may serve as one additional
tool in the competency toolbox (Kaslow et al., 2009).
Implications for Practice
Although the PCS can be used in settings with graduate students
and postdoctoral fellows, results from these studies suggest that the
measure may also offer promise to licensed psychologists, including
supervisors. As supervisors, practitioners may assess the founda-
tional competencies of their supervisees, and perhaps monitor the
emergence and development of their functional competencies, as
well. By continuing to expose them to additional opportunities for
learning and professional growth, they may embrace or facilitate
their commitment to their continuing competencies, as well, in
support of their overall professional development.
Likewise, in relation to themselves, the PCS may serve as a useful
tool to reflect on the range of elements that comprise foundational,
functional, and continuing competencies, and consider the ways in
which they evidence these elements in their daily practices. Using
the scale to monitor and reflect on these competencies may also
prove worthwhile, if only to document or benchmark current self-
appraisals in relation to subsequent shifts or gains, or to invite the
assessments of colleagues whose perspectives might augment the
self-appraisal of the practitioners themselves. As one element in a
broader portfolio of self-assessments, the PCS might also supple-
ment a more nuanced inventory of current skills and needs, an
appraisal of levels of self-care, or an identification of areas that
might benefit from continued development or identified areas of
desired change (see Neimeyer & Taylor, 2019). The movement
toward a more holistic assessment of ongoing professional devel-
opment (Roberts et al., 2005) suggests the potential value of the
inclusion of the PCS as one potential tool to facilitate both reflection
and documentation in relation to continuing professional growth and
competence.
Limitations
The considerable advantages of a brief, conceptually grounded,
and empirically derived assessment tool need to be balanced against
the important qualifications associated with self-report in general,
and self-assessment in particular. Because the PCS is a self-report
measure, the potential for participant response bias exists. And, as a
self-assessment measure, it accrues the range of additional chal-
lenges widely acknowledged within the field, each of which can
compromise the reliability or validity of the assessment (see
Dunning et al., 2004; Lilienfeld & Basterfield, 2020). Davis
et al. (2006) conducted an extensive review that compared the
accuracy of physician self-assessment with external assessments
of competence, for example, and found mixed results. Of the 20
comparisons analyzed, seven demonstrated a positive relationship
between internal and external assessments of competence while the
remainder reported little, no, or an inverse relationship between self-
and other-assessment. As noted elsewhere, Davis et al. noted that
some of the least-skilled professionals were also among those most
confident and favorable in their self-assessments (see Dunning
et al., 2004), underscoring the importance of caution and triangula-
tion when it comes to the interpretation of self-assessment measures,
including the PCS.
In addition, researchers have highlighted the range of widely
different conceptualizations of competency in psychology, each of
which carries important implications for the ways in which compe-
tence is assessed (Lichtenberg et al., 2007). The current instrument
derives from, and adheres to, a particular developmental conceptu-
alization of competence and the data it yields need to be interpreted
within the context of that conceptualization.
Each of these limitations suggests that the future utility of the PCS
may be best registered in relation to its application as a brief
screening tool, or its inclusion within a broader set of assessments
designed to bring a range of different measures together in a
triangulated way, with self-assessment forming only one element
within the context of other conceptually coherent measures that
leverage the input of other peers, supervisory, or behavioral inputs
that collectively might inform a more accurate and complete assess-
ment of current competence.
Furthermore, as an exploratory instrument, the utility of the PCS
can only be established by its future applications in a range of clinical
and empirical contexts. Its value remains promissory at this point, and
only future efforts will be able to determine its potential utility in
relation to documenting or predicting variables of clinical signifi-
cance at various levels of professional development (e.g., practicum,
internship, independent practice).
Relatedly, the brevity of the instrument highlights a range of its
potential limitations, as well as applications. As a very brief
measure, the PCS may have wide applicability in a broad range
of contexts that require time-sensitive assessment, but this likely
 THE PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCIES SCALE
weighs against the value of a more granular assessment that might
follow from more detailed measurements that incorporate a wider
range of indicators or contexts. It remains for future research to
determine the relationship between these various indicators of
professional competence, and the extent to which the PCS may
provide any incremental value in relation to those other measures.
Future Directions for Research
Fouad et al. (2009) note that the Competency Assessment
Toolkit, which is what the PCS was built upon, “has been received
positively and appears to have face validity, [but] future directions
will need to include assessment of its utility in application and
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
predictive validity” (p. S25). Following Fouad et al.’s call for
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
predictive validity, the PCS could be examined to determine how
well it predicts competencies. This could be accomplished by
comparing a trainee’s scores on the PCS to clinical outcomes or
a supervisor’s rating of the trainee. The implementation of sound
competency assessments should involve several methods of assess-
ment (see Schulte & Daly, 2009), and the PCS could represent one
such assessment, along with other measures of objective assess-
ments, such as the utilization of 360° evaluations.
Additionally, future research needs to assess the applicability of
the PCS within culturally diverse samples. The representativeness of
the samples utilized in each of the four samples in this study does not
speak directly to issues of diversity or the potentially differential
utility of the instrument among diverse populations. Thus, the
applicability of the instrument across a range of dimensions of
diversity remains to be demonstrated in future research.
Lastly, in all four samples, foundational, functional, and continu-
ing competencies were moderately correlated with each other,
suggesting that the competencies may develop in tandem (see
Table 3). This finding contrasts with other scholars, who suggest
that competencies may not develop at the same pace, particularly
among trainees (see Stoltenberg, 2005). Because the present studies
explored competencies among trainees nearing the end of their
training and those already licensed, future studies may benefit from a
broader examination of professional growth across the full range of
professional development, beginning at the earliest stages of
training.
These and other potential extensions of this line of research may
contribute to growing attention to the empirical study of professional
competence. Because the study of professional competence must
await the development of assessment tools adequate to the task,
future research should first concentrate on the replication and
extension of the current findings, examining the psychometric
properties of the PCS and determining the extent to which it
provides predictive validity in relation to meaningful markers of
professional development and competence. If work continues to
support the reliability and validity of this instrument, the PCS could
be used as a succinct measure of self-assessment for psychologists or
trainees.
Concluding Remarks
Assessing, remediating, and building upon professional compe-
tencies are critical to ethical practice and positive clinical outcomes.
The PCS may support these efforts by providing an efficient and
effective assessment tool. Rodolfa et al. (2010) note that the
119
cultivation of competence is predicated on the assessment of
competence. The purpose of this study was to advance the latter
in support of the former. The development of the Professional
Competency Scale constitutes one incremental step in support of this
ongoing competency movement within the field of professional
psychology.
References
American Psychological Association (APA). (2006). APA task force on the
assessment of competence in professional psychology: Final report. http://
www.apa.org/ed/resources/competency-revised.pdf
American Psychological Association (APA). (2018). 2007–2016: Demo-
graphics of the U.S. psychology workforce. Center for Workforce Studies.
https://www.apa.org/workforce/publications/16-demographics/index
Belar, C. D. (2009). Advancing the culture of competence. Training and
Education in Professional Psychology, 3(4, Suppl.), S63–S65. https://
doi.org/10.1037/a0017541
Brown, R. C., Southam-Gerow, M. A., McLeod, B. D., Wheat, E. B., Tully,
C. B., Reise, S. P., Kendall, P. C., & Weisz, J. R. (2018). The global
therapist competence scale for youth psychosocial treatment: Develop-
ment and initial validation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 74(4), 649–
664. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22537
Brucato, B., & Neimeyer, G. (2009). Epistemology as a predictor of
psychotherapists’ self-care and coping. Journal of Constructivist Psychol-
ogy, 22(4), 269–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/10720530903113805
Cox, D. R., & Grus, C. L. (2019). From continuing education to continuing
competence. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 50(2),
113–119. https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000232
Davis, D. A., Mazmanian, P. E., Fordis, M., Harrison, R. V., Thorpe, K. E., &
Perrier, L. (2006). Accuracy of physician self-assessment with observed
measures of competence. Journal of the American Medical Association,
296(9), 1094–1102. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.9.1094
Davis, D. E., DeBlaere, C., Owen, J., Hook, J. N., Rivera, D. P., Choe, E.,
Van Tongeren, D. R., Worthington, E. L., & Placeres, V. (2018). The
multicultural orientation framework: A narrative review. Psychotherapy:
Theory, Research, & Practice, 55(1), 89–100. https://doi.org/10.1037/
pst0000160
Dowd, E. T. (2001). Board certification (Diplomate) in behavioral psychol-
ogy. The Behavior Analyst Today, 2(1), 15–17. https://doi.org/10.1037/
h0099904
Dunning, D., Heath, C., & Suls, J. M. (2004). Flawed self-assessment:
Implications for health, education, and the workplace. Psychological
Science in the Public Interest, 5(3), 69–106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j
.1529-1006.2004.00018.x
Edwards, H. P. (2000). A framework for the determination of competencies in
relation to mobility for psychology under the AIT (pp. 1–25). Psychology
Sectoral Workgroup on the Agreement on Internal Trade.
Fouad, N. A., Grus, C. L., Hatcher, R. L., Kaslow, N. J., Hutchings, P. S.,
Madson, M. B., Collins, F. L., Jr., & Crossman, R. E. (2009). Competency
benchmarks: A model for understanding and measuring competence in
professional psychology across training levels. Training and Education in
Professional Psychology, 3(3), S5–S26. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015832
Fuertes, J. N., Miville, M. L., Mohr, J. J., Sedlacek, W. E., & Gretchen, D.
(2000). Factor structure and short form of the Miville-Guzman
universality-diversity scale. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling &
Development, 33(3), 157–169. https://doi.org/10.1080/07481756.2000
.12069007
Grus, C. L., Falender, C., Fouad, N. A., & Lavelle, A. K. (2016). A culture of
competence: A survey of implementation of competency-based education
and assessment. Training and Education in Professional Psychology,
10(4), 198–205. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000126
Hatcher, R. L., & Lassiter, K. D. (2007). Initial training in professional
psychology: The practicum competencies outline. Training and Education
 120 TAYLOR AND NEIMEYER
in Professional Psychology, 1(1), 49–63. https://doi.org/10.1037/1931-
3918.1.1.49
Hojat, M., Veloski, J. J., & Gonnella, J. S. (2009). Measurement and
correlates of physicians’ lifelong learning. Continuing Medical Education,
84(8), 1066–1074. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181acf25f
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in
covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alterna-
tives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/
10705519909540118
Kaslow, N. J., Grus, C. L., Campbell, L. F., Fouad, N. A., Hatcher, R. L., &
Rodolfa, E. R. (2009). Competency assessment toolkit for professional
psychology. Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3(4),
S27–S45. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015833
Kegel, K., & DeBlaere, C. (2014). Universal-diverse orientation in Asian
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
international students: Confirmatory factor analysis of the Miville-
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Guzman universality-diversity scale, short form. Cultural Diversity &
Ethnic Minority Psychology, 20(3), 469–474. https://doi.org/10.1037/
a0034746
Kerns, R. D., Berry, S., Frantsve, L. M. E., & Linton, J. C. (2009). Life-long
competency development in clinical health psychology. Professional
Psychology, Research and Practice, 3(4), 212–217. https://doi.org/10
.1037/a0016753
Lichtenberg, J. W., Portnoy, S. M., Bebeau, M. J., Leigh, I. W., Nelson, P. D.,
Rubin, N. J., Smith, I. L., & Kaslow, N. J. (2007). Challenges to the
assessment of competence and competencies. Professional Psychology,
Research and Practice, 38(5), 474–478. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-
7028.38.5.474
Lilienfeld, S. O., & Basterfield, C. (2020). Reflective practice in clinical
psychology: Reflections from basic psychological science. Clinical Psy-
chology: Research and Science, 27(2), Article e12352.
Mahoney, M. J. (1997). Psychotherapists’ personal problems and self-care
patterns. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 28(1), 14–16.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.28.1.14
Melchert, T. T., Hays, V. L., Wiljanen, L. M., & Kolocek, A. K. (1996).
Testing models of counselor development with a measure of counseling
self-efficacy. Journal of Counseling and Development, 74(6), 640–644.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1996.tb02304.x
Neimeyer, G. J., & Taylor, J. M. (2019). Advancing the assessment of
professional learning, self-care, and competence. Professional Psychol-
ogy, Research and Practice, 50(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.1037/
pro0000225
Roberts, M. C., Borden, K. A., Christiansen, M. D., & Lopez, S. J. (2005).
Fostering a culture shift: Assessment of competence in the education and
careers of professional psychologists. Professional Psychology, Research
and Practice, 36(4), 355–361. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.36
.4.355
Rodolfa, E., Bent, R., Eisman, E., Nelson, P., Rehm, L., & Ritchie, P.
(2005). A cube model for competency development: Implications for
psychology educators and regulators. Professional Psychology, Research
and Practice, 36(4), 347–354. https://doi.org/10.1037/0735-7028.36
.4.347
Rodolfa, E., Schaffer, J. B., & Webb, C. (2010). Continuing education: The
path to life-long competence? Professional Psychology, Research and
Practice, 41(1), 295–297. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020424
Schulte, A. C., & Daly, E. J. (2009). Operationalizing and evaluating
professional competencies in psychology: Out with the old, in with the
new? Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 3(4, Suppl.),
S54–S58. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017155
Stoltenberg, C. D. (2005). Enhancing professional competence through
developmental approaches to supervision. American Psychologist,
60(8), 857–864. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.8.85
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th
ed.). Allyn and Bacon.
Taylor, J. M., Kolaski, A., Wright, H., Hashtpari, H., & Neimeyer, G. J.
(2018). Predicting the evolution of counseling psychology in the U.S.:
Results from a Delphi poll of academic training directors. Counselling
Psychology Quarterly, 32(2), 169–185. https://doi.org/10.1080/09515070
.2018.1428169
Taylor, J. M., & Neimeyer, G. J. (2015). The assessment of lifelong learning
in psychologists. Professional Psychology, Research and Practice, 46(6),
385–390. https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000027
Ullmann, C. A. (1947). The training of clinical psychologists. American
Psychologist, 2(5), 173–175. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0061681
Webster, T. G. (1971). National priorities for the continuing education of
psychologists. American Psychologist, 26(11), 1016–1019. https://doi.org/
10.1037/h0032256
Received January 8, 2021
Revision received May 3, 2021
Accepted May 25, 2021 ▪