Rehabilitation psychology · 2026
Rehabilitation psychology: 2024 state of the field survey.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Baker Laurie N, Waldron-Perrine Brigid, Karol Robert L, Barisa Mark, Stern Greg A, Sweatman W Mark
Аннотация
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE: To date, only one "salary survey" has been published to depict state of the field information specifically for the specialty of rehabilitation psychology (Baker et al., 2022) Given workforce challenges identified since the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors initiated an updated survey to obtain comprehensive information regarding the current workforce. This study provides improved data on rehabilitation psychologists' demographics, geography, board certification, training, and salary information. The current article provides comparisons with the prior survey and discusses advocacy implications for the future of the specialty with respect to service, policy, payment, public impact, and protecting rehabilitation psychology.
RESEARCH METHOD/DESIGN: Members of the American Psychological Association (APA) Division 22 Practice Committee designed, tested, and disseminated the survey via Division 22 membership email listserv. This resulted in a voluntary convenience sample of 295 responses, of which 285 were included in the final data analyses.
RESULTS: Findings indicated that 81% of respondents were Division 22 members; most were women (76%), worked in hospitals/medical centers (64%), held PhD degrees (66%), worked in urban/suburban settings (97%), and had a traditional salary compensation structure (65%). Significant income differences were identified based on gender, age, degree, certification, years licensed, job title, and workplace setting. There were no significant differences found by race, disability, population served, or region.
CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Inferences related to salary information, gender, race, ethnicity, workload, reimbursement issues, and implications for our current and future workforce, including the need for additional analyses of experiential information such as quality-of-life items, are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
RESEARCH METHOD/DESIGN: Members of the American Psychological Association (APA) Division 22 Practice Committee designed, tested, and disseminated the survey via Division 22 membership email listserv. This resulted in a voluntary convenience sample of 295 responses, of which 285 were included in the final data analyses.
RESULTS: Findings indicated that 81% of respondents were Division 22 members; most were women (76%), worked in hospitals/medical centers (64%), held PhD degrees (66%), worked in urban/suburban settings (97%), and had a traditional salary compensation structure (65%). Significant income differences were identified based on gender, age, degree, certification, years licensed, job title, and workplace setting. There were no significant differences found by race, disability, population served, or region.
CONCLUSIONS/IMPLICATIONS: Inferences related to salary information, gender, race, ethnicity, workload, reimbursement issues, and implications for our current and future workforce, including the need for additional analyses of experiential information such as quality-of-life items, are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).