부산대학교 도서관

It has long been documented that the acceptance rate of applicants from Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) backgrounds to Clinical Psychology training is lower than that of White applicants, resulting in a lack of ethnic diversity in the workforce. The selection process starts with meeting the minimum entry criteria, then moves on to the selection of applicants to invite to interviews, based on written applications. Previous research has found that BME applicants face additional socio-economic barriers to accessing training and that many are not proceeding past the earliest stage of the selection process. This study employed an experimental design to test whether ethnic status (whether BME or not), ethnic identity and personal values of potential shortlisters influenced this process. This study recruited a large sample (n=160) of Clinical Psychologists from both BME and non-BME backgrounds and were asked to rate the personal statements of BME and non-BME applicants. Analysis revealed no differences between BME and non-BME Clinical Psychologists in how they rated applicants, but BME applicants were rated higher than non-BME applications. A model including variables such as age, gender, ethnic status and ethnic identity accounted for 13% of the variance in BME application ratings but was not predictive of either BME or non-BME ratings. BME Clinical Psychologists rated value items Power, Achievement, Tradition and Security significantly higher than the non-BME Clinical Psychologists. Limitations of the study as well as implications for future research are discussed. The findings from this study underscore the importance of improving equity of access to Clinical Psychology training for individuals from ethnically minoritised backgrounds.