Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10447-018-9346-y

O R I G I N A L A RT I C L E

Counseling Psychology Faculty’s Contributions

to the Internationalization of Counseling

Azadeh Fatemi 1 2
& Alan Stewart & Khanh Nghiem
1

Published online: 7 April 2018

# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract In this study, we identified counseling psychology faculty members’ international

publications, presentations, activities, and education abroad experiences through investigating
183 curricula vitae of faculty members in the United States. The results demonstrated that
compared to four decades ago, the emphasis on international issues has increased. However,
there is still a considerable number of counseling psychology faculty members who have not
incorporated international issues into their professional activities. Path analysis results indicat-
ed that international presentations and activities moderately predicted internationally rele-
vant publications. Based on these results, we proposed several ways to facilitate the
internationalization of counseling psychology in the future, and discussed how international-
ization could bring positive changes to the counseling psychology field.

Keywords Internationalization . Counseling psychology . Faculty . Research

Introduction

Internationalization has changed the nature and face of communication, business, politics, and
economy worldwide. Counseling as a field has not been an exception in this process and,
similar to other areas, has been involved in internationalization for at least a century. The
social, political and economic forces as well as different dynamics within the field have greatly
influenced the internationalization of counseling.
Several experts in the counseling field have pointed to the benefits and importance of
internationalization of the discipline. Gerstein (2006) identified the international movement as
Bthe next stage in the multicultural counseling movement^ (p. 379). Heppner et al. (2008) also
noted that internationalization can promote a context in which counselors use the knowledge

* Azadeh Fatemi
azadeh.shafigh@gmail.com

1
Ball State University Counseling Center, Lucina Hall, room 320, Muncie, IN 47306, USA
2
The University of Georgia, 402 Aderhold Hall, Athens, GA 30602, USA
62 Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72

from other cultures and countries to effectively solve existing problems with new solutions.
They recommended educators and faculty to expand their professional activities to include
international issues, populations, and settings, and equip students with skills that prepare them
to function globally.
For the purpose of this study, we adopted Leung et al.’s (2009) definition of internation-
alization, due to its emphasis on respect, equal collaboration, and cultural sensitivity, which are
regarded as essential factors for internationalization of the counseling field. They defined
internationalization as Ba continuous process of synthesizing knowledge generated through
research, scholarship, and practice from different cultures and using this knowledge to solve
problems in local and global communities… [it] involves collaborations and equal partnerships
in which cultural sensitivity and respect are required for success^ (p. 115). Thus, as a result of
internationalization counselors might engage in collaborations with international colleagues,
create international and cross-cultural clinical or research projects and publications, and
expand the scope of multiculturalism and social justice in counseling.
As a subfield in counseling, counseling psychology in the United States has notably
focused on national counseling issues and populations. International social, political, and
economic forces have influenced the field of counseling psychology; however, due to counsel-
ing psychologists’ somewhat narrow focus on issues and populations in the United States,
counseling psychology in that context became an ethnocentric (Leong and Ponterotto 2003)
and encapsulated discipline (Leung 2003). As part of that, counseling psychologists rarely
engaged in international professional activities and even questioned the importance of such
engagements (McWhirter 2000). However, counseling psychologists have recently begun to
place greater emphasis on international issues (Gerstein et al. 2009) in response to calls
regarding psychologists’ narrow focus on people of BWestern, Educated, Industrialized, Rich,
and Democratic (WEIRD)^ societies (Henrich et al. 2010) and the comparative ignorance of
different populations in the world (Arnett 2008).
Gerstein et al. (2009) also reported that the field of counseling psychology is currently
involved in the internationalization process. This involvement is evident from the rise of U.S
counseling psychologists’ presentations and publications about international topics (Heppner
and Gerstein 2008; Kwan and Gerstein 2008; Leong and Blustein 2000; Leong and Ponterotto
2003), participation in cross-cultural and cross-national research and professional activities
(McWhirter 2000; Norsworthy et al. 2009), and initiation of and attendance at international
conferences (Forrest 2008; Kwan and Gerstein 2008). Counseling psychology professionals
have also focused on enhancing cross-cultural competencies (Heppner et al. 2009) in training
the next generation of counseling psychologists.
Although the international movement was initiated several years ago by psychologists’
willingness to cross national boundaries, it still faces several challenges. For instance, the number
of publications about international topics and populations in the U.S. counseling journals is very
limited, which contributes to the perspective of U.S. counseling psychologists’ seeming lack of
awareness about international issues (Ægisdóttir and Gerstein 2010). True internationalization of
the profession is not possible until counseling psychologists resolve some of the challenges facing
the international movement. One important challenge is related to the extent to which faculty
members are involved in the international movement. Other challenges facing internationalization
go beyond U.S borders and might include counselors in different parts of the world not having
access to resources, difficulty in communication due to technology problems, and social and
political factors beyond the field of counseling that might influence the internationalization
process. To improve internationalization of the field such challenges need to be addressed.
Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72 63

As a result of internationalization, U.S. counseling psychologists have paid more attention

to providing culturally sensitive mental health services to people with international back-
grounds in the U.S. (Fouad 1991). They have also provided applied and training services in
other countries (Heppner et al. 2008), and developed international training programs that have
benefited both faculty and students (Wang and Heppner 2009). U.S. counseling psychologists’
international experiences have increased their cross-cultural competencies, which include
second language proficiencies, interests in international collaborations, and emphasis on
cross-cultural counseling and research.

Counseling Psychology Faculty

U.S. counseling psychology faculty members have had a major role in the growing
internationalization of the counseling psychology profession. They have promoted inter-
nationalization of counseling psychology through their publications, international collab-
orations, emphasis on international issues in counseling psychology curriculum, and
training the next generation of counseling psychologists including international students.
Additionally, through engaging in professional psychology organizations with an interna-
tional focus (e.g., the American Psychological Association, Division 52, and its Interna-
tional Section in Division 17), and inviting international guest speakers and faculty to U.S.
counseling programs (Turner-Essel and Waehler 2009), they have enhanced the interna-
tionalization of counseling psychology.
U.S. faculty members expanding the international focus in the field could enrich and
diversify counseling psychology programs, and their decisions can also have significant
impact on the internationalization of the field. Faculty’s decisions about initiating international
connections or collaborations, studying international topics and populations, funding projects
with an international focus, and incorporating international issues in the curriculum, can
substantially further the internationalization process. Additionally, faculty can determine the
admission criteria for counseling psychology programs in the U.S., which could influence how
involved in internationalization that counseling psychology programs and their graduates
might be in the future. For instance, these admission criteria could include second language
proficiencies for U.S. students, more information and support for international students as they
apply to U.S. counseling programs, and intentional recruitment of applicants who are inter-
ested in incorporating international issues into their research, teaching, clinical work, and
professional activities.
In this regard, Leong and Ponterotto (2003) noted that considering applicants’ study and
travel abroad experiences in admission considerations could promote cross-cultural under-
standing and awareness in counseling psychology programs. In addition, faculty can increase
and foster international and cross-cultural sensitivity and awareness through (1) encouraging
students to attend conferences held outside the U.S., (2) including foreign language proficiency
as part of program requirements, (3) creating international student and faculty exchange
programs, and (4) offering or supporting internships and practicum with an international focus
(Leong and Ponterotto 2003).
Turner-Essel et al. (2007) noted that counseling psychology faculty, through their own
connections, have mostly created international collaborations, projects, and activities that
promoted internationalization in their programs. Counseling psychology faculty can also
infuse international perspectives in their teaching and create international learning experiences
for students (Turner-Essel and Waehler 2009). These experiences can significantly impact
64 Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72

students’ knowledge and awareness about international issues. Moreover, through

implementing different policies, such as giving credit, tuition remission, or graduate assistant-
ships to students who are interested in international issues, faculty can initiate, and enhance
internationalization in their programs. Previous studies have indicated that counseling psy-
chology students are very interested in participating in activities and projects with an interna-
tional focus (Turner-Essel and Waehler 2009; Gerstein and Ægisdóttir 2007). Creating
international opportunities and projects for students is a response to an existing need. Overall,
counseling psychology faculty members’ professional work, decisions, and interests have an
important role in actively furthering internationalization of counseling psychology.

Overview of the Present Study

Considering the importance of faculty’s professional interests and activities in internationali-

zation of the field, the present study investigated the professional contributions of U.S.
counseling psychology faculty members to the internationalization of counseling psychology.
We limited the scope of this study to counseling psychology faculty and the impact they have
had on internationalization of the field to better understand the internationalization process in a
specific subfield of psychology.
Through analyzing counseling psychology faculty members’ curricula vitae, we identified
their publications, presentations related to international topics and populations, as well as their
education abroad experiences and involvement in international collaborations, activities, and
projects. We demonstrated how the patterns related to emphasizing international issues have
changed over the past few decades in regard to faculty’s publications, presentations, and
international activities.
Several scholars (e.g., Ægisdóttir and Gerstein 2010; Arnett 2008; Henrich et al. 2010)
emphasized the importance of publications about international topics and populations, and
demonstrated how lack of such publications might negatively impact the field. To investigate
the impact of factors influencing faculty’s internationally relevant publications, we investigated
the link among faculty’s international activities, education abroad experiences, and interna-
tionally related presentations, and their impact on publications on international topics.

Methods

Participants and Procedures

We first identified all counseling psychology APA accredited programs in the U.S. through the
APA website (American Psychological Association 2013). We then visited each program’s
website and downloaded the curricula vitae of those faculty members who had posted them
online. If faculty members’ information was not provided in a separate file, we copied and
pasted the information that was provided in program websites in a digital word processing
document. We created a separate file for each faculty member. In cases where we could not
find faculty members’ curricula vitae online, they were incomplete, or they had not been
updated over the prior two years, we sent an email requesting a current copy.
Overall, we obtained 294 curricula vitae through downloading from websites and by
receiving individual emails from faculty members. We kept 183 curricula vitae for further
analysis, and did not consider 111 vitae as they did not have any emphasis on
Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72 65

internationalization, international topics, or populations. We did not include in our analysis

curricula vitae of those who identified themselves as a clinical, instructor, visitor, lecturer, or
part-time faculty member. Furthermore, the data collection for this study was carried out
during the period 2012–2013, and we included curricula vitae that had been updated during or
before 2010.
We recorded the year and number of the faculty member’s international activities, education
abroad experiences, publications, and presentations related to international issues and popula-
tions. We also considered providing applied or research services outside the U.S., collaborating
with international colleagues or institutions on projects, and initiating projects with global
impact as international activities. Furthermore, obtaining a Bachelor’s, Master’s, or Doctoral
degree, or an alternative postgraduate degree, or experiencing training outside the U.S. was
regarded as an education abroad experience. In this study, we considered education abroad and
international activities as being separate categories to better understand the impact of each
category on faculty’s international publications. For the purposes of this study we considered
international publications as being any publication that addressed internationalization process-
es, issues or populations, or investigated international or global dynamics and their influence
on the field of counseling. Additionally, various types of publications, including journal
articles, book chapters, reports, and newsletter contributions, were included when considering
faculty’s internationally relevant publications.
To analyze the curricula vitae, two raters independently coded each curriculum vitae.
Any activity, such as education abroad experience, publication, or presentation was
counted as one if it was related to international issues, and zero otherwise. In several
cases where it was not clear from the title of the published work whether it was related to
international issues or internationalization of counseling and psychology, the raters read
the published work to decide about its relevance to international issues. The initial inter-
rater agreement indicated that the raters agreed on 91% of the ratings. The raters then
compared the ratings for which there were disagreements, and ultimately reached consen-
sus on all the ratings.

Analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to examine how the focus on international issues in
faculty’s professional and scholarly works might have changed over the past four decades.
We used path analysis to investigate the relationship among faculty’s education abroad,
international activities, presentations, and publications. Specifically we were interested to
learn more about the extent to which education abroad experiences, presentations, and
international activities predicted faculty’s internationally relevant publications. To conduct
path analysis, we used the SmartPLS software (http://www.smartpls.de/), which is based
on the partial least squares (PLS) path modeling, and focuses on the analysis of variance
and on predicting the relationships among variables.
The goal of this study was to predict the relationship among faculty’s scholarly activities;
therefore, SmartPLS was appropriate compared to other path modeling covariance-based
software such as AMOS or LISREL, which are commonly used for confirming a given theory
(Wong 2013). Furthermore, Rindskopf (1984) recommended using PLS when assumptions of
minimum sample size, normality of distributions (Hair et al. 2011), and maximum model
complexity are violated. Additionally, when the accurate model specifications are not ensured
and there are very few available theories to explain the data, use of PLS modeling is suggested
66 Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72

(Hwang et al. 2010). Because the sample size in this study was not large, the data were not
normally distributed, and there was not any specific theory to support and explain the data, we
used the SmartPLS software.
Chin (2010) noted that model fit indices are not provided in variance-based SEM such
as PLS. In this case, to demonstrate the adequacy of the PLS model, high R-squares and
significant structural paths should be demonstrated. To test the significance of structural
paths, we used the bootstrap resampling method (Efron and Tibshirani 1993). Bootstrap
procedure provides t values of the path coefficient in the model, and indicates whether the path
is statistically significant. Hair et al. (2011) noted that the critical value in two-tailed tests with a
p value of 0.05 is 1.96. Thus, any t value calculated from the bootstrap procedure that is above
1.96 is considered statistically significant. In this study, to test the statistical significance of
paths, we adopted 1000 resamples with a 95% confidence interval.

Results

The number and year of faculty’s publications, presentations, and international activities are
presented in Table 1. Since some faculty only identified the education abroad experiences they
had and did not include the year or type of these experiences in their vitae, we did not include
the information related to education abroad experiences in Table 1. However, we added up the
education abroad experiences of all faculty members and included education abroad experi-
ences as one of the variables in the analysis. The correlation among variables and descriptive
statistics are reported in Table 2.
The results indicated that during the 1970’s, international issues were largely absent as part
of the counseling psychology faculty’s professional interests and focus; however, over the
course of several decades, counseling psychology faculty’s attention to international issues has
considerably increased. Notably, the results showed that counseling psychology faculty had
more international activities than publications and presentations.
The path analysis diagram is presented in Fig. 1. The calculation of power indicates that the
sample size was large enough to detect a medium effect 99% of the time. The results of path
analysis indicated that faculty’s international activities were directly related to publications
(β = 0.32, R2 = 0.05, t = 2.8, p = 0.05). Indirectly, they were linked to publications through
presentations (β = 0.62, R2 = 0.05, t = 5.2, p = 0.05; β = 0.53, R2 = 0.50, t = 4.9, p = 0.05,
respectively). However, faculty education abroad was not directly (β = 0.04, R2 = 0.001, t =
1.1, p = 0.05) or indirectly (β = 0.22, R2 = 0.001, t = 1.9, p = 0.05) related to publications. We
also observed that presentations were positively linked to publications (β = 0.53, R2 = 0.50, t =

Table 1 Year and number of faculty’s internationally relevant publications, presentations, and international
activities

Years

1970–75 1975–80 1980–85 1985–90 1990–95 1995–2000 2000–05 2005–10 2010–13

Publications 0 2 11 19 19 41 111 239 190

Presentations 0 0 13 13 19 71 185 480 224
International 0 3 12 45 86 119 207 426 340
Activities
Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72 67

Table 2 Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations for variables of interest

Variables 1 2 3 4

Publications (1) 1.00

Education Abroad (2) .25 1.00
Presentation (3) .74 .36 1.00
International Activities (4) .67 .23 .67 1.00

4.9, p = 0.05). Education abroad was also positively linked to international activities (β = 0.23,
t = 2.9, R2 = 0.05, p = 0.05). Overall, the variables included in the model predicted 61% of the
variability in the publications.

Summary and Discussion

Counseling psychology faculty professional interests and activities are an important source for
increasing international knowledge, awareness, and competencies in the counseling profession.
This awareness provides variety in worldviews and clinical lenses, and prepares counselors to
better understand and serve individuals from different cultural and international backgrounds
(Leong and Ponterotto 2003). This study demonstrated the impact of faculty’s education
abroad experiences, international activities, and presentations on their publications related to
international issues. The results indicated that faculty’s education abroad experiences did not
predict their international publications, but their publications were predicted by their presen-
tations and other international activities.
Counseling psychology faculty members have an important role in promoting interna-
tionalization through their own international connections, collaborations, and activities
(Turner-Essel et al. 2007). This study demonstrated that such activities might lead to an
increase in faculty’s publications about international issues. International activities such as
collaborating with international colleagues on projects also provide opportunities for
counseling psychologists to immerse themselves in the culture of the country in which
they carry out their studies, and build connections with the local communities. Such
connections help counseling psychologists increase their knowledge about cultural values,

Fig. 1 Model of relation among education abroad, international activities presentations, and publications. Note:
Numbers in regular font show standardized coefficients and numbers in italics are the bootstrapping results.
*Italicized numbers above 1.96 are considered statistically significant
68 Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72

norms, behaviors, and language skills (Gerstein and Ægisdóttir 2007). Thus, it is crucial
that future scholars investigate factors that are responsible for initiating counseling
psychology faculty members’ interest in international collaborations and activities. Spe-
cifically, examining the motivation of those faculty members who engage in international
work can be beneficial for furthering the internationalization of the field.
Furthermore, although there are increasing numbers of U.S. counseling psychology faculty
members who seem to be more focused on and interested in international populations and
topics compared to four decades ago, many others have not considered or incorporated
international populations, perspectives, and activities into their professional work. Leong
and Leach (2007) argued that U.S. counseling psychologists have not demonstrated much
interest in internationalization and psychological research in other countries. Several factors
might explain this lack of attention to international issues. In this context, Gerstein and
Ægisdóttir (2007) discussed some methodological challenges that counseling psychologists
might face when engaging in international research. These challenges include difficulties in
accessing international populations, differences in concepts and constructs, high costs, and
difficulties related to cross cultural validity. Furthermore, conducting international research is a
very time-consuming task, which could be discouraging for counseling psychology re-
searchers. Wang and Heppner (2009) noted that similarity in areas of expertise, mutual respect,
developing problem solving strategies and cross-cultural competencies are important factors
that facilitate international collaborations.
In their investigation of four major counseling psychology journals’ publications from 2000
to 2004, Gerstein and Ægisdóttir (2007) concluded that only 6% of the published articles in
those journals were related to international topics or populations. More recently, Pieterse et al.
(2011) examined two U.S. counseling psychology journals from 1997 to 2009 and found that
only 10% of the published articles were internationally focused. Despite the accessibility to
counseling journals with an international focus (i.e., International Journal for the Advancement
of Counselling, International Journal of Psychology and Counselling), these numbers reflect
the slow growth in scholarly interest in international issues and research. This lack of emphasis
on international issues is not limited to the counseling profession. Indeed, it is a trend in the
field of psychology overall that needs to be changed. Arnett (2008) noted that the psycholog-
ical research published in major American psychology journals is based on only 5% of the
world population. He emphasized the differences between American culture and other cultures
in the world, and the different problems associated with generalizing research outcomes from
Western populations to all human populations.
To decrease the counseling profession’s encapsulation (Leung 2003) and to further inter-
nationalize the field, it is important that counseling psychologists understand why focusing on
and involvement in internationalization processes and international issues are important, and
how a lack of this attention can harm the profession. This understanding facilitates setting
criteria that enhances international works and collaborations of counseling psychologists. We
encourage counseling psychology faculty members, department heads, and university officials
to recognize that international research is a time consuming task. This consideration is
especially important for those faculty members who are in tenure track positions, and want
to engage in international research. It is also important for both university departments and
psychology organizations to provide funding opportunities for activities or projects with an
international focus. Counseling organizations or divisions can also play an important role in
creating and facilitating collaborative opportunities in which counselors collaborate with their
international counterparts.
Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72 69

Overall, it is critical for psychology and counseling organizations, training programs,

faculty, and students to consider the benefits of internationalization. Norsworthy et al.
(2009) noted that counseling psychologists’ international collaborations provide a variety of
opportunities for growth and learning. Past experiences of counseling psychologists involved
in international research (Wang and Heppner 2009) indicated that international collaborations
could increase cross-cultural competencies, international teaching and learning opportunities,
as well as presentations and publications.
This study possesses a few limitations that should be recognized. First, it did not include the
curricula vitae of recently retired faculty or those who did not post their information online, or
those that were incomplete. Those faculty members might have some international activities
that were not included in this study. Therefore, the results need to be viewed as an estimation
of faculty engagement in international activities. Second, since we only used faculty’s vitae as
the data source, we only identified and investigated the role of presentations, education, and
international activities. Other factors might influence faculty’s publications about international
issues and internationalization of the counseling profession that were not included in this study,
such as social and political factors or available funding for research or involvements. Third, as
explained earlier, the information presented in regard to more recent years might not fully
reflect faculty’s international publications, presentations, or activities. Fourth, when counting
faculty’s publications, we combined different types of publications such as journal articles,
book chapters, reports, or newsletters. Each type of published work might have different
readerships and impacts.
We recommend that future studies use other research methods such as interviews or
questionnaires to gather a deeper understanding of factors influencing internationalization
of counseling psychology and faculty’s publications. It is also important for future studies
to investigate why some faculty members incorporate international perspectives or topics
into their professional work while others do not, and to further explore some of the barriers
counseling psychology faculty might face when engaging in international research, teach-
ing, or practice.
Fifth, this study was limited to investigating the internationalization of counseling psychol-
ogy in the U.S. context. We need to consider that internationalization is broader than just U.S.
counseling psychologists focusing beyond national boundaries. Not considering other dynam-
ics that might be influencing the internationalization of counseling and specifically counseling
psychology is another limitation of this study. Future studies could incorporate other settings,
and broader factors such as social, cultural, political and economic factors, and study the
impact of these forces on internationalization of the field.
Finally, the study was limited to counseling psychology faculty’s impact on the
internationalization of counseling, thus, only studying one domain of the field of counsel-
ing. Future studies could well investigate how the results of this study might apply to the
wider field of counseling.
Although the processes of incorporating international perspectives in the field and collab-
orating with international colleagues started several years ago (Gerstein et al. 2009), consid-
erable efforts are still needed to truly internationalize the profession. In addition, despite its
considerable emphasis on diversity, multiculturalism, and social justice (Marsella and Pedersen
2004), the field of counseling psychology has mostly ignored international issues and popu-
lations, or important global dynamics. Counseling psychology’s emphasis on multiculturalism
appears to be limited to the U.S. population (Moodley 2007). Internationalization requires
emphasizing that diversity and multiculturalism are not limited to U.S. borders, and different
70 Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72

international dynamics impact the field of counseling. Moreover, to internationalize the field,
more receptivity and respect for international scholarship is needed (Pieterse et al. 2011).
Internationalizing counseling could bring more diversity, cultural awareness, and understand-
ing into the field. Internationalization is also in line with the counseling profession’s social
justice agenda. It is unlikely that the field of counseling will fully achieve its overall social
justice and multiculturalism agenda unless it focuses more on internationalizing the field. In
this way, counseling psychology faculty could play a significant role in incorporating inter-
national issues into their professional work.
One aspect of internationalization involves individuals focusing more on internationalization
or incorporating an international perspective when studying different topics or working with
different populations. This might help the field of counseling and psychology to better under-
stand different cultural groups worldwide. However, it is important to consider that internation-
alization is an important and valuable process in counseling, and could provide counselors more
opportunities to learn from global changes, incorporate these changes into the field, and respond
to such changes through the skills and tools they have and new skills to be developed.
Through internationalization, counselors could use their competencies at international and
global levels and positively impact global changes for the future. For instance, counselors
could put the field of counseling’s emphasis on multiculturalism and social justice into practice
by creating or getting involved in international social justice activities. Thus, counselors could
have a significant role in international social justice movements in the future. Internationali-
zation could connect counselors in the U.S. with other mental health professionals around the
world (Leung et al. 2009), which might provide more power and opportunities to influence
global changes and dynamics. Additionally, further internationalization of the field could
change counseling knowledge and theories, supervision and training approaches, as well as
the emphasis on social justice and diversity in counseling.

Author’s Contribution All authors contributed to the development of the study and this article.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest The authors declared that they have no conflict on interest.

References

Ægisdóttir, S., & Gerstein, L. H. (2010). International counseling competencies: A new frontier in multicultural
training. In J. G. Ponterotto, J. M. Casas, L. A. Suzuki, & C. M. Alexander (Eds.), Handbook of
multicultural counseling (pp. 175–188). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
American Psychological Association (2013). Accredited programs in counseling psychology. Retrieved from:
http://www.apa.org/ed/accreditation/programs/accred-counseling.aspx.
Arnett, J. J. (2008). The neglected 95%: why American psychology needs to become less American. American
Psychologist, 63, 602–614. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.63.7.602.
Chin, W. W. (2010). How to write up and report PLS analyses. In V. Esposito Vinzi, W. W. Chin, J. Henseler, &
H. Wang (Eds.), Handbook of partial least squares: Concepts, methods and applications (pp. 655–690).
Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
Efron, B., & Tibshirani, R. (1993). An introduction to the bootstrap. New York: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Forrest, L. (2008). President’s report: reflections on the international counseling psychology conference.
American Psychology Association Society of Counseling Psychology Newsletter, 29(2), 1–7.
Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72 71

Fouad, N. A. (1991). Training counselors to counsel international students. The Counseling Psychologist, 19, 66–
71. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000091191005.
Gerstein, L. H. (2006). Counseling psychologists as international social architects. In R. L. Toporek, L. H.
Gerstein, N. A. Fouad, G. Roysircar-Sodowsky, & T. Israel (Eds.), Handbook for social justice in counseling
psychology: Leadership, vision, and action (pp. 377–387). CA: Sage Publications.
Gerstein, L. H., & Ægisdóttir, S. (2007). Training international social change agents: transcending a U.S
counseling paradigm. Counselor Education and Supervision, 47, 123–139. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-
6978.
Gerstein, L. H., Heppner, P. P., Ægisdóttir, S., Leung, S.-M. A., & Norsworthy, K. L. (2009). Cross cultural
counseling: History, challenges and rationale. In L. H. Gerstein, P. P. Heppner, S. Ægisdóttir, S.-M. A.
Leung, & K. L. Norsworthy (Eds.), International handbook of cross-cultural counseling: Cultural assump-
tions and practices worldwide (pp. 3–32). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hair, J. F., Ringle, C. M., & Sarstedt, M. (2011). PLS-SEM: indeed a silver bullet. Journal of Marketing Theory
and Practice, 19, 139–151. https://doi.org/10.2753/MTP1069-6679190202.
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain
Sciences, 33, 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X.
Heppner, P. P., & Gerstein, L. H. (2008). International developments in counseling psychology. In E. Altmaier &
B. D. Johnson (Eds.), Volume 1, Encyclopedia of counseling: Changes and challenges for counseling in the
21st century (pp. 263–265). CA: Sage Publications.
Heppner, P. P., Leong, F. T. L., & Chiao, H. (2008). A growing internationalization of counseling psychology. In
S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (4th ed., pp. 68–85). Hoboken:
Wiley.
Heppner, P. P., Ægisdóttir, S., Leung, S.-M. A., Duan, C., Helms, J. E., Gerstein, L. H., & Pedersen, P. B.
(2009). The intersection of multicultural and corss-natioal movements in the United States. In L. H.
Gerstein, P. P. Heppner, S. Ægisdóttir, S.-M. A. Leung, & K. L. Norsworthy (Eds.), International
handbook of cross-cultural counseling: Cultural assumptions and practices worldwide (pp. 33–52).
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Hwang, H., Malhotra, N. K., Kim, Y., Tomiuk, M. A., & Hong, S. (2010). A comparative study on parameter
recovery of three approaches to structural equation modeling. Journal of Marketing Research, 47, 699–712.
Kwan, K. K., & Gerstein, L. H. (2008). Envisioning a counseling psychology of the world: the mission of the
international forum. The Counseling Psychologist, 36, 182–187. https://doi.org/10.1177
/0011000007313269.
Leong, F. T. L., & Blustein, D. L. (2000). Toward a global vision of counseling psychology. The Counseling
Psychologist, 28, 5–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000000281001.
Leong, F. T. L., & Leach, M. M. (2007). Internationalising counseling psychology in the United States: a SWOT
analysis. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 56, 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-
0597.2007.00283.x.
Leong, F. T., & Ponterotto, J. G. (2003). A proposal for internationalizing counseling psychology in the United
States: rationale, recommendations, and challenges. The Counseling Psychologist, 31, 381–395. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0011000003031004001.
Leung, S. A. (2003). A journey worth traveling: globalization of counseling psychology. The Counseling
Psychologist, 31, 412–419. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000003031004004.
Leung, S. A., Clawson, T., Norsworthy, K. L., Tena, A., Szilagyi, A., & Rogers, J. (2009). Internationalization of
the counseling profession: An indigenous perspective. In L. H. Gerstein, P. P. Heppner, S. Ægisdóttir, S. A.
Leung, & K. L. Norsworthy (Eds.), International handbook of cross-cultural counseling (pp. 113–123).
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Marsella, A. J., & Pedersen, P. (2004). Internationalizing the counseling psychology curriculum: toward new
values, competencies and directions. Counselling Psychology Quarterly, 17, 413–423. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09515070412331331246.
McWhirter, J. J. (2000). And now, up go the walls: constructing an international room for counseling psychology.
The Counseling Psychologist, 28, 117–122. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000000281007.
Moodley, R. (2007). Re-placing multiculturalism in counselling and psychotherapy. British Journal of Guidance
and Counselling, 35(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/03069880601106740.
Norsworthy, K. L., Leung, S.-M. A., Heppner, P. P., & Wang, L. F. (2009). Crossing borders in collaboration. In
L. H. Gerstein, P. P. Heppner, S. Ægisdóttir, S.-M. A. Leung, & K. L. Norsworthy (Eds.), International
handbook of cross-cultural counseling: Cultural assumptions and practices worldwide (pp. 125–139).
Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Pieterse, A., Fang, K., & Evans, S. (2011). Examining the internationalization of counseling psychology
scholarship: a content analysis of two US journals. International Journal for the Advancement of
Counselling, 33, 280–292. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10447-011-9134-4.
72 Int J Adv Counselling (2019) 41:61–72

Rindskopf, D. (1984). Structural equation models. Sociological Methods and Research, 13(1), 109–119.
Turner-Essel, L., & Waehler, C. (2009). Integrating internationalization in counseling psychology training
programs. The Counseling Psychologist, 37, 877–901. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000009336149.
Turner-Essel, L., Yakunina, E., Glover, L., & Chessar, S. (2007). Integrating internationalization, multicultural-
ism and social justice in counseling psychology. Poster presented at the American Psychological Association
Annual Convention in San Francisco, California.
Wang, L.-F., & Heppner, P. P. (2009). Cross-cultural collaboration. In L. H. Gerstein, P. P. Heppner, S. Ægisdóttir,
S.-M. A. Leung, & K. L. Norsworthy (Eds.), International handbook of cross-cultural counseling: Cultural
assumptions and practices worldwide (pp. 141–154). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Wong, K. K.-K. (2013). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) techniques using
SmartPLS. Marketing Bulletin, 24, 1–32.