Date of Award


Document Type


Degree Name

Doctor of Psychology (PsyD)



First Advisor

Beverly J. Goodwin, Ph.D.

Second Advisor

Kimberely J. Husenits, Psy.D.

Third Advisor

Elizabeth A. Kincade, Ph.D.


This doctoral project was an exploratory investigation of the treatment of gender in the education and training of doctoral level psychology graduate students. Fifty-one doctoral level psychology programs, including Ph.D., Psy.D. and Ed.D. programs, were placed into one of three groups based on their orientation, practitioner-oriented program (P-OP), clinical research-oriented program (CR-OP), or combined orientation program (CP). The programs were surveyed by the analysis of their respective websites to explore how gender was currently treated in doctoral level psychology programs. Types and number of classes with a gender emphasis and training opportunities were examined. In addition, each program’s mission statement and learning objectives were reviewed to determine if these reference diversity, especially gender. The female-to-male faculty ratios were recorded, as were the presence of faculty with a diversity and/or gender specialty. Several hypotheses were investigated including: (1) whether P-OPs and/or CPs would have more gender education than CR-OPs; (2) whether programs located in urban settings would have more gender education than those that are located in suburban or rural settings; (3) whether programs that had a more equal female-to-male faculty ratio would offer a more gender-focused education; and (4) whether programs that had more faculty with gender and/or multicultural diversity expertise would have more genderfocused education. Results indicated that both P-OPs and CPs had a significantly greater emphasis on gender education than CR-OPs. Location had no impact on gender education. While not significant, there did seem to be a moderately strong correlation between gender education and both higher female: male faculty ratios and faculty expertise. Future research could focus on the faculty and students’ perceptions of the current status of gender education, as well as the models of the programs that appear to be successfully integrating gender into their curriculum.