US dataswitch to UK
Clinical and Counseling Psychologists
conducting assessments of patients' risk for harm, maintaining current knowledge of relevant research and developing and implementing individual treatment plans. If that's your week, this page is about your job.
The honest answer
AI changes the edges of this job, not the middle: counseling individuals, groups or families to help them understand problems is work software can't reach.
What shifts is maintaining current knowledge of relevant research: the paper around the work, not the work.
Your week, as this page understands it
Assess, diagnose, and treat mental and emotional disorders of individuals through observation, interview, and psychological tests. Help individuals with distress or maladjustment understand their problems through their knowledge of case history, interviews with patients, and theory. Provide individual or group counseling services to assist individuals in achieving more effective personal, social, educational, and vocational development and adjustment. May design behavior modification programs and consult with medical personnel regarding the best treatment for patients. The job title says “clinical” or “counseling psychologists”: officially one job, two names. The real job is the part underneath: counseling individuals, groups or families to help them understand problems, deal with crisis situations, define goals and developing realistic action plans. That is the thing someone has to be right about.
The exposed part of this job is specific, and we won’t pretend it is coming back. But clinical and counseling psychologists is not one task. It is 30 scored ones, and they are nowhere near equally exposed. The most durable of them, on this evidence, is counseling individuals, groups or families to help them understand problems, deal with crisis situations, define goals and developing realistic action plans, and the ledger below shows exactly why.
Where the work sits, by task weight
- shifting to AI
- 4%
- changing shape
- 26%
- staying human
- 70%
These bars are tasks changing hands, not people being counted out. The ledger below shows which.
Whole-job exposure score 32 out of 100 (25–38 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, across 30 scored tasks. The number is the support for the sentence above it, not a headline about anyone’s future.
How we know this
What is measured: Every published task statement for clinical and counseling psychologists is rated on five dimensions: can a model produce the output, does the work need a body in a room, does it need a legally accountable person, does it depend on a person being trusted in the moment, and how much data exists. A published formula turns those five ratings into the score; the model never writes the number.
How the bar is built: Each task’s share of the bar is its published importance weight, so a task you do all day counts for more than one you do twice a year.
Release: 2026-q4.1, scores computed 2026-08-04. Read the full method.
Your job, task by task
These are the official task statements for this occupation, in plain English, sorted by what the evidence says is happening to each one. The official wording sits under every line so you can check the rewrite against it.
- 1 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
Shifting to AI
1 taskTasks today’s tools can already do most of. This is the part we will not soften: where these rows are the bulk of your week, the week changes.
Maintaining current knowledge of relevant research
This is reading one thing and writing another: current knowledge of relevant research in, a record out. That is the shape today's tools are built for.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Maintain current knowledge of relevant research.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 83 out of 100 (79–87 allowing for uncertainty): very high exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Keeping up with published research is reading and summarizing literature, which AI does quickly and accurately.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Changing shape
8 tasksTasks where the machine takes the producing and a person keeps the checking, the deciding, or the answering-for-it. For most jobs this is the biggest group, and it is where "transformation, not termination" is literally visible.
Documenting patient information, session notes, progress notes, recommendations and treatment plans
The software now makes the first pass at patient information, session notes, progress notes, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Document patient information including session notes, progress notes, recommendations, and treatment plans.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (52–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Session notes and treatment plans can be drafted from the consultation, though the clinician must check and own the record.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Writing reports on clients and maintaining required paperwork
The software now makes the first pass at reports, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Write reports on clients and maintain required paperwork.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 56 out of 100 (52–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Client reports and required paperwork follow set formats, so drafts come easily and the psychologist edits and signs.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing therapeutic and treatment plans based on clients' interests
The software now makes the first pass at therapeutic, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Develop therapeutic and treatment plans based on clients' interests, abilities, or needs.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 40 out of 100 (33–47 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Treatment plans follow published frameworks and draft well, but a licensed psychologist must set and own them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Consulting reference material, such as textbooks, manuals or journals, to identify symptoms, make diagnoses or develop approaches
The software now makes the first pass at reference material, but someone has to be answerable for the result, and it cannot be the software. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Consult reference material, such as textbooks, manuals, or journals, to identify symptoms, make diagnoses, or develop approaches to treatment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 52 out of 100 (45–59 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Searching manuals and journals for symptoms and treatments is strong AI territory, but the diagnosis itself stays licensed.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 4/4.
Developing, directing and participating in training programs for staff and students
The software now makes the first pass at training programs, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Develop, direct, and participate in training programs for staff and students.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 46 out of 100 (39–53 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Training material drafts well from documented practice, but running the sessions still relies on a credible person delivering them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Staying human
21 tasksTasks that stay with a person, because they happen in the physical world, because the rules need someone accountable, or because the value is that a specific person does them.
Conducting assessments of patients' risk for harm to self
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for assessments of patients' risk, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Conduct assessments of patients' risk for harm to self or others.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 17 out of 100 (10–24 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Risk of self-harm is judged in a live clinical relationship, and the law keeps that call in licensed clinical hands.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Identifying psychological, emotional or behavioral issues and diagnosing disorders
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for psychological, emotional or behavioral issues and diagnosing disorders, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 5 · CoreSource: “Identify psychological, emotional, or behavioral issues and diagnose disorders, using information obtained from interviews, tests, records, or reference materials.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (21–29 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Diagnosis is a licensed act, and the signals come from how a person presents rather than from text alone.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Counseling individuals, groups or families to help them understand problems
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for individuals, groups or families, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Counsel individuals, groups, or families to help them understand problems, deal with crisis situations, define goals, and develop realistic action plans.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 6 out of 100 (0–13 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Counselling works through the relationship itself, and a registered practitioner must provide it.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Interacting with clients to assist them in gaining insight
The rules require a named, qualified person to answer for clients, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Interact with clients to assist them in gaining insight, defining goals, and planning action to achieve effective personal, social, educational, or vocational development and adjustment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (4–12 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Helping someone reach their own insight depends on the therapeutic relationship itself, which cannot be handed to software.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Show the other 20 tasks
Providing occupational, educational or other information to individuals so that they can make educational or vocational plans
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at occupational, educational or other information, but the part that matters is a person saying it and standing behind it. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Provide occupational, educational, or other information to individuals so that they can make educational or vocational plans.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 53 out of 100 (46–60 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Careers and course information is well documented and easily assembled, though people often want it explained to them.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Conducting research to develop or improve diagnostic or therapeutic counseling techniques
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at research, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Conduct research to develop or improve diagnostic or therapeutic counseling techniques.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 50 out of 100 (43–57 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Research on counseling techniques can be designed and analyzed with heavy AI help, but running studies remains human work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 0/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning, supervising and conducting psychological research and writing papers describing research results
changing shapeThe software now makes the first pass at psychological research, but the deciding part still needs a person. So the job becomes checking and deciding rather than producing.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Plan, supervise, and conduct psychological research and write papers describing research results.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 49 out of 100 (42–56 allowing for uncertainty): partial exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; mistakes that are cheap to catch.
The rating behind it: Writing up results is well supported by AI, but designing and running the research remains the psychologist's job.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 0/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Referring clients to other specialists
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for clients, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Refer clients to other specialists, institutions, or support services as necessary.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 39 out of 100 (32–46 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: reading one thing and writing another; the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Matching a client to the right service is largely a directory and criteria task, though the handover is personal.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 3/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Consulting with other professionals, agencies or universities to discuss therapies, treatments
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles other professionals, agencies or universities and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Consult with other professionals, agencies, or universities to discuss therapies, treatments, counseling resources or techniques, and to share occupational information.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 35 out of 100 (28–42 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Sharing techniques and resources with other agencies is professional conversation that benefits from established working relationships.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Evaluating the effectiveness of counseling or treatments and the accuracy and completeness of diagnoses
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for the effectiveness, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Evaluate the effectiveness of counseling or treatments and the accuracy and completeness of diagnoses, modifying plans or diagnoses as necessary.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 31 out of 100 (24–38 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Outcome measures are documented and can be analyzed, yet changing a diagnosis or plan is a licensed judgment.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Preparing written evaluations of individuals' psychological competence for court hearings
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for written evaluations of individuals' psychological competence, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Prepare written evaluations of individuals' psychological competence for court hearings.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 27 out of 100 (20–34 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Court reports on psychological competence are legally the work of a licensed psychologist who examined the person.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Providing consulting services, including educational programs, outreach programs or prevention talks
staying humanThe value here is that a specific person handles services, including educational programs and stands behind it. That is earned, not computed.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Provide consulting services, including educational programs, outreach programs, or prevention talks to schools, social service agencies, businesses, or the general public.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Talk content is easy to prepare, but outreach sessions are delivered in person to schools, agencies or businesses.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 1/4 · needs an accountable person 1/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Planning and developing accredited psychological service programs in psychiatric centers or hospitals
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for accredited psychological service programs, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 3 · CoreSource: “Plan and develop accredited psychological service programs in psychiatric centers or hospitals, in collaboration with psychiatrists and other professional staff.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Designing an accredited service depends on local staffing, funding and politics that only insiders know.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Directing, coordinating and evaluating activities of staff and interns engaged in patient assessment and treatment
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for activities of staff, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Direct, coordinate, and evaluate activities of staff and interns engaged in patient assessment and treatment.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Directing and appraising clinical staff depends on watching people work and on the standing they have with the team.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Providing psychological or administrative services and advice to private firms or community agencies regarding mental health programs or individual cases
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for psychological, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Provide psychological or administrative services and advice to private firms or community agencies regarding mental health programs or individual cases.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 26 out of 100 (19–33 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Advising firms on mental health programs depends on the specific organization and on being trusted with sensitive cases.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Selecting, administering, score and interpreting psychological tests to obtain information on individuals' intelligence, achievements, interests or personalities
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for score, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Select, administer, score, and interpret psychological tests to obtain information on individuals' intelligence, achievements, interests, or personalities.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Scoring is already automated, yet choosing and interpreting psychological tests is restricted to licensed psychologists.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Developing and implementing individual treatment plans
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for individual treatment plans, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Develop and implement individual treatment plans, specifying type, frequency, intensity, and duration of therapy.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 25 out of 100 (18–32 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Writing the plan is straightforward; carrying out therapy at the stated intensity is licensed, in-person clinical work.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Advising clients on how they could be helped by counseling
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for clients, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Advise clients on how they could be helped by counseling.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 24 out of 100 (17–31 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: the same decision, made over and over; someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Describing how counseling helps is easy to write, but a hesitant client usually needs a person to hear it from.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 3/4.
Consulting with or providing consultation to other doctors
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for or providing consultation, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Consult with or provide consultation to other doctors, therapists, or clinicians regarding patient care.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 22 out of 100 (15–29 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Case discussion with other clinicians is a professional exchange between licensed people about a specific patient.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 2/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Collecting information about individuals or clients
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for information, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Collect information about individuals or clients, using interviews, case histories, observational techniques, and other assessment methods.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Case histories can be structured by software, but people disclose difficult material to a person they trust.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Obtaining and studying medical, psychological, social and family histories by interviewing individuals, couples or families and by reviewing records
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for medical, psychological, social and family histories, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Obtain and study medical, psychological, social, and family histories by interviewing individuals, couples, or families and by reviewing records.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Records can be summarized easily, but drawing out family and personal history depends on trust built in the room.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 2/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Observing individuals at play
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for individuals, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 3 · SupplementalSource: “Observe individuals at play, in group interactions, or in other contexts to detect indications of cognitive, intellectual, or developmental disabilities.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 21 out of 100 (14–28 allowing for uncertainty): low exposure, medium confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it.
The rating behind it: Spotting developmental signs while a child plays means being present and reading behavior as it unfolds.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 2/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 1/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Supervising and training interns, clinicians in training and other counselors
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for interns, clinicians, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Supervise and train interns, clinicians in training, and other counselors.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 11 out of 100 (7–15 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Supervising trainees toward licensure must legally be done by a licensed clinician, and it works through the relationship.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 3/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
Using a variety of treatment methods
staying humanThe rules require a named, qualified person to answer for a variety of treatment methods, and that person cannot be a piece of software.
importance 4 · CoreSource: “Use a variety of treatment methods, such as psychotherapy, hypnosis, behavior modification, stress reduction therapy, psychodrama, or play therapy.” (O*NET task statement)
How this row was scored
Exposure score: 8 out of 100 (4–12 allowing for uncertainty): minimal exposure, high confidence.
Why it sits in this group: someone qualified has to answer for it; the value is that a specific person does it.
The rating behind it: Delivering therapy is a licensed activity built on a live relationship with the individual client.
The five ratings: output a model can produce 1/4 · needs a body in a room 0/4 · needs an accountable person 3/4 · needs to be trusted in the moment 4/4 · how much data exists 2/4.
What this job pays, and how many people do it
- Median pay
- $100,580a year, the middle of the range, so half earn more and half earn less.bls-oews, 2025 · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
How we know this
Source: bls-oews
Reference period: May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
Rounding: Shown as published.
- People doing this job
- 75,990in the US, 2025.bls-oews · May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx)
What is deliberately not here: a forecast of how many of these jobs exist in ten years. Where an official projection exists for a market we publish it with its vintage; where it does not, we leave the space empty rather than borrow the other country’s number.
Why this is shifting
The reason is boringly specific. Most of what is shifting here is reading one thing and writing another: current knowledge of relevant research in, a record out. The rows above are exactly that shape: maintaining current knowledge of relevant research and documenting patient information, session notes, progress notes, recommendations and treatment plans. What it cannot do is be answerable: individuals, groups or families need a named person the rules will accept, and software cannot be that person. Which is why this page talks about your tasks changing, not your job ending.
Your move
Over a pint: what I’d tell you if you were my friend
Start with what does not change: counseling individuals, groups or families to help them understand problems is the middle of this job, and the evidence on this page says it stays with a person.
So, given all that: 4% of this job's task weight sits in rows the software is already learning, 26% in rows that change shape rather than disappear, and 70% in rows it is nowhere near. That is the position, measured across 30 scored tasks. It is not a forecast about you.
So the thing worth your attention is not the job going away. It is the layer around it. Maintaining current knowledge of relevant research is the part turning into software, and being the person who understands that layer is worth money.
This week: one thing
Ask the one question. Find whoever is bringing new software into your workplace (the manager, the office, whoever runs the system) and ask them what it is meant to do to current knowledge of relevant research, and what it is not meant to touch. Ten minutes, this week, before anyone decides it for you.
- What you end up holding
- a straight answer about what is actually being rolled out, and when
- How long it takes
- ten minutes
If there’s nobody obvious to ask, or you’d rather not ask your manager: Put the same question to your union rep, your shift lead or the person who has been there longest, in person, over a break. Same ten minutes, same answer, and you will usually get a straighter one. Write down what they say. The note is the artifact, and it tells you whether individuals, groups or families are in scope or not. Nothing to log into, no license needed.
Over the next 90 days
Get inside the tool rollout rather than waiting for it. Over the next ninety days, ask to be in the group that tests, checks or signs off whatever new system arrives near documenting patient information, session notes, progress notes, recommendations and treatment plans. It is usually an unglamorous seat that nobody fights for, and it is the one that decides how the software is used on your job rather than to it.
Over the next 12 months
On this evidence I would not retrain out of this job, and I will say that plainly rather than hedge it. The task list here is dominated by work that stays with a person. What I would do with a year is get formally recognised for the layer around it (the systems, the compliance, the planning), so you are the one who understands the software instead of the one it is done to. Before you pay for anything, use CareerOneStop - Find local training. It is free, it is the Labor Department's own service, and it is listed below with the rest of the free routes.
The roads out of here, and why I am not sending you down them
I looked at the obvious moves out of this job, and here is what I found.
I checked the 12 nearest US occupations to clinical and counseling psychologists (nearest by the work that AI is not taking, not by job title), and none of them survived. The closest was educational, guidance, and career counselors and advisors: only about 6% of its durable work is work you already do and it pays 36.0% less. And on the numbers you do not need one. This job scores 32/100 here, with only 4% of the task list in the top band, and “conduct assessments of patients' risk for harm to self or others” is not work that hands over cleanly. None of them beats deepening what you already have.
How that was checked: this job was compared against all 830 US occupations in this release on their official task statements, and the 12 nearest were examined one by one. A move that turns on an industry, an employer or a qualification rather than on the work itself will not show up in a check like that. And this release carries no licence register, so anything you are weighing needs that looked up separately.
3 moves I checked and rejected
These are the obvious-looking jumps. They are here with their reasons rather than quietly dropped, because the ones that fail are worth knowing about. It is one less thing to turn over at night.
Educational, Guidance, and Career Counselors and Advisors
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already counsel individuals, groups, or families to help them understand problems, deal with crisis…, and their equivalent is to counsel individuals or groups to help them understand and overcome personal, social, or…. Across both published task lists that is about 6% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 6% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $64,330 against your $100,580, 36.0% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
Psychologists, All Other
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already obtain and study medical, psychological, social, and family histories by interviewing individuals, couples…, and their equivalent is to provide education or counseling to individuals and families. Across both published task lists that is about 6% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 6% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. And it is a narrow door: about 18,820 of those jobs against 75,990 of yours (OEWS May 2025), 25% as many seats.
Healthcare Social Workers
Why it looked obvious: It came up as a near neighbour on the work AI is not taking: you already counsel individuals, groups, or families to help them understand problems, deal with crisis…, and their equivalent is to organize support groups or counsel family members to assist them in understanding, dealing…. Across both published task lists that is about 3% of the durable work in that job.
Why I am not recommending it: Almost none of it is work you already do: about 3% of the durable side of that job. That is a different job, not a next step. It is a pay cut, in those words: $67,880 against your $100,580, 32.5% less (OEWS May 2025 (both)). Retraining to earn less is a decision, not advice.
What I’d stop worrying about
A friend tells you what not to spend fear on. This is that list.
The headline number you read somewhere
The big “X% of jobs” figures are about the whole economy, not about you. The number that describes your job is on this page: 4% of its task weight, across 30 scored tasks. Every row behind it is printed above with the source. Check ours; ignore theirs.
The headlines about your trade disappearing
They are usually about the technology, not the timetable. Changes to work like counseling individuals, groups or families to help them understand problems arrive through rules, insurance and money, slowly and visibly. This page tracks the task evidence and will move when it moves.
Retraining out of a job that is holding up
On this evidence I would not spend money leaving. Spend it on the layer around the job instead: the tools, the paperwork, the planning. That is where the change actually is.
The “obvious” next job everyone suggests
I checked the obvious moves and most of them did not survive. The reasons are printed with the routes above, including the pay and the gate. A move that fails on the numbers is worth knowing about so you can stop turning it over at night.
You are reading the United States figures
The United Kingdom splits this work across more than one official group, of which Other psychologists is the closest. The pay and employment figures are not directly comparable, and we do not average them together.
Switch to the United Kingdom page →partial match
The other groups this work is counted across:
In UK official statistics this job is counted as Other psychologists, Clinical psychologists and Psychotherapists and cognitive behaviour therapists. Pay is shown separately for each of those groups (medians cannot be averaged together), while the task list and the scores on this page are for this group only.
Your route through this
Where to go next, and what it costs
Free, and complete
The moves above cost nothing. These are the real services that go with them: public, government-funded, and free at the point of use. Nothing on this page is behind an email address or a payment.
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Find local training
Search what's running near you, from the Labor Department's own database, before anyone sells you a course.
Free to search; individual programs vary, and some are funded
Anywhere in the US:
An American Job Center will sit down with you for free. Find yours by ZIP code.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
CareerOneStop - Licensed occupations finder
Check what your state actually requires before you pay for anything.
Free
Anywhere in the US:
Free
Why there is no community here
Collab365, who build this site, run paid Spaces for a small number of subjects, and none of them is built for this job. We are not going to point you at the nearest one and call it a fit.
So the free services listed on this page are the whole answer, and it is the same answer we would give a friend.
Noted, and thank you. We’ll email you if a Space for clinical / counseling psychologists launches. Nothing else.
That did not look like an email address, so nothing was saved. Have another go below.
We could not save that. The fault is ours, not yours, and your address was not stored. Please try again later.
No deadline on any of this. The page will still be here, and the data is refreshed on a published schedule rather than when someone wants a headline.
Questions people ask about this job
- Will AI replace Clinical and Counseling Psychologists?
- Not as a job, but it is already doing parts of the work. Across the 30 official task statements scored for Clinical and Counseling Psychologists (United States, SOC 19-3033), 4% of the importance-weighted core work is made of tasks today's AI could already do most of. The overall exposure score is 32 out of 100 (range 25–38, band: low). That is a statement about tasks, not about headcount: this measures what AI could do, not whether any employer adopts it, whether the law allows it, or whether doing the routine parts faster creates more demand for the human parts. Figures are from release 2026-q4.1.
- Which tasks in “Clinical and Counseling Psychologists” can AI already do?
- The highest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Maintain current knowledge of relevant research” (83/100, very high); “Document patient information including session notes, progress notes, recommendations, and treatment plans” (56/100, partial); “Write reports on clients and maintain required paperwork” (56/100, partial). Each score comes from five published 0–4 ratings turned into a number by a published formula, and each carries the model's one-sentence reason on the page.
- Which tasks in “Clinical and Counseling Psychologists” stay human?
- About 70% of this job's task weight sits in work that scores low for AI exposure. The lowest-scoring tasks in release 2026-q4.1 are: “Counsel individuals, groups, or families to help them understand problems, deal with crisis situations, define goals, and develop realistic action plans” (6/100, minimal); “Use a variety of treatment methods, such as psychotherapy, hypnosis, behavior modification, stress reduction therapy, psychodrama, or play therapy” (8/100, minimal); “Interact with clients to assist them in gaining insight, defining goals, and planning action to achieve effective personal, social, educational, or vocationa…” (8/100, minimal). Low scores usually mean the task needs a body in a room, a legally accountable human, or trust built in real time. Those are the three things the scoring rubric treats as gates rather than obstacles.
- What should someone working in “Clinical and Counseling Psychologists” do about AI?
- Start from the ledger rather than the headline: 4% of this job's weighted core work is exposed, and roughly 70% is not. The practical move is to spend more of your week on the tasks that score low, the ones above, and to get fluent at directing AI through the tasks that score high, because those are the parts that change whether or not you are ready for them. This page does not predict your job, and nothing here is career advice tailored to you: the score describes the occupation, not the person.
- How is the AI exposure score for Clinical and Counseling Psychologists calculated?
- Each official task statement for the occupation is rated on five published 0–4 dimensions (output replicability, physical embodiment, licensed accountability, real-time human trust, and data availability) by claude-opus-5 using scoring prompt task_scoring_v1.0. The model never writes the score; a published formula turns the five ratings into a 0–100 number, so every score can be recomputed by hand. The occupation figure is the importance-weighted mean across 30 scored tasks. The prompt, the rubric, the formula and the full dataset are published at https://futureproof.collab365.com/method and https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1 under CC BY 4.0.
Where these numbers come from
Worth knowing about these figures
- The match between this job and its counterpart in the other country is partial, so the two pages count slightly different groups of people.
- 1 of this occupation's scored task statements carry a score that was measured under a different occupation's context, because the statement is shared between jobs and has only been scored once so far. Each one names the occupation it was measured under in the free routes below; none is presented as a measurement for this job.
- Task clusters are not derived in this release, so the task-cluster field is empty and no Collab365 Space routing is attached to this occupation yet.
- Task statements
- onet-dbProcessing: catalogue-bridge → onet-im-rt-weighting → task-scoring → score-aggregation
- Task weights
- onet-db (im-rt)
- Scores
- Rubric task_scoring_v1.0, model claude-opus-5, computed 2026-08-05.
- Pay and employment
- bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))bls-oews (May 2025 estimates (national_M2025_dl.xlsx))
Figures on this page come from release 2026-q4.1, published 2026-08-05. Every release keeps its own permanent address, so a figure you cite in March is still there, unchanged, in November.
The plain-English wording on this page is assembled directly from the task statements and the published ratings, not written by hand for this occupation. That is why it is specific, and it is also why we say so.
The routes and free resources further up are today’s, not the release’s (last reviewed 2026-08-05). A route is an offer, not a historical fact, so it moves on its own clock.
Using these figures?
Cite this
Everything on this site is published under CC BY 4.0. Quote it, chart it, sell something built on it. Just say where it came from, and cite the dated release rather than the site, so the figure you quote stays checkable.
Plain text
Collab365 (2026). Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1 (methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0). https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1. Licensed CC BY 4.0. Built with O*NET data (USDOL/ETA, CC BY 4.0); ONS data (Open Government Licence v3.0); GAISI task framework (arXiv:2507.22748, MIT); BLS data (public domain).
BibTeX
@misc{collab365futureproof2026q41,
title = {Collab365 Futureproof: task-level AI exposure for US and UK occupations, release 2026-q4.1},
author = {{Collab365}},
year = {2026},
url = {https://futureproof.collab365.com/data/2026-q4.1},
note = {Release 2026-q4.1, methodVersion 2.0.0, promptVersion task_scoring_v1.0, CC BY 4.0}
}Data as of release 2026-q4.1, published . Releases never change after publication; when the figures move, a new dated release is published beside this one and this one stays exactly where it is.