Verified by 
Meeting new people can be challenging, especially when you know virtually nothing about them. Imagine being on a bus, train, or plane and the person next to you asks you what you do. If you’re a psychologist, you might say “I’m a psychologist.” If you’re a research psychologist rather than a clinical psychologist, that answer could lead to problems. “Oh you’re a psychologist,” the person might say, whereupon they might start telling you about their problems or make some coy remark about your probable interest in reading their minds. Hearing them say such things, you might be tempted to interrupt: “Sorry, I’m not **that** kind of psychologist.”
I have asked colleagues who, like me, are non-clinical psychologists, what they do in these circumstances. Some have told me they avoid saying they’re psychologists. They prefer not to get into these kinds of conversations because, they indicate, they’re unqualified to offer counsel and want to avoid awkward discussions. Instead of self-identifying as psychologists, these colleagues tell me they describe their jobs in other ways: “I’m a cognitive scientist,” they report, or “I’m a neuroscientist.”
There’s a counter-argument to avoiding the “psychologist” word, however. If you don’t say you are one, you fail to spread the word that psychology is a science. The National Science Foundation supports psychological research. So do the National Institutes of Health, companies, the military, and other government agencies. These institutions employee thousands of psychologists to aid in research and development. Even so, you may not want to take on the job of explaining the status of psychology as a branch of science, particularly if what you really want is to watch a movie, listen to music, or analyze data from your latest experiment.
So what should you do? In my case, I try to make case-by-case judgments. I rely on my quasi-clinical skills, such as they are, to get a reading of what kind of person this is and how much I want to engage with them. For me, because I work on the planning and control of everyday physical actions, if the person I’m talking to looks like an athlete, I may say that I’m an experimental psychologist who studies physical performance. If the person next to me is decked out in Fight-for-Unions buttons and I think I might want to strike up a conversation with him or her, I tell them I’m an experimental psychologist who investigates on how people work with their hands. Both things are true. Like anyone, I can truthfully describe what I do in many ways.
When I say I’m an “experimental psychologist,” I sometimes get mocking replies like, “Don’t experiment on me.” When I hear this, I try to turn the conversation into a teaching moment. I explain that my colleagues and I try to learn how people control the voluntary movements they perform in everyday life, hoping this knowledge may help clumsy children become less so, lead to better rehabilitation programs for people with Parkinson’s disease, and so on. When people hear that experimental psychologists pursue topics like these, it opens their eyes. They realize that the field may be of interest to them or people they know. Their new knowledge can also help them be on the alert when legislators threaten to cut funding for behavioral research. I always try to explain that behavioral data are core to what we experimental psychologists look at and that a huge amount can be learned from behavior itself, as shown by the way we (the person I’m talking to and I) are connecting.
Being able to read others, to predict when they're going to go off the deep end, or, more positively, help build a more supportive, nurturing world are behavioral science ventures par excellence. People in the general public often say that medical professionals are the ones who can and should deal with such issues, perhaps with brain surgery or medications. But designing clearer road signs and cleverer curricula can and should be done via behavioral means. If we wait for neuroscientists to figure out how brains should be directly modified to prevent traffic jams or poor study habits, we’ll be waiting a long, long time.
In sum, I think it’s important to use the word “psychologist.” “Behavioral scientist” is fine, too, but “psychologist” is more inclusive. Psychologists rely on medical-style measures like brain waves and brain images as well as behavior. Psychology, being the inclusive field it is, should invite others in. If you're a non-clinical psychologist, and someone asks you what you do, spread the word that you’re in “psych.” Let others know you’re “psyched” about it! What is done in research psychology is generally understandable to others. Take the time to explain it with your head held high and, no less importantly, be open to what others may have to say. There's a lot of wisdom out there. Shutting down may lead to your missing out on useful input from others you meet whose professions—no matter how they are described—may be of interest to you as well.
