SAP Who’s Who: Jerrold Lee Shapiro, Ph.D.

Who’s Who: Jerrold Lee Shapiro, PhD

Can you tell me about your educational background and professional experience?

Boston Latin School, diploma 1960

Colby College B.A.  1964

Northwestern University, M.A. 1967

University of Waterloo (Ontario) Ph.D.  1970

APA Internship Hawaii State Hospital in Kaneohe, HI (at the time at Northwestern we were told that we could intern anywhere in the country with an APA approved program. They repeatedly told us of those who went as far away as Ann Arbor, or St. Louis. I wasn’t the typical grad student there. I went to Hawaii – the second major life-changing shift.

I have held a full-time professorship and a clinical practice since 1969 

St. Bonaventure University 1969-70;

University of Hawaii 1970-82;

visiting professor at UC Santa Cruz 1979-80;

Santa Clara University since 1982

Clinical Psychologist from 1969-present (Licensed 1974; retired since 2023)

Consultant to U.S. Air Force (Pacific) 1973-1979

Consultant to family businesses 1983-2020 (Retired)

What inspired you to become a psychologist?

This is both a simple and complicated answer. As a child I always saw the world a little differently than my peers. I had more questions, particularly about authority and was always attuned somewhat to contextual cues.  I mistrusted words when body language was discrepant. So, I came to the field as a person who was curious even from boyhood. Often, I was intrigued by taking a different perception or assumption to understand the world around me (as per fictional heroes like Perry Mason). A second influence was baseball and the notion that 3 successes out of ten tries was superior and one didn’t have to be, or could be, perfect.

Finally, the simple answer – I got to meet Viktor Frankl as a freshman at Colby in 1960. For the first time in my life, I felt as though another person was talking through me as well as to me. I wasn’t the only person in that first lecture who experienced it as life-changing – several others were deeply moved and at least one other, my classmate Judith Milner Coche also ultimately became an existential psychotherapist. 

I had the amazing good fortune to have additional opportunities to meet Dr. Frankl twice later that included some wonderful lengthy dinners. I also had the luck to be able to speak a little Yiddish with him, once while the Jesuit President of Santa Clara, Fr. Locatelli waited with both kindness and a little confusion (as he shifted his weight from one foot to the other).  

What are some common misconceptions about the psychotherapy field that you encounter?

We seem to forget that the term psychotherapy is a very wide umbrella covering many discrepant approaches, theories and goals. Because of that, we have had throughout my career, major battles between schools for supremacy. It is very reminiscent of the story of the 7 blind men describing the elephant. Each school is looking at the field through different filters and hence starting points and claiming to be the correct one. Trying to find the “correct one” is the misconception.

At its core, there is a real difference between major perceptions of psychotherapy: Those that are symptom-oriented, technique-driven and those that are whole person – life changing enterprises. Of course, both have their place, but no one position, regardless of the form of evidence provided, is right for all clients. Indeed, there is an almost complete ignorance regarding a client’s theory of change for them. I am convinced that there are indeed psychoanalytic clients, CBT clients, existential clients etc. Best if therapists adopted the interventions to the client’s internal being and the clients’ context, including culture, gender socio-economic reality and the like.

One last related point. The question of what constitutes an evidence base. Consider the Law of the Instrument (Kaplan 1964). Basically, if I can choose the measuring stick, I can get the results I expect from my theory. There is truly evidence for all major forms of therapy. At the present time, some have made numerical changes holy and have elevated those. I spent years producing random-controlled outcome studies with attention and wait list control groups and I am proud with those statistically significant results. However, in my clinical practice, often clients respond more to the relationship and connection, than to the specific techniques. Both are evidence-based, but there is no one-size-fits-all answer despite the research-based clinical vs clinically-based research preference in academia, which is often focused on generating numbers for grants and tenure.    

What has been the most rewarding part of your work?

I think the most rewards have come from having an impact on the lives of others. Clients over the years, graduate students (whom I have taught almost exclusively since 1969). I love seeing the metaphorical light go on above someone’s head and seeing them use those insights to make good changes in their lives. Being able to express my creativity as a clinician, in writing and in the classroom. I deeply enjoy being part of a team with my colleagues, all contributing with different strengths towards creative goals. I also enjoy the ability to study what strikes my interest, in whichever ways I want.

What has been the most unexpected part of your work?

I always felt most comfortable working under the radar on what most interests me. The unexpected have come when I was somehow more popular – like various awards and appearing on a lot of media including the traditional network programs, Oprah and articles in major newspapers.

On a more personal level, I have been very fortunate to be able to make some very fortuitous choices in my life (my road less travelled). For example, it was never an expectation that I would leave the Boston area – Hello Honolulu. Among the most unexpected ones are choosing to go to Colby, even though the finances were beyond a stretch, meeting Viktor Frankl and the effect he had on me, doing my internship in Hawaii, opting to not return to Northwestern (despite being ABD) and finishing my doctorate at Waterloo, my marriage to Susan, (44 years and counting), also becoming a clinical psychologist and being a father. Those are all more a combination of the personal and work over the years.     

What is your hope for the field of psychotherapy?

My students being therapists (the fact that many of my former students are retired is somewhat daunting). As video- based (i.e., Zoom), telehealth and rapidly expanding AI-driven approaches, the need for in-person, symptom-oriented, technique-based therapies will in time diminish. That will hopefully lead to greater opportunities for more personalized therapy. I anticipate a greater focus on therapy as a life-changing experience.

For me, this means working within the client’s way of being. In short, deep empathy for process and an intimate relationship.  This may include a focus on matching client and therapist theories, and a deep dive into what constitutes culture. This entails understanding each person in their personal life context, including human universals, specific culture, individual differences within a culture and level of acculturation/assimilation. One of the beauties having lived in Hawaii and Canada) are the chopped salad vs soup (melting pot) metaphor of culture. Each person and cultural background retains a valued identity and together they combine into something better.

My greatest wish for the field is that graduate training will refocus on the clinical side with an expanded view of all kinds of evidence bases for therapy.   

What are your future plans? 

I am really happy with my most recent (2025) book, co-authored with four students on couple therapy with clients from traditional Asian collectivistic cultures. We explored four cultures in depth often interviewing and doing research in the native languages.

I am currently working on another book on couple therapy with Terry Patterson, looking at those common repetitive arguments and their function in a relationship. In addition, I am completing a manuscript with Art Bohart and Karen Tallman, on the core processes in psychotherapy including the clients’ personal theories and the collaborative process between client and therapist.

My history of research and writing, now up to 20 books, sometimes looks like “mesearch” (foci of interest have included group therapy, fatherhood, aging and other life transitions and couple therapy). I guess the commonality there is an underlying core of existentialism – perhaps my tribute to Frankl.

So, it may be a less responsive answer to your question, but I never know what is going to float by and grab my interest. I am 82 now and still don’t know what to expect will pique my interest next.

Maybe I am still that kid who is looking at the world from an unconventional perspective.

Or, maybe at my current age, I should let go of the dream of being a major league baseball player. Turns out I was over-optimistic and under-talented, and yet somehow that was a good impetus to become an academic.