Forensic Psychology Postdoctoral Training in the United States: How Do Programs Meet National Guidelines and Standards?

The current paper reviews a sample of forensic psychology postdoctoral training programs in the United States during the 2016-2017 academic year. The authors conducted the initial multimethod data collection at the behest of their state legislature as part of an effort to advance state hospital and university cosponsored forensic psychology training programs. The authors collected data from 12 of the 25 (48%) existing forensic psychology postdoctoral fellowships in the United States, prioritizing programs with state hospital affiliations. Though some differences exist in how forensic psychology postdoctoral programs attempt to train to the core foundational and functional competencies outlined by the American Board of Forensic Psychology (ABFP), we found few instances in which the core competencies were formally and/or systematically assessed during the training year. The authors conclude that the sampled forensic psychology fellowships provide interesting and relevant training experiences that are centered around competencies established by the ABFP, and that an important next step in the field is to use the relevant competencies to construct a framework for consistent evaluation and feedback. Public Significance Statement National professional bodies have developed clear guidelines that delineate exit criteria for forensic psychology postdoctoral fellows, but there have been few published accounts of whether or how programs meet these guidelines. This paper briefly reviews the core features of forensic psychology postdoctoral training among a sample of 48% of operational fellowships. Programs attempt to meet the evolving standards for advanced forensic psychology training through similar training experiences, but few have formal mechanisms for evaluating foundational or functional competencies.