The problem being described is that becoming a clinical psychologist often requires doing social psychology research to get a graduate degree.

There are Doctor of Psychology (PsyD rather than PhD) programs that focus on clinical psychology training rather than doing research, but the majority of clinical psychologists still do a traditional research-oriented graduate program and there are far more schools offering them.

Premise: > In North America (perhaps elsewhere) you are required to have at least a Master's degree to practise Psychology and you should have a doctorate if you want any mobility with your practise.

Conclusion: > This leads people who have no interest in academia having to find a way to convince people they've discovered something new and novel so that they can go apply what has already been discovered.

I'm not rejecting the premise, I'm saying the conclusion is not supported by this article. None of the figures mentioned in the article (Daryl Bem, John Bargh, Susan Fiske, Brian Wansink, Amy Cuddy, Simine Vazire, etc) are clinical psychologists. None of the research described in the article is clinical psychology, or even appears to have been performed for clinical psychology.

Maybe clinical psychology has a replication crisis, I don't know, but there is no evidence here for the idea that clinical psychology degree candidates are causing the replication crisis in social psychology.