I half-agree with the above, but not all of it.
The PsyD (or “Vail” model) was proposed at a psychological conference in 1973. Before that, the prevailing model was the scientist-practitioner (or “Boulder”) model, the PhD, which focused on turning out people who were scientists/researchers first and clinicians/practitioners second. The Vail model was intended to prepare students who aren’t interested in careers conducting research for clinical practice, so the focus is on learning how to practice psychology as a therapist/clinician.
However, PsyD students are still taught how to consume research as appropriate for their careers, so it’s untrue that people with PsyDs cannot properly evaluate new research. They still take research methods coursework and have to do a capstone research project, although it’s typically less rigorous than the dissertation; their abilities in this area kind of depend on the rigor and quality of their program in and of itself, not the three letters. There are many master’s level mental health counselors who are also not trained in the S-P model but still know how to consume research and improve their practice over time. (Many MDs are also perfectly capable of evaluating medical studies, although they usually gain this training through experiential learning or CME.)
However, I DO agree that PsyD programs tend to be at pricy private schools and also tend to be, on average, lower-quality programs than the PhD. That’s because by 1973, most of the well-established, top-shelf psychology departments already had a PhD and were not interested in switching to the PsyD model. Also, the issue with most PsyD programs is that they don’t come with funding. Most good, research-focused PhD programs will come with a full funding package (full tuition and fees plus a stipend in the $20-30K range). Mid-to-lower ranked clinical psychology PhD programs sometimes come with partial funding or no funding. But virtually all PsyD programs - good or bad - come with no funding; they’re intended to be treated like MD programs, where you borrow the full cost of attendance. The problem with that is that you might go $150-200K in debt for a career that pays like $75K on average. It’s not a great ROI, unless you have gobs of money available to you to pay it out of pocket.
Also, keep in mind that PsyDs will have an uphill battle getting a position at a university as a professor (even adjunct or with a less than full-time appointment) or researcher.
If you are interested in doing research and teaching at a university, definitely go for the PhD.
If you are interested in practicing as a therapist and have zero interest in research, I’d go for an MSW or an MA/MS/M.Ed in mental health counseling.
If you’re somewhere in the middle - with primary interest in practicing but some interest in maybe teaching or doing research someday, I’d still go for an MSW, with the knowledge that you can get a PhD in social work (or psychology) later on if you decide you want to teach. But that’s where things get a little more grey.
Also, counseling psychology is less competitive than clinical but will still allow you to practice as a clinician.
Also, this is only tangentially related, but there is a long and rich history of doing psychological research with questionnaires (and questionnaires are utilized in lots of different kind of research, including some RCTs). Questionnaires are not in and of themselves unreliable - you can, in fact, make a reliable questionnaire, and lots of psychologists use them. I’m a PhD-trained psychologist from a top 15-20 program and I use questionnaires all the time.