Advocacy and leadership in neuropsychology doctoral education: a developmental integration of perspectives on training

Advocacy has been identified as an important aspect of professional practice and identity in many subfields of health professions and science, including clinical neuropsychology. Despite this, opportunities for doctoral students to develop concrete skills related to advocacy and leadership more broadly within the specialty are sparse. An exploratory pilot survey was conducted to better understand neuropsychologists' prior training experiences with advocacy and leadership and their perspectives on how and when training should be provided. Sixty-eight neuropsychologists across career stages who self-identified as having had leadership or governance positions in psychology completed the survey. Thematic analysis of open responses was undertaken to identify primary themes related to training and education in advocacy and leadership. The majority of respondents (77.3%) were interested in receiving formal training or mentorship in advocacy/leadership. Even among neuropsychologists in formal leadership or governance positions, the majority had never participated in formal training opportunities in advocacy (76.5%) or leadership (60.3%), although most endorsed having received informal training and mentorship in leadership (76.5%). Most respondents believe that training should begin during doctoral training or earlier (68.7%). Perceived benefits of training include increased professional competency and relationships, while drawbacks included the time and cognitive cost of participation as well as limitations in the content and perspectives shared. These results highlight the importance of advocacy in neuropsychology training, as well as the current limited access to training opportunities. While engaging in this work may require some flexibility, creativity, and self-advocacy on the part of doctoral students, there are many ways for trainees and mentors to leverage existing skills and professional organizations to support trainees in developing advocacy competency. Specific recommendations for the integration of such training into doctoral training and case vignettes highlighting advocacy in action during doctoral training are provided.