We have just had different experiences. I have always chosen analysts, and many analysts tend to also be psychiatrists as well. (Some are even Zen masters for that matter). I don't find what you call "pdocs" anywhere around me. I do know that exists and seems to have taken up some sort of central role, but it is not what I have experienced at all.

I've experienced the opposite. People who want (and sometimes insist) to be called "doctor" as if that really means the same thing or means anything at all for that matter. And since the training is so different, there has to be a difference in attitude both toward the profession and toward clients. The science model for doctoral candidates is the way things just are. I don't happen to think this is very useful or helpful. In fact there are arguments out there that it can be harmful or at least not as humane as other approaches. That is kinda complicated to get into and has some larger issues about the way insurance has changed the field so much in recent years.

I'm not really here to argue or say my position is correct or anything. But it is different and it's not just a first impression so I just thought I would add it into the mix.