Les auteures présentent une étude qualitative, comparative sur les conceptions de la supervision dans le processus de professionnalisation des psychologues français. Quatre-vingt-neuf questionnaires ont été recueillis auprès de 50 psychologues en exercice et de 39 étudiants de Master 1 de Psychologie. L’analyse sémantique (logiciels Alceste et NVivo 8) de trois questions ouvertes visant à définir la supervision montre que son rôle professionnalisant n’est reconnu par aucune des populations. Les deux groupes développent en revanche des définitions et des attentes différentes vis-à-vis du dispositif. Pour les étudiants en psychologie, elle apparaît avant tout comme un dispositif d’analyse des pratiques à visée thérapeutique. Pour les psychologues en exercice, elle est davantage perçue comme un moyen de résoudre des problèmes ou comme un outil de formation continue.

Consisting in a process of professionalizing training, supervision is necessary to the development and improvement of the practice of professionals who are involved in helping suffering populations. However, identifying a consensual definition is rather difficult in France. This qualitative study aims at exploring the semantic field related to “supervision” from the point of view of psychology students and clinical psychologists. Based on the British and French literature on the subject, the authors make the assumption that it is difficult for professionals in psychology to have a clear idea of what supervision is as well as what the details of its implementation in the professionalization process of French psychologists should be. Eighty-nine questionnaires from 50 clinical psychologists and 39 psychology students (Master 1) have been analysed. The semantic analysis (software Alceste and NVivo 8) of three open questions shows that students have six different definitions of supervision against eight for confirmed psychologists. From a general point of view, supervision is mainly conceived as a group practice aiming at analysing practices. It aims at solving concrete problems and enabling to solve and overcome professional problems. Nevertheless, the two groups develop different conceptions of supervision. For psychology students, supervision is first considered as a way of analysing therapeutic practices and aims at helping them in dealing with their personal problems. For professional psychologists, supervision is more perceived as a training tool allowing them to acquire theoretical knowledge. Based on the contemplated hypothesis, the study shows that the professionalizing role of supervision, and more specifically during the studies, is recognized by none of the two groups of people. The global results show that there is an important demand in supervision and must lead in reconsidering the place and objectives of supervision in the psychology syllabus at university.