Journal of Humanistic

Psychology
http://jhp.sagepub.com/

Fostering Community: Explicating Commonalities Between

Counseling Psychology and Humanistic Psychology
Aaron D. Miller, Trisha Nash and Danielle G. Fetty
Journal of Humanistic Psychology 2014 54: 476 originally published online 7
January 2014
DOI: 10.1177/0022167813516795

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://jhp.sagepub.com/content/54/4/476

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Association for Humanistic Psychology

Additional services and information for Journal of Humanistic Psychology can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://jhp.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://jhp.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations: http://jhp.sagepub.com/content/54/4/476.refs.html

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

 >> Version of Record - Sep 11, 2014

OnlineFirst Version of Record - Jan 7, 2014

What is This?

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

516795
research-article2014
JHPXXX10.1177/0022167813516795Journal of Humanistic PsychologyMiller et al.

Article
Journal of Humanistic Psychology
2014, Vol. 54(4) 476­–493
Fostering Community: © The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permissions:
Explicating sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0022167813516795
Commonalities Between jhp.sagepub.com

Counseling Psychology
and Humanistic
Psychology

Aaron D. Miller1, Trisha Nash2,

and Danielle G. Fetty1

Abstract
Humanistic psychology and counseling psychology share many of the same
core values. This article focuses on three specific common characteristics:
strength-based approaches, qualitative methodology, and multiculturalism.
In contrast with the prominence of the medical model, both domains
work from a holistic understanding of the person. Additionally, most of
the development and progress within qualitative research methodologies
has taken place in counseling and humanistic psychology. Third, these areas
of psychology value culture, context, and members of underrepresented
groups. Finally, suggestions are provided for future communication and
collaboration.

Keywords
humanistic psychology, counseling psychology, multiculturalism, qualitative
research

1Southern Illinois University Carbondale, IL, USA

2The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN, USA

Corresponding Author:
Aaron D. Miller, Department of Psychology, Southern Illinois University, 201E Life Science II,
Carbondale, IL 62901-6502, USA.
Email: millerad@siu.edu

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

Miller et al. 477

Despite its myriad contributions to the field of psychology at large, those

professionals outside of the specialty do not always understand humanistic
psychology. When thinking about the field of humanistic psychology as a
whole, numerous reactions may come to mind. While other specialties and
theories may paint the discipline as “soft” or “simplistic,” the true definition
of the paradigm is one that values strengths, context, and diversity in contrast
with the overwhelming popularity of more reductionistic models that deem-
phasize these crucial variables. Humanistic psychology encourages multiple
methods of scientific inquiry, holistic models, and attention to cultural con-
text—all of which can be seen in the values and training of such training
programs that are historically rooted in the paradigm. With the limited num-
ber of doctoral programs strictly focused on humanistic psychology, it is
increasingly important to find places and ways to foster the development of
future humanistic psychologists. Doing so will ensure that the contributions
of humanistic psychology continue to affect both research and practice in
vital, substantial ways.
It seems that, today, many of the highly regarded humanistic psychologists
are coming from traditional training programs, showing that there is a need to
foster the connection and general acceptance of humanistic thought in vari-
ous educational fields (Clay, 2002). One notable trend is the burgeoning
activity of students on humanistic psychology social media groups.
Considering the growing interest and activity in the discipline from younger
generations of psychologists, humanistic psychology has an opportunity to
increase its impact within psychology as a whole (Bargdill, 2011). The
authors propose that humanistic psychology can broaden its influence by fos-
tering relationships within counseling psychology.
The American Psychological Association (APA) recognizes counseling
psychology as a distinctive specialization within the domain of psychology at
large (APA, 1999). Counseling psychologists work in a number of therapeu-
tic, academic, and research settings. Historically, counseling psychology has
focused on issues of adjustment and the normal development of a wide vari-
ety of clients. Based on presuppositions that mirror many of those held by
humanistic psychology, counseling psychology is an area of education and
training in which there seems to be a natural connection. In particular, there
are three important similarities between the domains: (a) use of qualitative
research methodologies, (b) depathologizing of the human experience, and
(c) emphasis on community/cultural issues.
Qualitative methodology has been widely used in counseling psychology
over the years (Neimeyer & Diamond, 2001; Ponterotto, 2005; Wampold,
1987). Morrow (2007) noted that numerous recent books, special journal
issues, and qualitative studies suggest that counseling psychologists express

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

478 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 54(4)

an openness toward postmodern forms of research methodology. Second, a

strength-based approach, in contrast to a pathology model, has been consis-
tent throughout the existence of counseling psychology and underlies the
development of the domain (Fretz, 1985; Gelso & Fretz, 2001). Counseling
psychology has emphasized the positive aspects of human experience in
research, training, and practice (Gelso & Fretz, 2001; Linley, 2006). Last, an
attention to multicultural diversity in practice is one of the hallmarks of coun-
seling psychology (Constantine, Miville, & Kindaichi, 2008; Gelso &
Fassinger, 1992; Heppner, Casas, Carter, & Stone, 2000). The disciple has
noted the importance of multicultural competence in training psychothera-
pists to serve a broader clientele (Katz, 1985; Leong & Blustein, 2000; Leong
& Gupta, 2008; Leong & Ponterotto, 2003). By recognizing and integrating
the commonalities, training programs may begin bridging the gap between
humanistic psychology and counseling psychology and increasing the poten-
tial impact of humanistic approaches within the field. This article will delin-
eate in greater detail how the assumptions of humanistic psychology and
counseling psychology have a number of important commonalities.
Additionally, we will address and discuss practical suggestions of ways to
increase the necessary communication and connection within the two
communities.

Diverse Research Methodology

A clear connection between counseling and humanistic psychology is the
reverence for a diversity of research methodologies. Seventy years ago,
Gordon Allport (1942) called for an expansion of qualitative methodology in
psychology, but quantitative research continues to dominate the field as a
whole. Both counseling and humanistic psychology took note of this sugges-
tion and began to promote qualitative methods in the following decades. In
many ways, qualitative methods in psychological research have primarily
developed in the setting of the two specialties.
Beginning in the late 1970s, counseling psychology called attention to the
need for alternative research methodologies rather than a strictly empirical
approach (Gelso, 1979). The discipline recognized the limits of quantitative
methodology and began advocating for research that explored the complexity
and individual context of human experience. In the 1980s, counseling psy-
chologists such as Borgen (1984) and Howard (1984) continued to argue for
the merits of qualitative research. A decade later, counseling psychology
noted that “receptivity to alternative methodologies is now at a high pitch”
(Gelso & Fassinger, 1990, p. 373). In 1992, the first research design book in
counseling psychology argued that “methodological diversity is essential for

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

Miller et al. 479

important advances in the field of counseling and development” (Heppner,

Kivlighan, & Wampold, 1992, p. 11). Finally, in 2005, a special issue of the
Journal of Counseling Psychology focused on qualitative methodology in an
attempt to advance the acceptance of a diversity of methods (Ponterotto,
2005). Through a gradual process, counseling psychology has moved away
from the positivism and postpositivism held by its mainstream counterparts
and begun to embrace more diverse research methodologies.
While it should be of no surprise that positivist and postpositivist research
had dominated mainstream psychology (Camic, Rhodes, & Yardley, 2003;
Denzin & Lincoln, 2000; McLeod, 2001; Morrow & Smith, 2000; Ponterotto,
2005; Rennie, 2002), qualitative methodology has made significant advance-
ments. Rennie, Watson, and Monteiro (2002) conducted a content analysis
from 1900 until 1999 to study the impact of qualitative research. The research-
ers entered five keywords into the PsycINFO database: qualitative research,
grounded theory, discourse analysis, phenomenological psychology, and
empirical phenomenology. After tracking these terms across the 20th century,
the authors discovered that there was a slight increase in these methods.
Unfortunately, even during the years with the highest usage of these method-
ologies, analyses revealed that less than half of 1% of the research produced
a match with the aforementioned keywords (Rennie et al., 2002).
Some scholars have expressed fear that the state of psychological research
is becoming isolated from other social sciences due to the relatively slower
acceptance and utilization of qualitative methodologies (Ponterotto, 2005).
And while there is an increase in the number of qualitative studies, it does not
appear that all are using a strong philosophical and theoretical grounding in
their conceptualizations. Many studies continue to employ a strong postposi-
tivistic lens even when purportedly using a qualitative methodology or the-
ory, which highlights the need for more in-depth training and understanding
of qualitative research paradigms (Ponterotto, 2005). We believe that human-
istic psychology has a lot to offer in clarifying the presuppositions and philo-
sophical underpinnings of various qualitative methods used in counseling
psychology.
In a survey of counseling psychology training directors, qualitative inquiry
and methodological diversity were rated as major trends in research that will
continue to influence the field (Neimeyer & Diamond, 2001). Morrow (2007)
argued that counseling psychology programs need to develop a renewed
commitment to training future generations of psychologists in qualitative
methodology. With the trend toward a more constructivist and phenomeno-
logical paradigm, psychologists will need to gain proficiency in qualitative
methods in order to be apt critics of psychological research (Morrow, 2007).
By increasing the exposure to methodological diversity, greater knowledge of

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

480 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 54(4)

these methods, and more effective training and preparation in graduate pro-
grams, we believe much progress can be made in helping to bridge the gap
between science and practice as well as between counseling psychology and
other fields.
While the field of psychology, as a whole, has underutilized qualitative
research, humanistic psychology—in addition to counseling psychology—
has been a central source for the development and acceptance of qualitative
methods. Literature in the existential-phenomenological domain has chal-
lenged the positivistic assumptions of what it means to be scientific. Rigorous
and insightful analyses of lived-world experiences in the writings of philoso-
phers such as Husserl (1977), Heidegger (1962), and Merleau-Ponty (1962)
provide examples of how qualitative inquiry can advance the knowledge of a
particular topic. Phenomenological analysis was later adopted and used for
psychological research (Wertz, 1985). In short, humanistic psychology val-
ues the nuanced understanding of human experience over generalizability.
Underlying contextual research approaches is a paradigm that honors the
importance of studying the person as a whole (Buhler, 1971), the inseparable
relationship between being and world necessitates the study of a subject
within a context. Phenomenological methodology is based on the assumption
that it is impossible to parse out an individual from his or her own experience
(von Eckartsberg, 1986). It is both impractical and impossible to try to reduce
experience to its composite parts. However, through the hermeneutic circle
researchers can continue to explore and reexamine the nature of rich and
meaningful phenomena. By engaging in dialogue between researcher and
participant rather than remaining an “objective” outsider to the individual’s
experience, we can gain a more meaningful understanding.
In addition, humanists and professionals in other fields have argued for the
legitimacy of qualitative methodology. Fischer (2006) asserts that qualitative
methods are no less empirical than experimentation, because the data are
accessible and open to critical examination. Giorgi (1985) points to the dis-
crepancy of the sophisticated progress of quantitative methods, while qualita-
tive methodology is relatively undeveloped. While there is certainly much
important information to be gained from nonreductive quantitative research,
the emphasis on prediction and explanation may detract from gaining a
deeper understanding of the subjective lived experience of individuals
(Ponterotto, 2005). In other words, quantitative methods emphasize internal
validity at the cost of external validity—thereby losing valuable information;
however, qualitative methods emphasize understanding and description.
Fischer (2006) has proposed that qualitative methods should not be con-
sidered as an absolute adversary to quantitative methods but rather as a more
holistic approach to understanding human beings. She proclaimed that we are

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

Miller et al. 481

now at an important junction in psychology in which there is a wonderful

opportunity to show the importance of qualitative work. Rather than com-
plain about the bias toward quantitative methods, scholars can more mean-
ingfully change the field by increasing their output of high-quality qualitative
research (Fischer, 2006). The emphasis on qualitative research in humanistic
programs over the last several decades has led to corresponding growth of the
method (Giorgi, 1985). With increased growth and legitimacy of diverse
research methods, the fields of counseling and humanistic psychology are
likely to blossom in the coming years. Attempts to connect the two areas with
common interest have been demonstrated by Wertz (2005). Perhaps by
increasing awareness of the other, increasing collaboration, and strengthen-
ing communication ties, we will be able to begin building the bridges between
counseling and humanistic psychology.

Strength-Based and Holistic Models

Counseling psychology and humanistic psychology share a number of under-
lying core assumptions that have come to define the two fields, including a
belief in human strengths and potential for growth as a model of understand-
ing individuals; the view of a healthy individual and emphasis on the holistic
view of the person rather than a focus on pathological categories; and the
focus on positive aspects of human experience. Despite these profound philo-
sophical similarities and similar origins from the “third force” of psychology,
humanistic psychology and counseling psychology have continued to be con-
sidered separate domains in training, research, and practice. In addition,
training programs have neglected to successfully integrate the central tenets
of the two fields, overlooking the more human side of psychology and operat-
ing from a traditionally medical mindset, with a focus on manualized treat-
ments (Chu et al., 2012; Ridley & Mollen, 2011).
A strengths-based approach, in contrast to a pathology model, has been
consistent throughout the existence of counseling psychology and has influ-
enced its development over the years (Fretz, 1985; Gelso & Fretz, 2001).
Humanistic psychology and counseling psychology continue to promote the
conviction that individuals are capable of overcoming adversity and achiev-
ing their potential. Unfortunately, views of growth and actualization have not
always coincided with the philosophies of Western thought, which until
recently has emphasized positivistic values and objectivity. When taking the
medical model as a frame of reference, the emphasis is on the reduction of
symptoms as a measure of the return to homeostasis. This type of model is
one that seems to be applied within societal views and policies and has been
popularized in psychological research. In contrast, theorists such as Maslow

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

482 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 54(4)

(1962) posited radically different notions, suggesting that it is fallacious for

our goal to be to simply return to the prior state of being. Instead of a focus
on a return to homeostasis, the aim should be to strive toward full human
potential—going beyond relief of symptoms to the root of an issue (Buhler,
1971). This is an area where counseling psychology and humanistic psychol-
ogy have emerged as pioneers.
Counseling psychology has distinguished itself from other areas in psy-
chology by emphasizing positive aspects of human experience within the dis-
cipline (Gelso & Fretz, 2001; Linley, 2006). In the last century, a number of
individuals have aided in the development of the strengths-based model,
which has helped define the field. Early on, Frank Parsons (1909) empha-
sized the use of strengths and human potential in his educational and voca-
tional counseling work during the aftermath of World War II (Lopez et al.,
2006). Later, Carl Rogers made significant contributions to both counseling
and humanistic psychology. Through his therapy, Rogers demonstrated the
importance of self-actualizing tendencies and the supporting natural human
affinity toward growth (Lopez et al., 2006). Finally, Leona Tyler (1973)
stated in her Division 17 (Counseling Psychology) presidential address at the
APA conference, “Modern scientific psychology is rooted in hope.” As such,
counseling psychology has had a rich history of emphasizing strengths and
human potential. However, these views have not always been recognized for
their shared base with the humanistic family of therapies.
Many theorists traditionally associated with humanistic psychology, such
as Fromm (1941), Goldstein (1939), Maslow (1962), Rogers (1951), and
May (1969), have long argued for the importance of growth, human potential,
and self-actualizing tendencies, which means emphasizing a focus on the per-
son who is having difficulties rather than the difficulties themselves (Buhler,
1971). In a departure from previously held psychodynamic theories, human-
istic psychology demonstrated the ability of individuals to “self-right” and
stabilize after negative experiences or psychopathology. This shift attributed
more power to individuals in the changes that occurred rather than providing
rationales based in the past or focusing on thoughts or behaviors. Individuals
are not “determined” by psychopathology but rather have the strengthened
capacity for resilience. Furthermore, many individuals are not only able to
return to their previous level of well-being but are actually able to transcend
their experience of pathology and achieve a fuller potential than before
(Buhler, 1971; Clay, 2002).
Counseling psychology and humanistic psychology also share the view
that encouraging development of new strengths, or augmenting existing ones,
makes individuals better able to cope with pathology (Linley, 2006). In recent
years, positive psychology has become a part of the zeitgeist associated with

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

Miller et al. 483

discussion of strengths and resilience (Lopez et al., 2006). Seligman (2011),

a known figure among positive psychology, described the impact of resil-
iency training in the U.S. military in contrast to the previously used symp-
tom-reduction model. This is perhaps a sign that society may be adopting the
notion that bolstering human strengths can serve to be a powerful basis of
resilience. Though these views have come to be associated with positive psy-
chology, they come from the foundations of humanistic and counseling psy-
chology. Despite the burgeoning research regarding strengths and resilience,
there appears to be a widening gap in its association with counseling and
humanistic psychology and strengths-based models. Positive psychology has
distanced itself from its humanistic roots by failing to recognize its philo-
sophical origins, oversimplifying complex concepts and theories, and criti-
cizing the humanistic field for lackadaisical research methodology (Friedman
& Robbins, 2012). Though they have common underpinnings, positive psy-
chology asserts itself as a new theory of human strengths and potential, inde-
pendent of humanistic psychology. On a larger scale, this perhaps represents
a substantial trend in society to marginalize humanistic psychology, despite
its common goals with other areas within psychology (Friedman & Robbins,
2012).
In many ways, positive psychology has been a significant force within the
field and has had a sizable impact on humanistic and counseling psychology
due to its more marketable nature. It has been associated with many self-help
movements and has been promoted to society at large, as opposed to more
specialized areas in psychology, such as humanistic psychology. Thus, posi-
tive psychology has had a much louder voice in the field due to greater pub-
licity and advertising compared with humanistic and counseling psychology.
Unsurprisingly, it is more commonly discussed and taught within training
programs. Because positive psychology has gained greater exposure and
awareness, and has the “louder voice,” so to speak, many counseling psy-
chologists seem unaware of the importance and potential influence of human-
istic philosophies. This includes their connection to positive psychology,
which is often neglected or diluted in mainstream training programs and
coursework. Counseling psychology has shared some commonalities with
both positive and humanistic views, but it is necessary to continue emphasiz-
ing the overlapping nature and common base of strengths-based philosophies
between humanistic and counseling psychology within training programs. By
emphasizing connections between them and realizing that they embody com-
mon values, their potential impact and power increases.
In keeping with the emphasis on the positive and healing aspects of
humanity comes the belief that health is more than the absence of pathology.
Research on well-being suggests that there are a number of factors

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

484 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 54(4)

that contribute to increasing psychological health, including flexibility,

strengths-building, coping, optimism, and hope, among others (Linley, 2006).
In addition, numerous studies have shown the long-term effectiveness of bol-
stering existing strengths and developing new ones on mental health and
resilience (Seligman, 2011). As such, preventative work is also a natural out-
growth of many strength-based approaches and is closely tied to counseling
psychology (Romano & Hage, 2000).
While traditional medical models have aimed to reduce negative symp-
tomatology in order to achieve health, counseling psychology and humanistic
psychology have sought to increase choice, well-being, and striving (Buhler,
1971; Clay, 2002; Lopez et al., 2006). Alternately, many sage figures of
humanistic psychology have emphasized the importance of authenticity, as
opposed to simple hedonic notions of happiness and well-being found in
much of the positive psychology literature (Medlock, 2012). Here, the view
of authenticity originates from an existential-phenomenological perspective
and places emphasis on the importance of self-defined values, choice and
commitment, awareness in lived experience, genuine interaction between
others in the environment, and an organized and integrated sense of self
(Medlock, 2012). Accordingly, a more authentic selfhood is potentially more
influential than the pursuit of more popularized notions of happiness and
health. While this is a different perspective of strengths than that of positive
psychology, it provides another view that is also very holistic. This view is in
contrast to the medical model, which overlooks individual strengths and
potential by focusing on individual deficits, thereby providing a one-sided
view of experience.
Modern science has implicitly underscored the importance of singular,
isolating facets of human experience, while neglecting holistic views of the
person (Buhler, 1971). This is evident in the current methods of diagnosis,
which inherently emphasize one aspect of an individual—psychopathol-
ogy—over strengths, culture, and environmental context. Hence, there is a
valuing of information “about” an individual versus an understanding or
sharing of their experience (Buhler, 1971). Borgen (1984) points out the
irony of modern science that attempts to demystify human behavior and
experience through empirical research, but in actuality further confuses our
understanding due to compartmentalizing experience. The current system of
diagnosing individuals according to symptoms or specific behaviors, thereby
providing them with a label, fails to consider the person as a whole. In keep-
ing with holistic views, counseling psychology has traditionally examined
individuals in the context of social and cultural influences (Borgen, 1984),
and humanistic psychology has emphasized that experience and behavior
occur within the context of an individual’s environment and subjective

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

Miller et al. 485

experience (Buhler, 1971). Hence, both approaches favor the holistic view of
a person.
Gelso and Fassinger (1992) noted that humanistic theories of personality
dovetail with the values of counseling psychology. As can be seen above,
humanistic psychology and counseling psychology have a number of com-
monalities in terms of strengths-based approaches, views of human nature,
conceptualization of pathology, and focus on human potential and growth.
Unfortunately, the two still appear split in the view of modern society and are
often not well integrated within graduate training programs. In addition,
these views have often been neglected by mainstream psychology, despite
their significant contributions to the field (Clay, 2002). By continuing to fos-
ter the connections between the two communities and by bringing a more
powerful and unified voice to mainstream psychology, we can expect to see
a budding impact on what is considered “pathological” in the broader field of
psychology.

Multicultural Focus/Acceptance
In the past decades, multiculturalism has become a focus in the field of
counseling and psychology, including the development of the field of mul-
ticultural counseling and of APA guidelines for multicultural training and
education (APA, 2003). Beyond the focus on multiculturalism in psychol-
ogy, there has been an additional focus on the development of multicultural
ideals in both the fields of counseling psychology and humanistic
psychology.
Within the field of psychology, and counseling psychology in particular,
multicultural education has become a tenet of training and educational pro-
grams. The first mention of multiculturalism within psychology appeared at
the Vail Conference of 1973, which recommended the inclusion of cultural
diversity within doctoral programs. This recommendation led to the inclu-
sion of cultural diversity in the accreditation handbook as a component of
effective training (APA, 1986), and subsequently, the development of the
APA (2003) guidelines on multiculturalism. The inclusion of multicultural
competence in training programs was implemented to ensure a more ade-
quate understanding and knowledge of the differences between cultures, and
the different experiences nondominant cultures may have due to discrimina-
tions. These competency guidelines were very quickly incorporated into the
council of counseling psychology’s model training program (Murdock,
Alcorn, Heesacker, & Stoltenberg, 1998). As it stands, to gain accreditation
as an APA accredited program, the “gold standard” in the United States,
programs must show respect for, and understanding of, cultural and

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

486 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 54(4)

individual diversity in their recruitment of faculty and students, as well as in

their curriculum, retention, policies, and procedures. In addition, programs
must include and incorporate multiculturalism and diversity in all their
courses wherever relevant. The in-depth inclusion of multicultural issues
demonstrates the commitment that the field of counseling psychology has to
understanding the significant impact of cultural differences and experiences.
(Leong & Gupta, 2008).
The focus in counseling psychology mirrors the dedication of the field of
humanistic psychology to bring and address multicultural issues in the theo-
retical framework. It has been stated that many of the skills considered to be
the basics of humanistic psychology—active listening; creating an open,
non-judgmental space; attending to nonverbal communication—are skills
that bode well for connecting with diverse cultures, as they transcend lan-
guage and culture (Nelson-Jones, 2002). Additionally, there has been a push
in humanistic psychology to build bridges with multiculturalism in order to
allow for a therapy that is less ethnocentric (Leong & Gupta, 2008). This
includes incorporating and addressing spirituality and more Eastern philoso-
phies (Fukuyama, Murphy, & Siahpoush, 2003), humanistic models of mul-
ticulturalism (Jenkins, 2001), and existential cross-cultural counseling
(Vontress & Epp, 2001).
Scholars have argued that qualitative methods are particularly useful in
research (Morrow, Rakhsha, & Castandea, 2001; Ponterotto & Park-Taylor,
2007) and assessment (Goldman, 1990; Watkins & Campbell, 1990) with
diverse populations. In contrast to statistical methods that emphasize the
characterization of the mean, qualitative research and assessment taps the
worldview of members of marginalized populations. Humanistic psycholo-
gy’s connection with qualitative research has also drawn a multicultural con-
nection, as the use of qualitative research is well suited to studying
multicultural issues (Wertz, 2011). Given the push toward connecting multi-
culturalism with counseling in both counseling psychology and humanistic
psychology, it is only natural that the two fields find a way of connecting that
enables humanistic-oriented psychologists to obtain a doctoral degree
endorsed by APA accreditation.

Suggestions to Develop and Maintain

Communication
As we have discussed, there are numerous commonalities between the fields
of counseling psychology and humanistic psychology. While many of the
associations are extremely visible, the two fields still seem to remain

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

Miller et al. 487

unconnected. It is true that individuals drawn to humanistic psychology may

find comfort in a counseling program, but many may not find their place
without outside guidance toward such a program. This is the challenge that
we are hoping to address with this article—how do we connect the two and
develop communication and connection?
One potential way to foster a connection between the two programs
could be through the use of large programs such as conferences (e.g.,
regional, divisional, or national conferences). By better understanding what
a counseling psychology program is actually about, those who are looking
to go into graduate school may see the programs as a potential home for
them. Many people are rather unclear as to what various PhD and PsyD
programs are about—such as, what characterizes the program’s theoretical
orientations, major tenets, degree outcomes, and so on. In addition, many
individuals are unfamiliar with the theoretical proclivities held by certain
programs and by society in general, and are thus often misinformed about
the exact nature or philosophy of a given program. By providing all stu-
dents, particularly those who are humanistically oriented with this informa-
tion, programs would better equip students to decide on a program that
would fit their desired outcome and be a comfortable place rather than just
going to obtain the desired degree.
A second plausible way to open communication between the groups could
be through the use of outreach—by bringing a speaker from a counseling
psychology program to talk to undergraduates or master’s level students to
provide information on the preventative nature of the counseling psychol-
ogy—something that many people who warm to humanism appreciate about
the tenets of counseling psychology. Alternatively, having someone who is a
humanistic psychologist come speak with those students who are interested
in counseling psychology may help them find an orientation that suits them,
particularly if they connect with the warmth and person-centered nature of
humanism. Many undergraduate and research universities place an emphasis
on manualized treatments and randomized control trials, as opposed to more
humanistically oriented views. Thus, students often lack exposure to various
marginalized views, a circumstance easily remedied by guest speakers and
presentations.
Additionally, by providing education on what characterizes programs,
schools can give students knowledge about what to look for in a degree pro-
gram (e.g., internship placement, accreditation, training opportunities). We
suggest educators provide information on all available programs for degrees
(not necessarily solely counseling psychology)—thereby, students will have
the background that they need to make an educated decision. The information

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

488 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 54(4)

about the plausible outcomes from each type of degree gives students the
ability to make a decision based on what they want to do in the future—and
they may see that counseling psychology programs offer a broad base of
knowledge, with many plausible careers.
We also suggest that humanistic psychology and counseling psychology
be able to communicate what each discipline has to offer the other. With so
many specializations in psychology, it is easy to become insular in the cur-
rent academic climate. However, both disciplines have unique strengths that
can be shared among colleagues. For example, counseling psychology has
been on the forefront of research on diverse populations and multicultural
competence. As there has been a recent emphasis at humanistic conferences
to increase diversity, this seems to be an area where counseling psychology
could provide knowledge and guidance. In addition, humanistic psychology
has been steeped in the philosophy of science and epistemology of qualita-
tive methods for many years. Perhaps dialogue surrounding contextual
research paradigms could be fostered to advance the methodology. In the
last year, both Divisions 17 and 32 have worked together in the call for
reform of the DSM-5 development. The strengths of the two divisions should
be clearly outlined so that the mutually beneficial relationship can be made
self-evident.
We believe that counseling psychology and humanistic psychology share
many core values that directly influence the professional identity of the indi-
viduals who constitute these groups. Whether explicitly or implicitly, the two
disciplines have greatly influenced each other over the years. However, it
appears that there is limited interaction between the groups. It is the goal of
this article to open the lines of communication. With increased pressure by
third-party reimbursement, it is important for humanistic psychology to iden-
tify potential allies in the greater psychological community. In addition, train-
ing programs and graduate schools are becoming increasingly competitive.
Counseling psychology departments may provide humanistically minded
students an alternative to traditional humanistic programs. We believe that
collaboration can lead to a synergistic effect in which the voices of both areas
are amplified. With this amplified and unified message, the greater field of
psychology may begin to once again take notice of the views of humanistic
psychology and counseling psychology.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

Miller et al. 489

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publi-
cation of this article.

References
Allport, G. W. (1942). The nature of democratic morale. In G. Watson (Ed.), Civilian
morale: Second yearbook of the society for the psychological study of social
issues (pp. 3-18). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
American Psychological Association. (1986). Accreditation handbook. Washington,
DC: Author.
American Psychological Association. (1999). Archival description of counseling psy-
chology. The Counseling Psychologist, 27, 589-592.
American Psychological Association. (2003). Guidelines on multicultural educa-
tion, training, research, practice, and organizational change for psychologists.
American Psychologist, 58, 377-402.
Bargdill, R. (2011). The youth movement in humanistic psychology. Humanistic
Psychology, 39, 283-287. doi:10.1080/08873267.2011.592468
Borgen, F. H. (1984). Counseling psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 35,
579-604. doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.35.020184.003051
Buhler, C. (1971). Basic theoretical concepts of humanistic psychology. American
Psychologist, 26, 378-386.
Camic, P. M., Rhodes, J. E., & Yardley, L. (2003). Naming the stars: Integrating
qualitative methods into psychological research. In P. M. Camic, J. E. Rhodes, &
L. Yardley (Eds.), Qualitative research in psychology: Expanding perspectives
in methodology and design (pp. 3-15). Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Chu, J. P., Emmons, L., Wong, J., Goldblum, P., Reiser, R., Barrera, A. Z., & Byrd-
Olmstead, J. (2012). The public psychology doctoral training model: Training
clinical psychologists in community mental health competencies and leadership.
Training and Education in Professional Psychology, 6(2), 76-83. doi: 10.1037/
a0028834
Clay, R. A. (2002). A renaissance for humanistic psychology: The field explores new
niches while building on its past. American Psychological Association Monitor,
33(8), 42.
Constantine, M. G., Miville, M. L., & Kindaichi, M. M. (2008). Multicultural com-
petence in counseling psychology practice and training. In S. D. Brown & R.
W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (4th ed., pp. 141-158).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd
ed.). London, England: Sage.
Fischer, C. T. (2006). Humanistic psychology and qualitative research: Affinity, clari-
fications, and invitations. The Humanistic Psychologist, 34(1), 3-11. doi:10.1207/
s15473333thp3401_2
Fretz, B. R. (1985). Counseling psychology. In E. M. Altmaier & M. E. Meyer (Eds.),
Applied specialties in psychology (pp. 45-73). New York, NY: Crown/Random House.

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

490 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 54(4)

Friedman, H. L., & Robbins, B. D. (2012). The negative shadow cast by positive
psychology: Contrasting views and implications for humanistic and positive psy-
chology on resiliency. The Humanistic Psychologist, 40(1), 87-102.
Fromm, E. (1941). Escape from freedom. Oxford, England: Farrar & Rinehart.
Fukuyama, M., Murphy, M., & Siahpoush, F. (2003). Bridging the gaps: Weaving
multicultural and humanistic perspectives into transpersonal education. The
Humanistic Psychologist, 31, 182-200. doi:10.1080/08873267.2003.9986930
Gelso, C. J. (1979). Research in counseling: Methodological and professional issues.
The Counseling Psychologist, 8(3), 61-67. doi:10.1177/001100007900800303
Gelso, C. J., & Fassinger, R. E. (1992). Personality, development, and counseling
psychology: Depth, ambivalence, and actualization. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 39, 275-298.
Gelso, C. J., & Fretz, B. R. (2001). Counseling psychology (2nd ed.). Fort Worth, TX:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich College Publishers.
Giorgi, A. (1985). Theoretical plurality and unity in psychology. Psychological
Record, 35, 177-181.
Goldman, L. (1990). Qualitative assessment. The Counseling Psychologist, 18(2),
205-213. doi: 10.1177/0011000090182003
Goldstein, K. (1939). The organism: A holistic approach to biology derived from
pathological data in man. Salt Lake City, UT: American Book.
Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time. New York, NY: Harper & Row.
Heppner, P. P., Casas, J. M., Carter, J., & Stone, G. L. (2000). The maturation of
counseling psychology: Multifaceted perspectives, 1978-1998. In S. D. Brown
& R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (3rd ed., pp. 3-49).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Heppner, P. P., Kivlighan, D. M., Jr., & Wampold, B. E. (1992). Research design in
counseling. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Howard, G. S. (1984). A modest proposal for a revision of strategies for counseling
research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 430-441.
Husserl, E. (1977). Cartesian meditations: An introduction to phenomenology.
Norwell, MA: Kluwer Academic.
Jenkins, A. H. (2001). Humanistic psychology and multiculturalism. In K. J. Schneider,
J. F. Bugental, & J. F. Pierson (Eds.), The handbook of humanistic psychology:
Leading edges in theory, research, and practice (pp. 37-45). London, England:
Sage.
Katz, J. H. (1985). The sociopolitical nature of counseling. The Counseling
Psychologist, 13, 615-624. doi:10/1177/0011000085134005
Leong, F. T. L., & Blustein, D. L. (2000). Toward a global vision of counseling psy-
chology. The Counseling Psychologist, 28, 5-9. doi:10.1177/0011000000281001
Leong, F. T. L., & Gupta, A. (2008). Culture and race in counseling and psycho-
therapy: A critical review of the literature. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.),
Handbook of counseling psychology (4th ed., pp. 320-337). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Leong, F. T. L., & Ponterotto, J. G. (2003). A proposal for internationalizing counsel-
ing psychology in the United States: Rationale, recommendations and challenges.
The Counseling Psychologist, 31, 381-395. doi:10.1177/0011000003031004001

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

Miller et al. 491

Linley, P. A. (2006). Counseling psychology’s positive psychological agenda: A

model for integration and inspiration. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 313-322.
doi:10.1177/0011000005284393
Lopez, S. J., Magyar-Moe, J. L., Peterson, S. E., Ryder, J. A., Krieshok, T. S.,
Koetting O’Byrne, K., . . .Fry, N. A. (2006). Counseling psychology’s focus on
positive aspects of human functioning. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 205-
227. doi:10.1177/0011000005283393
Maslow, A. (1962). Toward a psychology of being. Princeton, NJ: D Van Nostrand.
May, R. (1969). Existential psychology. New York, NY: Crown/Random House.
McLeod, J. (2001). Introduction: Critical issues in methodology of qualitative
research. Counseling & Psychotherapy Research, 1(2), 115-117. doi:10.1080/
14733140112331385148
Medlock, G. (2012). The evolving ethic of authenticity: From humanistic to positive
psychology. The Humanistic Psychologist, 40(1), 38-57.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. New York, NY: Routledge
& Kegan Paul.
Morrow, S. L. (2007). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: Conceptual founda-
tions. The Counseling Psychologist, 35, 209-235. doi:10.1177/0011000006286990
Morrow, S. L., Rakhsha, G., & Castandea, C. (2001). Qualitative research methods
for multicultural counseling. In J. Ponterotto, J. Casas, L. Suzuki, & C. Alexander
(Eds.), Handbook of multicultural counseling (pp. 575-603). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Morrow, S. L., & Smith, M. L. (2000). Qualitative research in counseling psychology.
In S. L. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (3rd
ed., pp. 199-230). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Murdock, N. L., Alcorn, J., Heesacker, M., & Stoltenberg, C. (1998). Model training
program in counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 26, 658-672.
doi:10.1177/0011000098264008
Neimeyer, G. J., & Diamond, A. K. (2001). The anticipated future of counseling psy-
chology in the United States: A Delphi poll. Counseling Psychology Quarterly,
14(1), 49-65. doi:10.1080/09515070110057513
Nelson-Jones, R. (2002). Are there universal human being skills. Counseling
Psychology Quarterly, 15, 115-119. doi:10.1080/09515070110100947
Parsons, F. (1909). Choosing a career. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Ponterotto, J. G. (2005). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: A primer
on research paradigms and philosophy of science. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 52, 126-136. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.126
Ponterotto, J. G., & Park-Taylor, J. (2007). Racial and ethnic identity theory, mea-
surement, and research in counseling psychology: Present status and future direc-
tions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54, 282-294.
Rennie, D. L. (2002). Making a clearing: Qualitative research in Anglophone Canadian
psychology. Canadian Psychology, 43, 139-140. doi:10.1037/h0086909
Rennie, D. L., Watson, K. D., & Monteiro, A. M. (2002). The rise of qualitative
research in psychology. Canadian Psychology, 43, 179-189. doi:10.1037/
h0086914

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

492 Journal of Humanistic Psychology 54(4)

Ridley, C. R., & Mollen, D. (2011). Training in counseling psychology: An intro-

duction to the major contribution. The Counseling Psychologist, 39, 793-799.
doi:10.1177/0011000010377664
Rogers, C. R. (1951). Client-centered therapy: Its current practice, implications and
theory. Oxford, England: Houghton Mifflin.
Romano, J. L., & Hage, S. M. (2000). Prevention and counseling psychology:
Revitalizing commitments for the 21st century. The Counseling Psychologist, 28,
733-763. doi:10.1177/0011000000286001
Seligman, M. E. P. (2011). Flourish: A visionary new understanding of happiness and
well-being. New York, NY: Free Press.
Tyler, L. E. (1973). Design for a hopeful psychology. American Psychologist, 28,
1021-1029.
von Eckartsberg, R. (1986). Existential-phenomenological research approaches in
psychology. Washington, DC: University Press of America.
Vontress, C. E., & Epp, L. R. (2001). Existential cross-cultural counseling. In K.
J. Schneider, J. F. Bugental, & J. F. Pierson (Eds.), The handbook of humanis-
tic psychology: Leading edges in theory, research, and practice (pp. 371-387).
London, England: Sage.
Wampold, B. E. (1987). Guest editor’s introduction. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 34, 364. doi:10.1037/h0090421
Watkins, C. E., & Campbell, V. L. (1990). Testing and assessment in counseling psy-
chology: Contemporary development and issues. The Counseling Psychologist,
18, 189-197.
Wertz, F. J. (1985). Methods and findings in an empirical analysis of being criminally
victimized. In A. Giorgi (Ed.), Phenomenology and psychological research (pp.
155-216). Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press.
Wertz, F. J. (2005). Phenomenological research methods for counseling psychology.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 167-177. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.52.2.167
Wertz, F. J. (2011). A phenomenological psychological approach to trauma and resil-
ience. In F. J. Wertz, K. Charmaz, L. M. McMullen, R. Josselson, R. Anderson,
& E. McSpadden (Eds.), Five ways of doing qualitative analysis (pp. 124-161).
New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Author Biographies
Aaron D. Miller is a graduate student at Southern Illinois
University Carbondale. His research focuses on major
life decisions, in particular, applying concepts from exis-
tential theory to vocational psychology. He is also inter-
ested in the intersection of personality and career vari-
ables. He has been an active member of Division 32 since
2005.

Downloaded from jhp.sagepub.com at UNIV ARIZONA LIBRARY on September 27, 2014

Miller et al. 493

Trisha Nash, PhD, is a graduate of the University of Memphis in

Memphis, Tennessee, with her degree in counseling psychology.
She is currently on a postdoctoral fellowship in sport psychology
through the University of Washington and Seattle Children’s
Hospital. She has been an active member of the Society of
Humanistic Psychology (Division 32) since 2008 and is currently
on the Membership Committee.

Danielle G. Fetty, MA, is a graduate student at Southern Illinois

University Carbondale. Her research focuses on trauma, beliefs
about justice, spirituality, meaning making, and posttraumatic
growth in trauma survivors. She also has interests in Gestalt, exis-
tential, and multicultural applications in psychotherapy. She has
been an active member of Division 32 since 2011.