Cross-Cultural Training

Cross-cultural training, also referred to as multicultural counseling competence training, denotes the process of instructing psychologists-in-training to work effectively across cultures in their practice and research activities. The term cross-cultural (or multicultural) has been defined in the counseling psychology literature in two distinct ways. One definition of cross-cultural is broad and inclusive of a wide variety of reference group identities (e.g., race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, social class). More traditional uses of the term, which emerged in the 1960s, were specific to different ethnicities, within and beyond the borders of the United States. On the basis of salience of race as a marker in the United States, many scholars during the 1980s and 1990s argued for a more specific definition of cross-cultural (multicultural) that focuses on domestic racial, ethnic, and linguistic minority groups. Because there has been increased attention to international issues in the field of counseling psychology during recent years (for instance, three of the five presidents of the Society for Counseling Psychology between 2003 and 2007 positioned counseling psychology in a global sphere), cross-cultural, for the purposes of this entry, refers to race and ethnicity within both domestic and international contexts.

The rapidly changing demographics of the U.S. domestic population and the transnational reach of counseling psychology make cross-cultural training increasingly critical in the overall education of applied psychologists. However, despite the importance the American Psychological Association (APA) has placed on cross-cultural training and the growing percentages of people of color in the United States served by applied psychologists, clients from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds nonetheless continue to average fewer sessions, terminate more quickly, and utilize services less often than their non-Hispanic White counterparts. Racial and ethnic minority individuals oftentimes do not view counseling as addressing their needs, or perhaps untrained, culturally insensitive therapists leave too many minority clients feeling misunderstood. If clients are not considered within their sociocultural contexts as they understand and experience them, a host of potential negative implications might ensue with regard to case conceptualization (e.g., minimizing the importance of contextual factors), diagnosis (e.g., overpathologizing clients from different cultures on the basis of their different world-views), and treatment (e.g., difficulty establishing the therapeutic alliance, inappropriate interventions). Therapeutic services designed from a universalist framework—a theoretical approach based on White middle-class male values that assumes a set of universal laws of human functioning—may not be appropriate in contexts where diverse worldviews and cultural values prevail. On the other hand, counselors (of various ethnicities) who have received cross-cultural training and demonstrate adequate levels of multicultural competence and sensitivity generally will minimize mistakes made in cross-cultural counseling and thus provide better, more appropriate services to clients of various racial and ethnic backgrounds.

Changing demographics in the academy also call attention to the importance of cross-cultural sensitivity in university classrooms and other training settings (e.g., practica). Traditional forms of pedagogy that rely on the universalist approach are not relevant for many students of diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. To recruit and retain graduate students from a variety of racial and ethnic backgrounds, training programs must make the curriculum relevant for these students. Although demographic trends reveal increasing [Page 1087]numbers of domestic students of color in undergraduate psychology programs (25% in 2000), many do not enroll in graduate study, or they withdraw before obtaining their doctorates. The teaching and training of psychology must become culturally relevant and appropriate for students from diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds so that they can (a) feel respected and validated in academic environments, thus leading to greater rates of completion; (b) bring relevant knowledge, grounded in empirical research, back to their communities; and (c) transform the ways in which psychological services are provided to a wide range of people. Based on data collected by the APA Research Office in 2000, the immediate reality remains that the majority of psychologists in the workforce (91%) and psychologists-in-training (78%) are White, and many are apathetic or resistant to cross-cultural training. With regard to internationalization, increasing numbers of international students are enrolling in applied psychology graduate programs and are being hired in academic positions in the United States or abroad in their countries of origin.

...