Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers

  Search

2014 APPIC Match Statistics - Phase I

Match Report from the APPIC Board of Directors
February 21, 2014

 

We are pleased to report that 3,173 applicants were successfully matched to internship positions in Phase I of the APPIC Match. Nearly half (48%) of all applicants who obtained a position matched to their first choice internship program, about two-thirds (68%) received one of their top two choices, and about four-in-five (81%) received one of their top three choices.

A total of 801 applicants were not matched to an internship position in Phase I, while 361 applicants withdrew or did not submit a Rank Order List. A total of 328 positions remained unfilled.

Overall, the imbalance between applicants and internship positions showed significant improvement this year, due to a substantial increase in available positions along with a significant decrease in registered applicants. Compared to the 2013 Match, the number of registered applicants in 2014 decreased by 146 (3%) to 4,335 applicants, while the number of internship positions increased by 125 (4%) to 3,501 positions. Of the 125 additional positions, 73 (58%) were in APA- or CPA-accredited programs.

It should be noted that, in 2014, a separate, regional Match was held simultaneously with Phase I of the APPIC Match (in previous years, this regional Match occurred after the completion of Phase I of the APPIC Match). As a result of this timing conflict, applicants who lived in that region could only participate in one of these Matches. It is unknown as to whether this situation affected the number of students who registered for or participated in the APPIC Match.

Despite the improvement in the overall imbalance, the number of applicants in 2014 still exceeded the number of positions by 834.

The following Match statistics are new this year for Phase I and are included in the report below: Matched Applicants by Accreditation Status of Matched Internship.

Here is a summary of the numbers of applicants and positions in 2014 as compared to the 2012 and 2013 APPIC Matches:

   
2012 MATCH
2013 MATCH
2014 MATCH
 
Applicants: Registered for the Match
4,435
4,481
4,335

Withdrew or did not submit ranks
426
430
361

Matched
2,968
3,094
3,173

Unmatched
1,041
957
801
   

Positions: Offered in the Match
3,190
3,376
3,501
  Filled
2,968
3,094
3,173
  Unfilled
222
282
328


Following is a ten year comparison of the 2004 and 2014 Match statistics:

 
2004 MATCH
2014 MATCH
10-YEAR CHANGE
 
Participating Sites
618
744
+126  (+20%)
Positions Offered
2,732
3,501
+769  (+28%)
Positions Filled
2,428
3,173
+745  (+31%)
Positions Unfilled
304
328
+24    (+8%)
 



Registered Applicants
3,258
4,335
+1,077  (+33%)
Withdrawn/No Ranks Applicants
219
361
+142  (+65%)
Matched Applicants
2,428
3,173
+745  (+31%)
Unmatched Applicants
611
801
+190  (+31%)

 

INTERNSHIP PROGRAMS


PARTICIPATION IN PHASE I
Training Sites Participating in the Match
744
Programs Participating in the Match
1,358
Positions Offered in the Match
3,501

NOTE: A "training site" can offer more than one "program" in the Match. Each "program" was identified in the Match by a separate 6-digit code number.


APPLICATIONS RECEIVED IN PHASE I
Sites Receiving Applications in Phase I
751
Total Number of Applications Received in Phase I
67,473
Average Number Received Per Site (SD = 65.1)
89.8
Median Number Received Per Site
80
Range of Applications Received Per Site
1 - 413

NOTE: For comparison purposes, in 2013 sites received an average of 97.9 applications (SD = 71.2) and a median of 86 applications.


MATCH RESULTS IN PHASE I
Positions:
Filled in the Match
3,173
91%
Remaining Unfilled
328
9%
Programs:
Filled in the Match
1,136
84%
With Unfilled Positions
222
16%

NOTE: 29 programs at 27 sites submitted fewer ranks than the number of positions available. As a result, no ranks were submitted for 50 positions, which remained unfilled.


APA- OR CPA- ACCREDITED POSITIONS
Filled in the Match
2,474
96%
Remaining Unfilled
114
4%
Total
2,588

NON-ACCREDITED POSITIONS
Filled in the Match
699
77%
Remaining Unfilled
214
23%
Total
913

Non-accredited positions represented 26.1% of all positions but 65.2% of unfilled positions.


RANKINGS IN PHASE I
Average Number of Applicants Ranked Per Position Offered for Each Program:
Programs Filling All Positions
8.4
Programs With Unfilled Positions
3.3
All Programs
7.5

Each Registered Applicant Was Ranked by an Average of 5.3 Different Programs.

 

APPLICANTS

PARTICIPATION IN PHASE I
Applicants Registered in the Match
4,335
Applicants Who Withdrew or Did Not Submit Ranks
361
Applicants Participating in the Match
(includes 34 individuals who participated in the Match as 17 "couples")
3,974


APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED IN PHASE I
Number of Applicants Who Submitted Applications in Phase I
4,236
Total Number of Applications Submitted in Phase I
67,473
Average Number of Applications Submitted by Applicants in Phase I (SD = 6.2)
15.9
Median Number of Applications Submitted in Phase I
16
Range of Applications Submitted in Phase I
1 - 57

NOTE: For comparison purposes, in 2013 applicants submitted an average of 16.3 applications (SD = 6.6) and a median of 16 applications.


MATCH RESULTS IN PHASE I
Applicants Matched
3,173
80%
Participating Applicants Not Matched
801
20%


MATCH RESULTS BY RANK NUMBER ON APPLICANT'S LIST
(PERCENTAGES MAY NOT TOTAL TO 100 DUE TO ROUNDING ERRORS)
Rank
Number of Applicants
1
1,525
48%
2
642
20%
3
389
12%
4
240
8%
5
145
5%
6
95
3%
7
52
2%
8
31
1%
9
21
1%
10 or higher
33
1%
Total
3,173
100%


RANKINGS IN PHASE I
Average Number of Rankings Submitted Per Applicant:
Matched Applicants
8.1
Unmatched Applicants
4.0
Overall
7.3

Each Position Was Ranked by an Average of 8.3 Applicants.



MATCH RATES BY DEGREE TYPE
DEGREE SOUGHT
MATCHED
UNMATCHED
WITHDREW OR NO RANKINGS SUBMITTED
TOTAL
Ph.D. / Ed.D.
1,724
77.1%
354
15.8%
157
7.0%
2,235
Psy.D.
1,449
69.0%
447
21.3%
204
9.7%
2,100
TOTAL
3,173
73.2%
801
18.5%
361
8.3%
4,335

NOTE: A small number of students (less than ten) seeking Ed.D. degrees were included in the Ph.D. category in order to prevent individuals from being identified.



MATCH RATES BY PROGRAM TYPE AND DEGREE
PROGRAM TYPE
DEGREE SOUGHT
MATCHED
UNMATCHED
WITHDREW OR NO RANKINGS SUBMITTED
TOTAL
Clinical
Ph.D. / Ed.D.
1,219
78.8%
239
15.5%
88
5.7%
1,546
Psy.D.
1,348
69.2%
415
21.3%
186
9.5%
1,949
TOTALS
2,567
73.4%
654
18.7%
274
7.8%
3,495
Counseling
Ph.D. / Ed.D.
343
78.0%
67
15.2%
30
6.8%
440
Psy.D.
46
71.9%
7
10.9%
11
17.2%
64
TOTALS
389
77.2%
74
14.7%
41
8.1%
504
School
Ph.D. / Ed.D.
128
63.1%
39
19.2%
36
17.7%
203
Psy.D.
11
36.7%
13
43.3%
6
20.0%
30
TOTALS
139
59.7%
52
22.3%
42
18.0%
233
Combined
Ph.D. / Ed.D.
34
73.9%
9
19.6%
3
6.5%
46
Psy.D.
44
77.2%
12
21.1%
1
1.8%
57
TOTALS
78
75.7%
21
20.4%
4
3.9%
103
ALL PROGRAMS
Ph.D. / Ed.D.
1,724
77.1%
354
15.8%
157
7.0%
2,235
Psy.D.
1,449
69.0%
447
21.3%
204
9.7%
2,100
TOTALS
3,173
73.2%
801
18.5%
361
8.3%
4,335

NOTE: A small number of students (less than ten) seeking Ed.D. degrees were included in the Ph.D. category in order to prevent individuals from being identified.



MATCHED APPLICANTS BY ACCREDITATION STATUS OF MATCHED INTERNSHIP
PROGRAM TYPE
DEGREE SOUGHT
MATCHED TO ACCREDITED INTERNSHIP
MATCHED TO NON-ACCREDITED INTERNSHIP
TOTAL
Clinical
Ph.D. / Ed.D.
1,131
92.8%
88
7.2%
1,219
Psy.D.
826
61.3%
522
38.7%
1,348
TOTALS
1,957
76.2%
610
23.8%
2,567
Counseling
Ph.D. / Ed.D.
322
93.9%
21
6.1%
343
Psy.D.
17
37.0%
29
63.0%
46
TOTALS
339
87.1%
50
12.9%
389
School
Ph.D. / Ed.D.
111
86.7%
17
13.3%
128
Psy.D.
5
45.5%
6
54.5%
11
TOTALS
116
83.5%
23
16.5%
139
Combined
Ph.D. / Ed.D.
28
82.4%
6
17.6%
34
Psy.D.
34
77.3%
10
22.7%
44
TOTALS
62
79.5%
16
20.5%
78
ALL PROGRAMS
Ph.D. / Ed.D.
1,592
92.3%
132
7.7%
1,724
Psy.D.
882
60.9%
567
39.1%
1,449
TOTALS
2,474
78.0%
699
22.0%
3,173

NOTE: A small number of students (less than ten) seeking Ed.D. degrees were included in the Ph.D. category in order to prevent individuals from being identified.




Summary of Program Rankings


The following report contains additional statistics on how successful programs were, on average, in matching with applicants during Phase I of the APPIC Match.

There are several important issues that must be considered in attempting to analyze program success based on the rank numbers of matched applicants.

DEFINITIONAL PROBLEMS: Because each applicant submitted a single Rank Order List in order to match to a single position, it is easy to identify his or her "first choice," "second choice," etc. However, for an internship program, determining first or second choice applicants is a far more difficult and complex task. First, many programs attempt to fill several positions; if a program has three positions to fill, an applicant ranked third by that program can in effect be considered a "first choice" for purposes of the Match. Furthermore, a significant number of sites submitted multiple Rank Order Lists for a single program, sometimes ranking the same applicant on different Lists with different rank numbers. Also, the reversion of unfilled positions between lists adds a further complication to this analysis.

We worked closely with National Matching Services in an attempt to resolve these difficulties and to develop a reasonable method of presenting this data.

STANDARDIZED RANKINGS: For the purposes of this analysis, we converted each site's rankings to a "standardized rank." This is best explained by example: if the number of positions to be filled from a Rank Order List was three, then the first three applicants on this List were considered to be "first choice" applicants and given a standardized rank of 1. The next three applicants on that List were defined as "second choice" applicants and given a standardized rank of 2. And so on.


PHASE I MATCH RESULTS BY STANDARDIZED RANK NUMBER ON INTERNSHIP PROGRAM LIST

(PERCENTAGES MAY NOT TOTAL TO 100 DUE TO ROUNDING ERRORS)

Standardized Rank
Number of Applicants Matched
1
1,109
35%
2
833
26%
3
549
17%
4
315
10%
5
183
6%
6
81
3%
7
40
1%
8
19
1%
9
14
0%
10 or higher
30
1%
Total
3,173
100%

To interpret this chart: Of all positions that were filled in Phase I of the Match, 35% were filled with "first choice" applicants (as defined above), 26% with "second choice" applicants, and so on.

Furthermore, 61% were filled with "first" or "second" choice applicants, while 79% were filled with "third choice" applicants or better.

Of course, comparing these numbers to applicants' Match statistics should be done with extreme caution, given the significantly different ways in how "first choice", "second choice", etc. were defined in each analysis.

 

Report Prepared by Greg Keilin, Ph.D.
and National Matching Services, Inc.
February 21, 2014