Criminology and Psychology Degree

Criminology and psychology degrees link behavioral science with criminal justice for forensic practice, rehabilitation, and research careers. The intersection of criminology and psychology is more fundamental than the intersection of criminology with most other disciplines. Psychology asks why individuals behave as they do—what cognitive processes, emotional states, developmental histories, and social influences shape human conduct; criminology asks why some conduct is defined as criminal and why crime is distributed as it is across populations, places, and time periods. These questions are not merely adjacent; they are mutually necessary. A criminology that ignores individual psychology cannot explain why most people in high-risk environments never commit crimes while some do; a psychology that ignores criminological theory cannot explain why individual characteristics interact with social structure to produce criminal outcomes at rates that vary dramatically across communities and cultures.

Introduction

The criminology and psychology degree—in its various forms—exists to serve students who understand this mutual necessity and who want professional training that spans both disciplines. Unlike the law and criminology combination, where the two disciplines maintain relatively distinct professional identities (the lawyer and the criminologist practice in different roles), the criminology and psychology combination produces a single professional identity: the individual who understands crime and justice from both the social structural perspective of criminology and the individual behavioral perspective of psychology.

Criminology and criminal justice degree programs at the undergraduate level increasingly offer formal combined credentials in criminology and psychology—recognized by students as the most in-demand combination in the integrated degree market. Cleveland State University, which launched a Psychology + Criminology BS integrated degree in Fall 2025, reports that it “has the highest number of students planning to enroll” of all integrated degrees it has developed—a data point that reflects organic student recognition of this combination’s distinctive career value. This student demand is not a passing trend; it reflects the structural reality of a criminal justice system that is increasingly expected to address mental health, addiction, trauma, and developmental disability alongside traditional law enforcement and punitive functions.

This article examines the criminology and psychology degree across three formats: undergraduate combined degrees (integrated majors, double majors, and dual degrees), graduate-level combinations (including the uniquely ambitious PsyD/MCJ dual degree at Widener University), and the foundational intellectual question of what each discipline provides the other. It addresses career pathways with salary data, admissions considerations, the critical distinction between a psychology-criminology combined credential and a forensic psychology credential, and the specific career sectors where this combination is most distinctively positioned.

What Psychology Gives Criminology

The intellectual contribution of psychology to criminology operates at three distinct levels: individual difference variables that explain why some people in criminogenic environments commit crimes while others do not; cognitive and behavioral frameworks that explain how criminal learning occurs and how it can be interrupted; and clinical applications that translate theory into intervention.

Individual Difference Variables and the Biosocial Model

Criminology’s structural theories—social disorganization, strain, social learning, social control—explain why crime rates vary across communities, social classes, and time periods, but they face a fundamental explanatory gap: most individuals who grow up in high-crime neighborhoods, experience economic deprivation, and are exposed to criminal peer groups do not commit serious crimes. Explaining this variation requires individual-level analysis that psychology provides.

The biosocial model of crime—most thoroughly developed by Adrian Raine and colleagues—integrates neurological, genetic, hormonal, and environmental factors to explain why specific individuals develop antisocial behavior when most members of their social environments do not (Raine, 2013). Research on executive function deficits, low resting heart rate as a correlate of fearlessness and sensation-seeking, prefrontal cortex development and its relationship to impulse control, and the interaction between genetic predispositions and environmental triggers (gene-environment interactions) provides explanatory depth that structural criminological theories alone cannot achieve.

Equally influential is Terrie Moffitt’s (1993) developmental taxonomy of antisocial behavior, which distinguishes between two qualitatively distinct groups of offenders whose criminal trajectories reflect fundamentally different causal mechanisms. Life-course-persistent (LCP) offenders begin antisocial behavior in early childhood, continue through adolescence and adulthood, and account for a disproportionate share of serious crime; their trajectory is shaped by neuropsychological deficits—low verbal IQ, executive dysfunction, memory problems—interacting with adverse early environments. Adolescence-limited (AL) offenders commit offenses primarily during adolescence in response to the maturity gap between biological maturity and social independence, desisting naturally when adult roles become accessible. This taxonomy is not merely academic; it directly informs risk assessment, sentencing recommendations, reentry planning, and the design of intervention programs that serve these fundamentally different populations differently. A practitioner who understands Moffitt’s framework brings to risk assessment and case planning the insight that recidivism risk profiles, appropriate interventions, and long-term trajectories differ substantially across offender types in ways that uniform approaches cannot address (Moffitt, 1993).

For students planning careers in offender assessment—risk assessment for sentencing, reentry planning, or civil commitment—understanding the psychological and neurobiological factors associated with persistent criminality provides direct professional preparation. The actuarial risk assessment instruments used throughout the criminal justice system—the LSI-R, the PCL-R (Psychopathy Checklist-Revised), the Static-99—are grounded in psychological research and require psychological literacy to administer and interpret competently (Andrews & Bonta, 2010).

Cognitive and Behavioral Frameworks for Criminal Conduct

The dominant evidence-based approach to offender treatment—the Risk-Needs-Responsivity (RNR) model developed by Andrews and Bonta—is explicitly psychological in its theoretical foundations, grounding treatment recommendations in social learning theory, behavioral psychology, and the cognitive-behavioral tradition (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). The RNR model’s identification of the central eight criminogenic needs—criminal history, antisocial personality pattern, antisocial cognitions, antisocial associates, family/marital circumstances, school/work circumstances, leisure/recreation, and substance abuse—reflects decades of psychological research on what factors are causally implicated in criminal behavior and amenable to treatment.

Students who understand both the criminological context of the RNR model—why it emerged in corrections reform, what policy frameworks govern its implementation—and the psychological content of cognitive-behavioral interventions that address these needs—motivational interviewing, cognitive restructuring, social skills training—are equipped for the most sought-after positions in correctional treatment, community supervision, and reentry services that combine criminological and psychological knowledge.

Clinical Applications: Assessment, Therapy, and Crisis Intervention

The mental health crisis in the criminal justice system—approximately two million people with mental illness are booked into jails annually, according to research by the Treatment Advocacy Center—has created enormous demand for professionals who understand both the mental health conditions that bring people into contact with the criminal justice system and the criminal justice processes, procedures, and institutional contexts in which mental health interventions must occur.

Crisis intervention team (CIT) programs, mental health courts, diversion programs, and jail-based mental health services all require professionals who can move comfortably between mental health and criminal justice institutional frameworks. A social worker in a mental health court who understands both the diagnostic framework of the DSM and the legal standards governing competency, criminal responsibility, and diversion eligibility is providing more effective service than one who understands only the mental health component. A probation officer who understands the psychological dimensions of addiction and trauma is more effective at supporting treatment compliance than one who applies purely behavioral incentives and sanctions without understanding the underlying psychology of the clients they supervise.

What Criminology Gives Psychology

The contribution runs in the other direction as well—and is equally important. Psychology’s study of criminal behavior has historically suffered from an individualist bias: focusing on the psychological characteristics of offenders while underweighting the social, structural, and institutional factors that criminology documents as primary determinants of crime rates and criminal justice outcomes.

Structural Context for Individual Behavior

A psychologist who understands criminological research on concentrated disadvantage, collective efficacy, and neighborhood-level crime rates can interpret an individual client’s criminal history in its full social context rather than treating it as evidence of stable personality pathology. A client who grew up in a neighborhood with four times the poverty rate, three times the residential instability, and twice the incarceration exposure of the average American neighborhood has experienced social conditions that criminological research documents as powerful predictors of criminal involvement—conditions that need not be treated primarily as individual deficits (Sampson, Raudenbush, & Earls, 1997).

This structural awareness is directly clinically relevant. A forensic psychologist who attributes a client’s repeated criminal involvement to psychopathic personality traits without considering the neighborhood and peer network context of that involvement may be providing an incomplete and potentially unfair assessment. Expert testimony that incorporates criminological social context alongside psychological individual assessment is more accurate and more equitable than testimony grounded in one framework alone.

Criminal Justice Institutional Contexts

Psychologists who work in criminal justice settings—correctional facilities, mental health courts, probation departments, forensic psychiatric hospitals—need to understand the institutional logic of criminal justice organizations, the legal framework governing their clients’ circumstances, and the policy context in which their clinical work occurs. A clinical psychologist who has never studied criminology may be ill-prepared for the institutional realities of correctional practice: the security-first orientation of correctional facilities, the classification systems that determine where clients are housed and what programming they can access, the sentence structures and parole considerations that shape clients’ motivations and timelines, and the legal standards governing client confidentiality in forensic contexts.

Criminological training provides this institutional literacy, enabling psychologists to function effectively within criminal justice organizations rather than treating them as opaque obstacles to clinical practice. Programs that combine criminology and psychology are explicitly acknowledging this institutional literacy gap and filling it with curriculum that most single-discipline psychology programs leave unaddressed.

Degree Formats: Integrated, Double Major, and Dual Degrees

The criminology and psychology combination is available in several structural formats, each with different advantages, time requirements, and career preparation profiles.

Integrated Bachelor’s Degrees

The integrated bachelor’s degree—a single credential that systematically combines criminology and psychology content—is the newest and most coherent format. Cleveland State University’s BS in Psychology + Criminology, launched in Fall 2025, is designed to cover “currently offered courses including Introduction to Psychology, Introduction to Criminology and Criminal Justice, Criminological Theory, Abnormal Psychology, Memory and Cognition, Statistics, and Research Methods” alongside “hands-on experiences, including internships, research projects and fieldwork.” The explicit integration—not merely placing students in two separate departments but designing a curriculum that bridges both—is the structural advancement that traditional double major models do not achieve.

Northeastern University’s BS in Criminal Justice and Psychology is a 128-credit integrated program that covers “Introduction to Criminal Justice, Criminal Due Process, Criminology, Crime, Media, and Politics, along with Criminal Justice Research Methods” alongside psychology content—one of the few programs that packages both disciplines in a single integrated credential from a NECHE-accredited research university with Northeastern’s distinctive co-op experiential education model.

University of Colorado Colorado Springs (UCCS) offers a dual BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology that reflects the Mountain West’s criminal justice infrastructure and UCCS’s strong connections to Colorado Springs’ law enforcement and military communities—a local labor market context that creates distinctive career placement advantages for UCCS graduates.

The Double Major: Building the Combination from Existing Programs

The most accessible pathway to combining criminology and psychology is the double major at institutions that offer both programs without a formal integrated credential. Students who declare double majors in criminology (or criminal justice) and psychology complete the requirements of both programs separately, typically adding 30–45 credits to the 120 required for either single major—a substantial but manageable addition for students who plan deliberately from their first semester.

The advantages of double majoring over single-program study are genuine but the workload is real: students must satisfy the general education requirements, core courses, and elective requirements of two majors simultaneously, leaving limited room for elective exploration outside the two disciplines. Students planning double majors should map out their four-year course sequence before beginning to verify that the combination is achievable within four years without overloading any single semester.

Husson University’s dual degree program in Criminal Justice and Psychology explicitly addresses the mutual necessity of both disciplines for professional practice: “The successful law enforcement professional requires an understanding of the forensic application of psychology to the investigation of crime…Conversely, the qualified forensic practitioner requires a thorough grounding in criminal justice, police operations and the law to effectively assess and treat offenders and victims.” This framing—each discipline as necessary for the other’s professional effectiveness—is precisely the intellectual case developed in this article’s opening.

The PsyD/MCJ: The Most Advanced Combined Credential

Widener University’s PsyD/MCJ dual degree program represents the most advanced formal combination of psychological and criminal justice credentials available in American graduate education. Students complete both a Doctor of Psychology (PsyD) in clinical psychology—APA-accredited, producing licensed clinical psychologist credentials—and a Master of Criminal Justice simultaneously in five years of full-time study.

The significance of APA accreditation cannot be overstated for students planning forensic psychology practice. The American Psychological Association accredits doctoral clinical psychology programs under standards that ensure graduates can obtain psychology licensure and be recognized as qualified to conduct competency evaluations, violence risk assessments, and treatment under court order. A doctoral psychology credential from a non-APA-accredited program does not qualify graduates for these clinical forensic roles regardless of the credential’s academic quality. The Widener PsyD’s APA accreditation—alongside the MCJ’s criminal justice institutional knowledge—produces graduates who are both licensed clinical psychologists and criminologically sophisticated practitioners, enabling them to function as expert witnesses, forensic assessment specialists, correctional treatment directors, and mental health court consultants with credentials that neither discipline alone could provide.

The PsyD/MCJ program includes “practica in areas of treatment and assessment in prison and court systems, along with interventions relevant to law enforcement institutions and administration and management within local, state, and federal prison systems”—exactly the clinical placement experience that bridges the credential’s two disciplines in applied settings. For students planning forensic psychology careers in criminal justice contexts, the Widener program’s combination of APA-accredited clinical training and criminological education is the most complete available credential.

The Critical Distinction: Forensic Psychology vs. Criminal Psychology vs. Psychology-Criminology Combined

One of the most important definitional clarifications for students exploring criminology and psychology combinations is understanding the difference between forensic psychology, criminal psychology, and the interdisciplinary psychology-criminology credential—three overlapping but distinct professional identities.

Forensic Psychology

Forensic psychology, as the professional practice discipline, refers to clinical psychologists who apply psychological knowledge and clinical skills in legal contexts—conducting competency evaluations, providing violence risk assessments, treating offenders in correctional settings, and serving as expert witnesses. Practicing forensic psychologists are licensed clinical psychologists (PhDs or PsyDs from APA-accredited programs) who have developed specialized competency in forensic applications of clinical assessment and treatment (Bartol & Bartol, 2019). The American Board of Forensic Psychology (ABFP) provides board certification for psychologists who demonstrate advanced forensic competency.

The critical point for prospective students is that forensic psychology practice at the level that involves independent evaluation, court testimony, and clinical treatment requires doctoral-level credentials from APA-accredited programs—not bachelor’s or master’s degrees in criminal justice, forensic criminology, or psychology-criminology combinations. Students who aspire to this professional identity need doctoral clinical psychology training, and the criminology-psychology undergraduate or master’s combination serves as preparation for doctoral applications rather than as a terminal professional credential.

Criminal Psychology as Academic Subfield

Criminal psychology as an academic subfield studies the psychological bases of criminal behavior without necessarily providing clinical credentials. Academic criminal psychologists research criminal decision-making, personality correlates of offending, the psychology of interrogation and confession, eyewitness memory, and cognitive biases in criminal investigation—producing the research literature that informs both forensic practice and criminological theory (Leo, 2008). Academic criminal psychologists are researchers rather than clinicians; they hold PhDs from research psychology programs rather than clinical psychology credentials, and their career destinations are universities and research organizations rather than clinical practice settings.

The criminology and psychology combined undergraduate degree is strong preparation for academic criminal psychology careers because it develops both the theoretical criminological framework and the psychological research training that academic careers require. Students planning academic careers in criminal psychology should pursue research-oriented master’s and doctoral programs in either criminology with strong psychology training or psychology with strong criminological content, rather than professional psychology programs that emphasize clinical practice over scholarly research.

The Psychology-Criminology Combined Graduate School Pathway

Students who complete criminology and psychology undergraduate degrees and then ask “what next?” have a distinctive set of graduate options that the combination uniquely positions them for:

Clinical psychology doctoral programs (PhD or PsyD, APA-accredited) for students planning forensic clinical practice — the criminological background provides institutional knowledge that enhances application competitiveness for programs with forensic psychology tracks.

Criminology or criminal justice doctoral programs for students planning academic or research careers — the psychology training provides biosocial and cognitive behavioral content that enriches research on individual-level criminological questions.

Social work master’s programs for students planning community corrections, reentry, or victim services careers where both psychological clinical skills and criminological institutional knowledge are professionally valuable.

Counseling psychology programs for students planning addiction treatment, trauma-informed practice, or mental health service careers within criminal justice contexts.

Public health master’s programs for students interested in violence prevention, substance abuse policy, or the public health approach to criminal justice reform.

Career Pathways and Salary Data

The criminology and psychology combined credential opens career pathways that single-discipline credentials serve less well—particularly in the mental health and criminal justice interface sectors that have grown substantially over the past two decades.

Mental Health Diversion and Crisis Intervention

Mental health diversion programs—pre-arrest, pre-booking, and post-booking alternatives to traditional criminal prosecution for individuals whose criminal conduct is related to mental illness—represent one of the fastest-growing sectors in the criminal justice workforce and one of the clearest career destinations for criminology-psychology graduates.

Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) programs, now operating in hundreds of law enforcement agencies nationwide, train officers to respond to mental health crises with de-escalation techniques rather than arrest. CIT program coordinators—who develop curriculum, train officers, and evaluate program effectiveness—need both mental health content knowledge and law enforcement institutional understanding that the psychology-criminology combination provides. The Crisis Intervention Team International (CIT International) certifies CIT programs and advocates for evidence-based crisis intervention standards.

Mental health court coordinators and diversion specialists work within court systems to connect defendants with mental health treatment rather than incarceration. These positions typically require bachelor’s or master’s degrees in psychology, social work, or criminal justice, with the combination of both disciplines providing distinctive competency that single-discipline graduates cannot match. Entry-level mental health court positions earn $45,000–$60,000; experienced coordinators and program directors earn $65,000–$90,000 depending on jurisdiction and organization size (BLS, 2023).

Offender Assessment and Correctional Treatment

The RNR-based correctional treatment sector employs thousands of professionals who administer risk assessments, develop case plans, provide cognitive-behavioral treatment, and evaluate program outcomes across state and federal correctional systems. These positions—including correctional treatment specialists at the Bureau of Prisons (classified in the GS-101 and GS-185 series), prison social workers, and community corrections counselors—explicitly require both knowledge of criminal behavior and risk factors (criminological content) and clinical assessment and treatment skills (psychological content).

The Bureau of Prisons correctional treatment specialist positions earn $50,000–$85,000 depending on GS grade and location, with senior positions and supervisors earning above $100,000. State correctional counselors earn $45,000–$70,000, with substantial variation by state. The RNR certification through the Correctional Service of Canada and similar training programs provide professional credential documentation that supplements academic credentials for these roles (Andrews & Bonta, 2010).

Victim Services and Trauma-Informed Practice

Victim services programs—in district attorney’s offices, nonprofit victim advocacy organizations, hospitals, and community organizations—increasingly expect staff to understand both the criminal justice processes that crime victims encounter and the psychological impacts of trauma, victimization, and secondary victimization. The Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) has developed the trauma-informed care framework that now guides most victim services practice—a framework that is explicitly psychological in its understanding of trauma responses and explicitly criminological in its understanding of the criminal justice contexts in which victims seek services.

Victim advocates at entry level earn $38,000–$50,000; victim services program directors and senior advocates earn $55,000–$80,000. Sexual assault nurse examiners (SANEs) with psychology training earn $75,000–$110,000 depending on location and healthcare organization. Forensic nurse practitioners who provide both clinical care and forensic documentation in crime victim cases earn at the high end of this range (Turvey, 2012).

Research and Policy Careers

Research positions at criminal justice policy organizations, university research centers, and government agencies increasingly value the psychology-criminology combination because the most important current policy questions in criminal justice—how to reduce recidivism through treatment, how to identify and divert individuals with mental illness before they cycle through jails, how to implement trauma-informed policing—are inherently biopsychosocial questions that require both disciplinary perspectives to address rigorously.

Research analysts and program evaluators at the National Institute of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, and similar agencies earn $65,000–$100,000 at mid-career levels. University research positions span the full academic salary range, with assistant professor positions in criminology or psychology averaging $75,000–$100,000 at regional universities and $90,000–$130,000 at research universities (BLS, 2023).

Police Psychology

Police psychology—the specialized application of psychological science to law enforcement contexts—is one of the most distinctive career pathways for criminology-psychology graduates and one where the combination’s dual competency is most clearly superior to either discipline alone. Police psychologists are employed directly by law enforcement agencies or contracted through consulting practices to provide a range of services: pre-employment psychological screening of officer candidates, fitness-for-duty evaluations of officers whose conduct or mental health has raised concerns, critical incident debriefing after officer-involved shootings and other traumatic events, officer wellness programs, and consultation to command staff on organizational and personnel issues.

The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Police Psychological Services Section publishes professional guidelines for police psychology practice that specify the competencies required for each service type. A police psychologist conducting pre-employment screenings must understand both clinical assessment—administering and interpreting the MMPI-2, PAI, and related instruments—and the specific demands of law enforcement work, including the stress tolerance, integrity, and judgment that policing requires and that the criminological study of police culture, use of force, and occupational health illuminates. Pure clinical psychologists without law enforcement institutional knowledge conduct less contextually informed screenings; criminologists without clinical assessment credentials cannot conduct them at all.

Police psychologists typically earn $80,000–$130,000 annually in agency staff positions, with experienced independent contractors serving multiple agencies earning substantially more. The credential requirements include a doctoral degree in psychology (PhD or PsyD, typically APA-accredited) alongside specialized training in police psychology through programs including the IACP’s Police Psychological Services Section training and the American Board of Professional Psychology (ABPP) Forensic specialty certification (BLS, 2023).

Juvenile Justice and Adolescent Development

The juvenile justice system’s explicit developmental orientation—its recognition that adolescent offending is categorically different from adult crime and that adolescents retain greater capacity for rehabilitation than adults—creates a distinctive professional role for individuals who combine developmental psychology knowledge with juvenile justice system literacy. Juvenile courts, youth residential facilities, school-based intervention programs, and diversion programs serving adolescents require practitioners who understand both the developmental neuroscience of adolescent decision-making and the institutional structure of juvenile justice processing.

The Supreme Court’s evolving standards jurisprudence—beginning with Roper v. Simmons (2005), which prohibited juvenile capital punishment, through Graham v. Florida (2010) and Miller v. Alabama (2012), which restricted life without parole for juveniles—has been explicitly grounded in developmental psychological research on adolescent brain maturity, impulse control, and susceptibility to peer influence. Practitioners who can engage both the legal framework of juvenile justice and the developmental psychology research that increasingly shapes it are increasingly valuable in juvenile public defense, juvenile court consultation, and youth justice reform advocacy.

Juvenile probation officers, youth residential counselors, and school-based intervention specialists typically earn $42,000–$65,000 at entry and mid-career levels; juvenile justice program directors and court-based specialists earn $60,000–$90,000. Forensic evaluators who conduct juvenile competency and transfer evaluations for courts require doctoral clinical credentials but earn $90,000–$150,000+ in this specialized consultancy role (BLS, 2023).

UK Undergraduate Criminology and Psychology Programs

British universities offer BSc combinations in Criminology and Psychology that reflect both disciplines’ strong empirical traditions in the UK context and that serve students planning professional careers in the British criminal justice system.

Programs at University of Birmingham, University of Sheffield, Manchester Metropolitan University, and Keele University combine criminological theory and criminal justice system study with psychology research methods, abnormal psychology, forensic psychology, and developmental psychology over three years of combined undergraduate study.

BPS Accreditation and Professional Qualification Routes

UK graduates who plan to practice forensic psychology are typically required to obtain a BPS (British Psychological Society) accredited undergraduate psychology degree as the foundation for postgraduate qualification routes—a consideration that shapes which psychology-criminology combinations provide a qualifying foundation for professional practice. The British Psychology Society’s Division of Forensic Psychology maintains professional standards and accreditation criteria for forensic psychology training in the UK, and students planning UK forensic psychology careers should verify that their chosen combined degree satisfies BPS accreditation requirements before enrolling. Programs where the psychology component is BPS-accredited provide a qualifying foundation; those where criminology content displaces the required psychology curriculum may not.

Career Outcomes in the UK Criminal Justice System

UK graduates of criminology and psychology combined degrees enter a criminal justice landscape shaped by the National Probation Service (NPS), Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS), and the National Health Service (NHS) forensic mental health services—all of which employ practitioners whose roles combine criminological and psychological knowledge. Approved Premises (formerly probation hostels), community rehabilitation companies, and the youth justice system through Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) all employ staff for whom the psychology-criminology combination is more directly applicable than either discipline alone.

Forensic mental health services within the NHS—medium and high-secure psychiatric hospitals, community forensic teams, court liaison and diversion services—employ clinical psychologists, social workers, and allied health professionals who work specifically with people who have both mental health needs and criminal justice involvement. The UK’s well-developed forensic mental health infrastructure, supported by government funding and NHS pay scales, provides career stability for psychology-criminology graduates that is distinctive compared to the more fragmented American equivalent.

Admissions Considerations for Criminology and Psychology Programs

Admissions to combined criminology and psychology programs vary substantially by program type and degree level.

Undergraduate Admissions

Undergraduate integrated programs in criminology and psychology typically admit students through standard university admissions processes—academic record, standardized test scores where required, and application essays. The more selective the institution, the more competitive the admissions process, but combined programs at most institutions do not require significantly different preparation than single-discipline programs.

Students planning to eventually pursue doctoral clinical psychology—the pathway to forensic psychology practice—should prioritize institutions with strong psychology research infrastructure, clinical psychology faculty mentors, and undergraduate research opportunities, as these are the factors that most directly affect doctoral program competitiveness. GRE preparation, even for undergraduate students planning eventual doctoral applications, should begin no later than the junior year at a criminology-psychology combined program.

Graduate Admissions and the Clinical vs. Research Track Decision

The most consequential admissions decision for criminology-psychology students is the choice between clinical psychology doctoral programs (PsyD or APA-accredited PhD in clinical psychology) and research psychology or criminology doctoral programs (PhD programs without APA clinical accreditation). This distinction determines professional identity: the clinical track produces licensed psychologists who can practice independently; the research track produces scholars who publish and teach.

Clinical psychology doctoral programs are among the most competitive in all of graduate education—acceptance rates at APA-accredited programs frequently below 5 percent, with high GRE expectations, strong undergraduate GPA requirements (3.5+), and extensive research experience expectations. Students planning clinical tracks from criminology-psychology undergraduate degrees should develop clinical research experience—working as a research assistant in clinical psychology labs, completing honors theses with clinical psychology mentors, and volunteering in clinical settings—that demonstrates clinical research orientation alongside the criminological training that distinguishes their applications.

The GRE Psychology Subject Test

Several APA-accredited doctoral clinical psychology programs require or strongly recommend the GRE Psychology Subject Test in addition to the general GRE. The subject test assesses knowledge across the full breadth of psychology—biological bases of behavior, sensation and perception, learning and cognition, social psychology, developmental psychology, abnormal psychology, treatment, and research methods—at a level of specificity that the general GRE verbal and quantitative sections do not approach.

Students from criminology-psychology combined undergraduate backgrounds face a specific challenge on the subject test: their curriculum typically develops depth in forensic, abnormal, and social psychology alongside criminological theory, but may not have provided systematic coverage of all subject test domains. Students who majored primarily in criminology with a secondary emphasis in psychology may lack adequate coverage of sensation and perception, biological bases of behavior, and the full developmental psychology curriculum that subject test questions draw on.

Preparation for the subject test for students with mixed criminology-psychology backgrounds should begin at least six months before the target test date and should include systematic review of domains underrepresented in criminology curricula. The ETS practice book for the Psychology Subject Test provides the most authoritative preparation material, and supplementing with introductory psychology textbooks covering biological, developmental, and perceptual domains ensures coverage of areas that criminology-focused curricula typically address only tangentially. Students who have completed a full introductory psychology course, abnormal psychology, research methods, and at least two additional psychology content courses are typically prepared for subject test performance in the range that competitive doctoral programs consider adequate.

Selecting the Right Criminology and Psychology Program

Program selection for criminology and psychology combinations requires clarity about career goals that differ substantially across the clinical, research, and applied tracks that this combination serves.

Matching Program Format to Career Goal

Students planning forensic clinical practice (competency evaluations, violence risk assessment, treatment) need undergraduate programs that provide a foundation for APA-accredited doctoral clinical psychology admission—strong psychology research training, undergraduate clinical exposure, and faculty mentoring relationships with clinical psychology faculty. The criminology component enriches their preparation but should not displace the clinical psychology content that doctoral program admissions require.

Students planning correctional treatment, community corrections, or mental health diversion careers at the bachelor’s or master’s level—where doctoral credentials are not required—should prioritize programs with strong applied curriculum in both disciplines: RNR-based treatment, crisis intervention, trauma-informed practice, and the institutional structures of criminal justice organizations. Programs with practicum and internship placements in correctional, court, and community settings are essential for this career track.

Students planning research careers should prioritize programs with active research faculty in both criminology and psychology, undergraduate research assistant opportunities, and thesis requirements that produce the writing samples and research experience that doctoral applications require.

The Practicum and Internship Requirement

Across all three tracks, fieldwork experience in settings that bridge psychology and criminal justice is the most direct preparation that combined degree programs provide and that single-discipline programs typically cannot replicate. Students should specifically investigate what practicum, internship, and field placement opportunities are available in their target programs—and whether those placements include criminal justice settings (courts, correctional facilities, probation departments, law enforcement agencies) alongside mental health settings.

Programs with formal agreements with mental health courts, correctional treatment programs, victim services organizations, and crisis intervention programs are providing the experiential learning that employers across this career sector consistently report as the most valuable differentiator between candidates with equivalent academic credentials. Students who graduate from combined programs with 200–400 hours of supervised fieldwork in criminal justice mental health settings are substantially more competitive than those whose fieldwork was confined to outpatient mental health clinics without criminal justice context.

Conclusion

The criminology and psychology degree serves students who recognize that crime and the criminal justice system cannot be adequately understood from either discipline alone—that structural criminological analysis without individual psychological depth is incomplete, and that psychological analysis without criminological context is acontextual. The degree’s career destinations—forensic practice, offender rehabilitation, mental health diversion, crisis intervention, victim services, and research—are precisely those where this dual competency produces professionals who are more effective than those trained in either discipline alone.

The credential’s most important strategic choice is the career track it serves: clinical practice requires doctoral clinical psychology credentials beyond the combined undergraduate degree; applied practice in corrections, community supervision, and victim services is well-served by bachelor’s and master’s degrees; academic research requires research doctoral credentials in one or both disciplines. Students who identify their track early and build their undergraduate preparation accordingly will find in the criminology-psychology combination one of the most versatile and professionally distinctive credential combinations available in criminal justice education.

References

Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The Psychology of Criminal Conduct (5th ed.). LexisNexis Matthew Bender.
Bartol, C. R., & Bartol, A. M. (2019). Introduction to Forensic Psychology: Research and Application (5th ed.). SAGE.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2023). Occupational outlook handbook: Psychologists; social workers; probation officers. U.S. Department of Labor. https://www.bls.gov/ooh/
Clear, T. R., Cole, G. F., & Reisig, M. D. (2019). American Corrections (12th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Cullen, F. T., & Wilcox, P. (Eds.). (2010). Encyclopedia of Criminological Theory. SAGE.
Golde, C. M. (2005). The role of the department and discipline in doctoral student attrition. Journal of Higher Education, 76(6), 669–700.
Leo, R. A. (2008). Police Interrogation and American Justice. Harvard University Press.
Lilly, J. R., Cullen, F. T., & Ball, R. A. (2019). Criminological Theory: Context and Consequences (7th ed.). SAGE.
Moffitt, T. E. (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: A developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review, 100(4), 674–701.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2022). Digest of Education Statistics. U.S. Department of Education. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/
Nettles, M. T., & Millett, C. M. (2006). Three Magic Letters: Getting to Ph.D. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Raine, A. (2013). The Anatomy of Violence: The Biological Roots of Crime. Pantheon Books.
Sampson, R. J., Raudenbush, S. W., & Earls, F. (1997). Neighborhoods and violent crime: A multilevel study of collective efficacy. Science, 277(5328), 918–924.
Sherman, L. W., Gottfredson, D., MacKenzie, D., Eck, J., Reuter, P., & Bushway, S. (1998). Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn’t, What’s Promising. National Institute of Justice.
Turvey, B. E. (2012). Forensic Victimology: Examining Violent Crime Victims in Investigative and Legal Contexts (2nd ed.). Academic Press.
Walker, S. (2015). Sense and Nonsense About Crime, Drugs, and Communities (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.

Related Articles