Received: 14 October 2021
| Accepted: 1 October 2022
DOI: 10.1002/jclp.23451
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Financial stress and debt in clinical psychology
doctoral students
Erica Szkody1
Jennifer Boland
| Steven Hobaica2
4
|
Jason J. Washburn
1
Department of Psychology, Mississippi State
University, Mississippi State, Mississippi, USA
2
Department of Psychology, Washington
State University, Pullman, Washington, USA
3
Department of Psychology and
Neuroscience, University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
4
Sarah Owens3
|
5
|
|
6
Debora Bell
Abstract
Introdution: Few studies examine the financial burden of
clinical psychology doctoral programs and its impact on
achievements, stress, and mental health.
Objectives: The current study sought to better understand
Department of Psychology and Philosophy,
Sam Houston State University, Huntsville,
Texas, USA
students’ financial stress and debt, and how financial stress
5
personal and professional milestones.
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral
Sciences, Northwestern University Feinberg
School of Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, USA
6
Department of Psychology, University of
Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, USA
Correspondence
Erica Szkody, Department of Psychology,
Mississippi State University, P.O. Box 6161,
Mississippi State, MS, 39762, USA.
Email: [email protected]
may impact their mental health and the attainment of
Method: Students (N = 912) completed an online survey
assessing demographics, sources of income and expenditures, mental health, and milestones.
Results: After accounting for yearly inflation, stipends have
not kept pace with the average cost of living in the United
States. Over one?third of students indicated that they had
no expendable pretax income after paying for their
education and typical living expenses. Additionally, over
80% reported acquiring additional debt in graduate school
to offset their living expenses. Financial concerns were
associated with delays in major life milestones (e.g., buying
a car/house, getting married/starting a family, having
children), as well as avoiding medical (34.2%) or mental
(41.4%) health care, with 17.5% of participants experiencing a health crisis they could not afford while in graduate
school. Financial stress was associated with an increase in
time spent thinking about finances, higher rates of
depression and anxiety symptoms, and decreased sleep.
J Clin Psychol. 2023;79:835–853.
wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/jclp
© 2022 Wiley Periodicals LLC.
| 835
836
|
SZKODY ET AL.
Conclusion: Many clinical psychology doctoral students
experience financial stress and are often unable to afford
basic educational, personal living, and health care expenses,
likely worsening mental health. Academic programs and
leadership are encouraged to increase student stipends,
improve financial transparency, provide access to health
care, and alleviate financial stress and debt
KEYWORDS
clinical psychology, debt, financial stress, graduate students,
income
1
| INTRODUCTION
Over the past several decades, the cost of higher education (i.e., undergraduate, master’s, and doctoral?level programs and
the associated costs of living while pursuing higher education) in the United States (US) has risen dramatically (Goldrick?Rab
& Steinbaum, 2020; US Department of Education, 2019), increasing by as much as 250% (Baum & Ma, 2012). To meet
these costs, many students have turned to student loans and financial aid, resulting in an estimated total of over $1.7
trillion in debt in the United States (Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 2021). Although much of the
concern with education costs and debt is concentrated at the undergraduate level (Broton et al., 2020; Whitsett, 2012),
students pursuing professional or graduate degrees are increasingly impacted by student loan debt (Belasco et al., 2014),
accounting for nearly 40% of all student loan debt (Burk & Perry, 2020; Delisle et al., 2014).
The steep cost of graduate education is not new. Medical student debt has been a problem of national importance
since the 1960s (Greysen et al.,2011). Graduate students in social work (Unrau et al., 2020), law (Campos, 2012), and
psychology (Belasco et al., 2014) also report high educational costs and debt, with additional challenges in the last decade
as graduate students are no longer eligible for subsidized student loans (Heiniff et al., 2011). For psychology graduate
students, surveys suggest concerning trends of worsening debt loads (Doran et al., 2016a; 2016b; Michalski et al., 2011;
Stamm et al., 2015; Wilcox, Pietrantonio et al., 2021; Wilcox, Barbaro?Kukade, et al., 2021). Recent studies (Doran
et al., 2016a; Wilcox, 2021) that include hundreds of psychology graduate students and early career professionals across
numerous subfields (e.g., clinical, clinical neuropsychology, counseling, family, health, and school) and types of programs
(e.g., PhD, PsyD, and Master’s) have documented increasing debt loads. For example, the average amount of graduate
psychology student debt tripled from 1995 to 2005 ($20,000 to $60,000; Finno et al., 2010). Just over a decade later,
Doran and colleagues reported average cumulative debt of $105,000 and $173,000 for psychology doctoral (PhD and
PsyD) students (Doran et al., 2016a). The most recent estimates suggest an average cumulative debt exceeding $122,000
and $231,000 for PhD and PsyD students, respectively (Wilcox, Pietrantonio et al., 2021). Given a median salary of
$90,000 for clinical psychologists (Conroy et al., 2021), graduate student debt is likely outpacing salary growth
(Klonoff, 2016; Norcross et al., 2010).
As several authors have noted (e.g., Lantz & Davis, 2017; Wilcox, Pietrantonio et al., 2021), exceptionally large
standard deviations around mean debt load (~$118,000?$124,000 in Wilcox, Pietrantonio et al., 2021) make it
difficult to draw broad conclusions, and indicate that students’ experiences of graduate school debt will vary widely.
Multiple studies have found associations between debt load during graduate school and increased stress and delays
in personal life milestones (Doran et al., 2016a; Wilcox, 2021). Several studies have also demonstrated that financial
stress and debt can have an especially negative impact on first?generation college students and marginalized
groups, particularly among people of color (Lantz & Davis, 2017; Pietrantonio & Garriott, 2017; Wilcox,
SZKODY ET AL.
| 837
Pietrantonio et al., 2021; Wilcox, Barbaro?Kukade, et al. 2021). Student debt among people of color may only
reinforce the impacts of structural racism (e.g., racial segregation and discrimination), further expanding racial
wealth inequity (Mishory et al., 2019). Such findings among psychology graduate students are consistent with the
broader literature on financial strain in higher education and calls to view higher education debt as a crisis and an
equity, diversity, and social justice concern (e.g., Pietrantonio & Garriott, 2017; Sullivan et al., 2019;
Wilcox, 2021; Wilcox, Barbaro?Kukade, et al. 2021).
In response to the findings that debt is unavoidable and necessary for many psychology graduate students to
complete their degrees, as well as increasing recognition that their careers may not provide sufficient income to repay the
debt (e.g., Klonoff, 2016), multistep plans to address psychology graduate student debt have been proposed (e.g.,
Pietrantonio & Garriott, 2017; Wilcox, 2021; Wilcox, Barbaro?Kukade, et al. 2021). Recommendations include increasing
financial transparency and guidance for graduate students and early career psychologists, pursuing federal advocacy for
debt concerns, ensuring financial literacy, advocating for higher stipends and other financial and professional supports
during graduate school, and advocating for higher wages for early career professionals who are increasingly likely to be
paying off student loan debt. Additionally, given evidence of the differential impact on already resource insecure and
marginalized students, these recommendations are often qualified by admonitions to attend to the unique needs of
graduate students from marginalized or minoritized backgrounds, students with parenting, or family care responsibilities,
students experiencing low income or material resource insecurity, or those who are first?generation college students (e.g.,
Brown et al., 2022; Wilcox, Barbaro?Kukade et al., 2021).
Although some psychology graduate students are granted stipends or salaries through their graduate programs
to assist with living costs, not all students have access to university?funded financial support. For example, among
clinical science and science practitioner programs in clinical psychology, 79% of programs provide all their students
a stipend (Council of University Directors of Clinical Psychology [CUDCP], 2020). It is notable that the provision of
stipends in clinical psychology occurs less frequently in PsyD programs in comparison to PhD programs (Norcross
et al., 2010). Even when students receive stipends or other university?based funding, loans or other forms of
financial support are often necessary to cover basic education and living expenses. In addition to tuition costs and
university fees, psychology graduate students also regularly face steep increases in housing costs due to a lack of
affordable graduate student housing; they may also be unable to afford professional (e.g., conferences, internship
relocation, and work attire) or personal expenses (e.g., medical care) (Doran et al., 2016a; Wilcox, Pietrantonio
et al., 2021; Wilcox, Barbaro?Kukade et al., 2021). Thus, while some discipline?wide steps have been taken to help
reduce the expense of graduate school (e.g., recent recommendations that internship interviews be held virtually;
Association of Psychology Post?doctoral and Internship Centers [APPIC], 2022), the financial burden remains large.
The most recent published data from the American Psychological Association (APA) suggests that median
yearly stipends for psychology doctoral programs range from $14,400?$16,500 ($1200–$1375 per month;
APA, 2016), which is just slightly higher than federal poverty rates for an individual ($12,880 for states other than
Hawai’i [$14,820] and Alaska [$16,090]; HHS, 2021). These stipends are well below poverty rates for two or more
individuals ($17,420 for states other than Hawai’i [$20,040] and Alaska [$21,770]), which may especially impact
graduate students with children or unemployed partners. Little is known of whether stipends cover actual living
costs for these students. Assuming an average cost of living for students (e.g., over $1000 per month for rent and
utilities), Doran et al. (2016a) estimated that students have only $2400?$4500 per year ($200?$375 per month) to
cover the rest of their personal costs (e.g., university fees, groceries, vacation, work travel, car payments, insurance,
phone bills, and medical bills) without additional assistance.
Financial stress and debt can impact students in higher education in areas such as academic performance (Baker
& Montalto, 2019) and a student’s ability to access proper mental health care when distressed (El?Ghoroury
et al., 2012). Qualitative findings highlight systemic concerns at the institutional and departmental levels that also
impact financial stress and debt (e.g., “predatory” for?profit institutions, engaging in unpaid or poorly paid training
experiences, potential negative consequences of extended time to degree), the various negative impacts of debt on
students (e.g., stress and mental health symptoms, delaying important life milestones), and concerns about eventual
838
|
SZKODY ET AL.
income not being sufficient given steep debt accumulated throughout their education (Doran et al., 2016b).
Although prior research has identified an association between debt and stress among psychology graduate students
(Doran et al., 2016a; Olson?Garriott et al., 2015), the relations between financial stress and debt with psychology
students’ mental health have not been further explored.
Understanding the association between financial stress and mental health may be especially important for
individuals with marginalized identities (e.g., people of color) given evidence of higher borrowing from members of
these groups (Lantz & Davis, 2017) and greater exposure to risks for mental health problems. For example,
Wilcox, Pietrantonio et al. (2021), Wilcox, Barbaro?Kukade et al. (2021) found that Black graduate psychology
students and those from lower socioeconomic status (SES), borrowed more money than their peers. Additionally,
they found that students from a lower SES reported more financial stress and a larger impact of this stress on their
personal endeavors. Little else is known, however, about the financial struggles of marginalized students in
psychology doctoral programs.
2
| T H E CU R R E N T S T U D Y
The current study aims to further document the status of financial stress and debt of clinical psychology doctoral
students, as well as their impact on their future plans and mental health. Using a large, nationwide, and diverse
sample of PhD students in clinical psychology, the current study builds upon existing research by examining
students’ net income (i.e., income minus costs), sources of income, types of expenses, and how financial stressors
relate to career and personal aspirations, as well as mental health outcomes. We also examined common financial
advice given to psychology doctoral students and whether students engaged in cost?saving behaviors or pursued
additional sources of income to reduce the strain of financial burdens. Finally, we examined the differential impact
of financial stress on student mental health outcomes in underrepresented subgroups of students (i.e., people of
color and LGBTQ + students). Thus, in the current study we aimed to answer four distinct questions:
1. Where do clinical psychology graduate students receive funding and financial support?
2. How do students spend their money?
3. How much expendable income do students have, if any?
4. How does financial stress impact students?
3
3.1
| M E TH O D
| Participants
We recruited 1117 doctoral students currently enrolled in university?affiliated scientist?practitioner and clinical scientist
psychology graduate programs in the United States. Approximately 18% of these participants (n = 205) completed fewer
than 80% of survey items and were excluded from the present analyses, resulting in a final sample size of 912 individuals.
In the final sample, 81.5% of participants identified as a woman (n = 757), 16.2 identified as a man (n = 148), and 2.3%
(n = 21) identified their gender as transgender, genderqueer, nonbinary, nonconforming, or other. Most participants
identified as heterosexual (n = 685; 75.1%), with 22.9% (n = 209) identifying another sexual orientation (gay/lesbian,
bisexual, pansexual, demisexual, queer, asexual, and other). Most participants reported their race as White (n = 664; 72.8%),
with smaller numbers identifying as Black (n = 46; 5%), Asian or Asian American (n = 93; 10.2%), Middle Eastern or North
African (n = 16; 1.8%), another ethnicity (n = 14; 1.5%), or multiethnic (n = 72; 8.9%); 7.6% (n = 69) of participants identified
as Latine. The sample was well?distributed regarding year in program, with the percent of students in Years 1 to 5+ ranging
from 16% to 24.5%. Additionally, the sample represented all regions in the United States (39% Midwest, 27.5% South,
SZKODY ET AL.
| 839
16.7% Northeast, and 16% West), with most participants living in small (38.7%) or large (33.7) cities. The collected sample
demographics were generally comparable to the overall field of clinical psychology (see APA, 2022) and to students
enrolled in similar programs in clinical psychology (see APA. 2021). Recruitment procedures and demographic
characteristics of the sample are described further in another paper.
4
| MEASURES AND VARIABLES
4.1
4.1.1
| Sources of income
| Stipends
Participants were given an open text box to report the pretax whole dollar amount of their stipend, how many
months per year the stipend covered, and to specify any differences in funding in the summer months. Participants
were asked to report the source of their stipend (research assistantship, teaching/teaching assistantship, personal
grant or fellowship, clinical position, other program funding, or none). Participants also reported if their program
provided medical and dental insurance coverage (yes/no).
4.1.2
| Part?time employment
Participants were asked if their program permitted them to hold a part?time job in the summer (yes/no) and during
the academic year (yes/no). They were also asked if they ever held a part?time job during graduate school (yes/no),
and if they had, their pretax annual income (whole dollar amount) from this part?time job and when the job was held
(e.g., summer and year?round).
4.1.3
| Savings
Participants were asked to report the whole?dollar amount that they currently had in their savings account, as well
as the amount they had in savings when they entered graduate school.
4.1.4
| Additional sources of income
Participants were asked to report whether they received additional income from outside sources in the past year
(e.g., gifts, paid bills from family, friends, and partners, child support, etc.) and to report the percentage of their total
income provided by these sources. Participants were also asked whether they received food or cash assistance from
the state in the last year (yes/no for various forms of assistance).
4.2
4.2.1
| Expenditures
| Cost of living
Participants were asked to report how much they had spent per month on living expenses including utilities (e.g.,
electric, gas, garbage, and water), internet, rent, phone plans, groceries, and childcare. Participants also were asked
840
|
SZKODY ET AL.
to estimate the whole dollar amount per month spent on their vehicle (e.g., gas, car payments, car insurance, and
repairs) and public transportation. Lastly, participants were asked to estimate a whole dollar amount per month
spent paying down debt (e.g., loans and credit card debt). Values for each expense were examined individually and
multiplied by 12 to estimate the yearly expenditures in these categories. In addition, participants were asked to
report how many other individuals they were financially responsible for, their relationship to these individuals, and
how much they spent supporting these individuals in the last year.
4.2.2
| Work and education?related expenses
Participants were asked to estimate a whole dollar amount spent on university fees, conference registration and
travel, professional clothing, technology needed for school, or practica (e.g., phone and computer), and class
materials. Participants were instructed to report only unreimbursed costs. In addition, participants currently on
internship were asked to report how much they spent in total on internship applications, traveling, and interviews.
4.2.3
| Debt
Debt was assessed by asking participants to estimate the whole dollar total amount of their credit card debt, loans
they took out during their undergraduate education, and loans they took out during graduate school thus far.
Participants were also asked to report their total current loan amount (i.e., their total amount of loan debt from
graduate and undergraduate loans yet to be paid off).
4.3
4.3.1
| Financial stress and quality of life
| Financial stress
Financial stress was assessed by asking participants to report how stressed they felt about their level of debt on a 4?
point Likert scale from “not stressed” to “very stressed”; participants with no debt were instructed to select “not
applicable.” Participants were also asked if they had seriously considered abandoning their doctoral studies because
of financial difficulties (yes/no) and were asked to estimate how many hours per week they spent thinking about or
managing their financial concerns.
4.3.2
| Delayed life milestones
Participants were asked if they had delayed life milestones in graduate school due to financial concerns and to
select all delayed milestones (social activities, dating, buying a car, buying a house, marriage, or starting a family,
having kids, or other).
4.3.3
| Housing characteristics
Participants were asked if they lived with a roommate, partner, family, or alone. The number of individuals in the
home was also assessed for each participant. Further, participants were asked if they had experienced any
| 841
SZKODY ET AL.
potentially hazardous home conditions during graduate school (adapted from Mayer & Jencks, 1989; see
supplemental Tables 1 and 2 for a complete list of housing conditions).
| Financial hardship
4.3.4
Financial hardship was assessed using a checklist of items adapted from a prior measure of material hardship (Mayer
& Jencks, 1989). Participants were asked whether they or other members of their household had experienced a
variety of material hardships in the past year like not being able to afford food, having the utilities turned off, or
missing rent payments (see Supporting Information: Tables 1 and 2 for a complete list of financial hardship items).
4.4
| Mental health outcomes
4.4.1
| Mental health outcomes
We examined the relations between financial stress and mental health outcomes using the Patient Health
Questionnaire?9 (PHQ?9; Kroenke et al., 2001) to examine depressive symptoms, the Generalized Anxiety
Disorder?7 (GAD?7; Spitzer et al., 2006) to examine anxiety symptoms, the Drug Abuse Screen Test (DAST?10;
TABLE 1
Average reported income, savings, and loans
Source of Income
M
SD
Median
Max
Yearly stipends
$19,741.27
$7492.27
$20,000.00
$48,000.00
Summer stipends
$2305.90
$2656.97
$2000.00
$22,000.00
Savings
$7575.17
$12,021.41
$3000.00
$80,000.00
Income from part?time jobs
$6131.01
$6774.63
$3000.00
$26,000.00
Undergraduate loans
$35,567.40
$57,797.26
$25,000.00
$100,000.00
Graduate student loans
$37,636.86
$33,276.25
$29,000.00
$150,000.00
Total current loans
$59,524.68
$63,244.76
$40,000.00
$500,000.00
Note: All averages were taken from students who reported at least $1 of funds in each category.
Abbreviation: SD, standard deviation.
TABLE 2
Sources of stipends
Source
Academic year income
n
%
Summer income
n
%
Research assistantships
337
37.9%
144
28.8%
Teaching
363
40.8%
79
15.8%
Clinical work
195
21.9%
44
8.8%
Other program sources
116
13.0%
73
14.6%
Personal grants or fellowships
105
11.8%
18
3.6%
Note: Students were asked to select all applicable funding sources and were permitted to select more than one source.
842
|
SZKODY ET AL.
Skinner, 1982), the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT?C), and questions regarding how many hours
of sleep they typically received each night and how many nights per week they struggled to fall or stay asleep. See
Hobaica and colleagues for descriptive outcomes of each measure, reliability analyses, and more information about
the use of the measures in the current sample. Each measure was adapted to only examine students’ perceptions of
symptoms during graduate school.
5
| RESULTS
Analyses were conducted with SPSS 27.0. Data were examined for statistical assumptions (e.g., normality, outliers,
and multicollinearity) before analysis. Outliers over two standard deviations above the initial mean score for all
count data (i.e., reported stipends, savings, cost of living expenses, costs affiliated with work and education, and
debt) were removed from analyses. Outliers may have occurred due to unreliable reporting, misunderstanding
questions, typing errors, or represent atypical but accurate data. Outliers were more common when participants
were asked to estimate annual rather than monthly expenses, suggesting a greater likelihood of unreliable reporting
or errors with annual data. Further, comparisons of outliers for university stipends to available data from similar
programs (CUDCP, 2020) further suggest that the outliers were unlikely to be accurate. For other variables, outliers
also appeared to be inaccurate or highly unlikely (e.g., a car payment should not cost $30,000 a month). Although it
is ultimately impossible to know for certain if the outliers represent accurate responses or not, best practices in
managing outliers were employed. All final scores after outlier removal are reported below. Missing data were
treated using listwise deletion in all analyses. Potential selective differences between participants who completed
all measures versus those who did not were assessed and no significant differences were present (e.g., participants
in each group did not significantly differ on age, racial?ethnic group, year in program). Further, both parametric (i.e.,
independent t?tests) and nonparametric tests (i.e., Mann?Whitney U test) were performed on all variables to
examine differences between demographic groups (i.e., racial?ethnic group, gender, and sexual identity) for all
analyses to account for differences in sample size of the examined groups. All analyses were calculated using
estimated pretax amounts and thus, should be contextualized accordingly (e.g., take?home income is less than it
appears, costs, and loan repayments are more than they appear).
6 | A I M 1 : WH E R E A RE G R A D U A T E S T U D E N T S R E C E I V I N G FU N D I N G
AND S UPPORT?
6.1
| Yearly stipends
Average income is provided in Table 1. Table 2 details sources of departmental income during the academic year
and over the summer. Overall, almost all students reported receiving a stipend of some kind during their doctoral
studies. Only 18 individuals reported receiving no stipend over the course of the academic year or summer. Overall,
39.4% (n = 336) of students reported that their stipend covered 9 months, 8.6% of participants (n = 73) reported
that it covered 10 months, 49.6% of participants (n = 423) reported that it covered 12 months, and 21 individuals
indicated another time. Over half of the sample (56.4%; 500 individuals) stated that their funding was different in
the summer but that students still received some funding support, with 16.8% (n = 149) indicating that no summer
funding was available through their program. Among participants reporting no summer stipend, 31.8% (n = 130)
were not permitted to get a summer job to supplement their income. Yearly stipends were not significantly different
across demographic factors (e.g., gender, racial?ethnic group, and sexual identity).
SZKODY ET AL.
6.2
| 843
| Savings
Although most participants reported having some financial savings, 79 participants (8.9%) reported they had no
savings when entering graduate school and 133 participants (15.3%) reported having no savings at the time of data
collection. Those with savings reported a median amount of $5000. Savings amounts were not significantly
different between White participants and people of color; however, LGBTQ + individuals (n = 194) reported
significantly fewer savings (M = $5859.50, SD = $10,981.37) than their peers (n = 641, M = $8054.46, SD =
$12,275.03), t(351.42) 2.37, p = 0.02. It is notable that the standard deviations for savings is large, likely due to
variables such as variance in stipends, program costs, the availability of financial assistance, and existing personal or
familial wealth. In addition to savings and stipends, 72.2% of the sample (n = 642) reported receiving financial
support from friends, family, partners, gifts, or child support. In terms of summer funding, if no stipend coverage
was provided, participants reported earning 57.47% (SD = 38.74) of their income themselves and receiving 11.04%
from family, 15.69% from outside work, 12.22% from current partners, 2.38% from some other source, and less
than 1% from friends, ex?partners, or welfare. Sources of financial support did not significantly differ across
demographic factors (e.g., gender, racial?ethnic group, and sexual identity).
6.3
| Other sources of income
When asked about other sources of income, 72.1% (n = 641) reported that they were not permitted by their
program to have a part?time job during the academic year. In addition, 52.4% (n = 466) reported they were not
permitted to have a summer job to help with their financial situation. Only 28.0% (n = 249) reported working a part
time job at some point in graduate school, and 29 students (3.3%) reported being on cash or food assistance offered
from the state.
6.4
| Loans
Only 48 participants (5.4%) reported no undergraduate student loan debt. For graduate student loans, 170 (19.1%)
participants reported that they had not taken out loans. As expected, graduate student loan debt increased by year
in program with last year graduate students reporting a significantly higher amount of current loans
(M = $76,838.94, SD = $92,647.18) than first year students (M = $31,819.20, SD = $33,479.58), t(149.65) ?4.86,
p < 0.001. For students in their last year of graduate school (n = 219), participants reported a current combined undergraduate and graduate loan debt that averaged $76,838.94 (SD = $92,647.18, Median = $45,000.00, min = 0, max = $500,000). Student loan debt was not significantly different based on racial?ethnic group, gender, nor LGBTQ + identity status. 7 | AIM 2 : WH ERE A RE S TU DENT S SPENDIN G T HEIR MON EY? Participants reported their average expenses per year. Only individuals who reported an expenditure over $0.00 were included in the analysis (n = 816). The average reported yearly expenditure was $17,514.74 (SD = $8513.11, Median $16,904.00, Min = $700.00, Max = $394,00.00). See Table 3 for the average costs for expenditures on utilities, vehicle and transportation, debt, university and conference fees, and professional clothing. For those on internship (n = 76), the average cost of internship interview application and travel was $2,717.43 (SD = $1312.91, Median $3000.00, Min = $0.00, Max = $5800.00). No significant differences were found on spending habits across demographic factors (e.g., gender, racial?ethnic group, and sexual identity). 844 | SZKODY ET AL. TABLE 3 Average annual expenditures during graduate school Expenditure M SD Median Reported no payment (n; %) Utilities, internet, rent, phone plans, groceries, and childcare $12,321.43 $950.00 $11,400.00 186; 20.4% Vehicle and public transportation $2721.04 $1983.60 $2400.00 58; 6.4% Paying down debt from credit cards and other sources $4109.76 $268.28 $3600 473; 51.9% University fees $1960.49 $2119.93 $1200.00 138; 12.9% Conference fees $763.11 $572.65 $700.00 118; 12.9% Professional clothing, technology for school or practica, and class materials $702.72 $540.98 $500.00 7; 1.0% Note: All averages were taken from students who reported at least $1 of funds in each category. Most participants (70.3%; n = 625) reported that they share housing with other roommates, friends, and/or family members and live with at least one other person (M = 1.54 people in the home, SD = 1.03). Similarly, 13% of participants (n = 115) reported that they are financially responsible for at least one other person in the household (M = 1.38, SD = 0.08). Most participants reported that they rent their home or apartment (85.9%; n = 764). Lastly, 75.6% of participants (n = 669) reported that their program provided some form of health insurance, yet only 37.3% of participants (n = 331) reported that their program provided some form of dental insurance. 8 | A I M 3 : D O ST U D E N T S H A V E A N EX P ENDABLE I NC OM E? The average leftover income was calculated by subtracting participant's reported yearly expenditures from their total reported pretax income (stipend or part?time jobs). The average reported income was $21,496.67 (SD = $8975.89, Median $22,000.00, Min = $2500.00, Max = $49,000.00). Thus, the average expendable pretax income of the overall sample was $3970.30 (SD = $11,410.94, Median $4096, Max = $37,940.00). Calculations show that only 65% of the sample had any expendable pretax income. Most of the sample (65.0%), however, reported some expendable income (i.e., over $0.00). The average calculated expendable pretax income, of those who had expendable income over $0.00, was approximately $10,425.42 (SD = $7578.83, Median $8776.00.00, Min = $60.00, Max = $37,940.00). Expendable pretax income did not significantly differ across demographic factors (e.g., gender, racial?ethnic group, and sexual identity). Of those with no expendable income (