IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/inorps/v10y2017i02p200-204_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Licensure of Industrial and Organizational Psychologists: It's Déjà Vu All Over Again 1

Author

Listed:
  • Kozlowski, Steve W. J.
  • Chao, Georgia T.

Abstract

If one has been involved in the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) since its inception, as we have, one will have had several opportunities to reflect on the issue of licensing to regulate the practice of industrial and organizational psychology (IOP). Some find value in licensure, but the vast majority of industrial and organizational (I-O) psychologists do not. As the target article written by the Licensure of Consulting and Industrial-Organizational (I-O) Psychologists (LCIOP) Joint Task Force (2017) documents, there have been several policy statements made by SIOP leadership over the years. The essence of SIOP's policy is quite clear and consistent. Although SIOP does not support and will not promote the licensure of I-O psychologists, it does support a pathway to licensure for those who desire it, and is supportive of efforts to reduce the many barriers to licensure for those who desire it. It is our understanding that SIOP's participation in the LCIOP Joint Task Force was predicated on this long-standing policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Kozlowski, Steve W. J. & Chao, Georgia T., 2017. "The Licensure of Industrial and Organizational Psychologists: It's Déjà Vu All Over Again 1," Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(2), pages 200-204, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:10:y:2017:i:02:p:200-204_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1754942617000104/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:inorps:v:10:y:2017:i:02:p:200-204_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/iop .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.