When Tech Meets Psych

By Peter Clark, Spring 2010

Many people know Randall Wyatt, PhD, through his role as the Director of the Office of Professional Training (OPT). However, he is also an early adopter of many technological innovations and keeps abreast on the potential influence these devices may have on the broad field of psychology.

Peter Clark: What are some of the positive and negative effects when psychologists use new technologies to communicate with their clients?
Randall Wyatt: Some of the advantages are that communication can happen very quickly. People can contact their clients to change an appointment or set up another appointment. A downside is potential breaches of confidentiality. Is your e-mail secure? Does your cell phone have a password? Other disadvantages—sometimes an e-mail conversation isn’t the same as a face-to-face conversation. That doesn’t mean important things can’t be exchanged. Everyone that’s doing chatting knows that meaningful conversations occur in chat—and they’re real. But sometimes more complicated things should be done in person because there’s no body language in a chat or an e-mail. As a professional, you can miss the nuances of an interpretation or tone of voice. Of course, some clients prefer the anonymity or not being seen online ala the couch in psychoanalysis, an ironic retro twist.

PC: Would you recommend setting strict boundaries with a client before engaging in a technological relationship with them?
RW: I haven’t felt the need to do that beforehand, but have set limits in a few cases of extensive emails. My informed consent form does note that extended phone contact will be billed at the hourly rate.

PC: Maybe you should change this form to reflect all telecommunication contact.
RW: Probably. But I haven’t found that many clients have engaged in extensive e-mailing. I don’t do instant messaging (IM) with clients. Not that I wouldn’t in the future, but I haven’t yet. I don’t think therapists have worked out how billing will work for extended online conversations.

PC: A lot of the information psychologists once secured away in the vault is now totally accessible online. What do you think of clients self-diagnosing on websites like WebMD or gaining access to assessment instruments like the Rorschach on Wikipedia?
RW: Information is power. Power can be used well and it can be abused. So I think in general it’s better that psychologists have been forced to come down from their ivory tower, out of the academic journals and into people’s computers. That’s better. Will there be problems with that? Yes. But good things should be shared and psychology has a lot of really great things. I am involved in the development of addictions self-help surveys on addicted.com. For the most part, I think these surveys aide people seeking out additional resources and professional help. The Rorschach loss of privacy could pose some problems in people accessing it online and losing its surprise value. Sure, there’ll be the good the bad and the ugly, but we have to be involved in this game vs. being on the sidelines. This is a great opportunity for psychology to be in the public. I think we could do a lot more good that way.

PC: What do you think the future holds for the relationship between technology and psychology?
RW: I see more online therapy and more video therapy, both being done in shaky formats currently. As the technology gets better, it will facilitate ways to have meaningful therapeutic interventions online. I think the whole issue of avatar therapists online is being piloted. We don’t know where it’s going, but I think the interpersonal relationship is never going to go away. My belief is that people assume an interpersonal relationship online anyway, since that is how humans are built.