A research psychologist has a PhD and may legitimately use the title “Doctor.” They have the same education, but chose to follow a different route than clinical psychology.
I have two research psychologists on my team. They call themselves “psychologists” also.
I do not know the exact wording of the CA law, but I would bet that it has some stipulation that a psychologist cannot claim to be a board-certified clinician if he/she is not, in fact, licensed, but that they can call themselves “psychologists” if that is, in fact, the subject of their PhD.
My mother is licensed and sees clients, but cannot call herself a psychologist because she does not have a PhD.
This is a red herring; Dr. Ford has raised all kinds of questions about her credibility without quibbling about the fact that she is a researcher, not a clinician.
Usually, the law is very specific in its wording.
She can call herself “doctor” all day long til a rainbow farting unicorn appears, but
in the state of California, she CAN NOT legally use the professional title of “psychologist” without a license.
That’s why one of her staffers had an “oh sh*t” moment and scrubbed the professors faculty page removing the reference of her being a psychologist.
In all honesty I believe that she has unwittingly opened up another can of worms, and wasn’t expecting people to start digging into her background.
We found that she’s not a licensed psychologist.
We found that the timeline she gave for her marriage counseling in relation to the home renovation was off by several years.
We found she lied about flying.
And the list keeps getting longer by the day.