In praise of clinical judgment: Meehl's forgotten legacy.

Department of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30322, USA.
Journal of Clinical Psychology (Impact Factor: 2.12). 11/2005; 61(10):1257-76. DOI: 10.1002/jclp.20181
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Although Paul E. Meehl demonstrated the limits of informal aggregation of data and prognostication by presumed experts, he remained convinced that clinical experience confers expertise of some kind. The authors explore this forgotten side of Meehl's legacy by reconsidering the validity of clinical judgment in its natural context, everyday clinical work. Three domains central to clinical practice are examined: diagnosis, interpretation of meaning, and intervention. It is argued that a more sanguine picture of clinical expertise emerges when the focus shifts from prediction at high levels of inference to (a) judgments at a moderate level of inference, (b) contexts for which clinical training and experience are likely to confer expertise, and (c) conditions that optimize the expression of that expertise (e.g., use of instruments designed for expert observers). The authors conclude by examining domains in which clinical judgment could prove useful in knowledge generation (e.g., hypothesis generation, identification of falsifying instances, item development).

  • Source
    Handbook of Psychology (2nd ed.), Assessment Psychology (Vol. 10), 2nd edited by J. Graham & J. Naglieri, 01/2012: chapter Clinical versus mechanical prediction: pages 26-49; John Wiley & Sons.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This research examined how people’s ability to detect behavior change in simulated child targets is affected by their clinical experience and the assessment method they use. When using summary assessment methods that are widely employed in research and clinical practice, both inexperienced and experienced clinical staff detected changes in the overall frequency of targets’ aggressive behavior, but were not uniquely influenced by changes in targets’ reactions to social events. When using contextualized assessment methods that focused on conditional reactions, experienced staff showed greater sensitivity than novices to context-specific changes in targets’ aggressive and prosocial reactions to aversive events. Experienced staff also showed greater sensitivity to context-specific changes in their overall impressions of change, but only for aggression. The findings show how clinically experienced judges become more attuned to if…then… contingencies in children’s social behavior, and how summary assessment methods may hamper the detection of change processes.
    Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 09/2014; 36(3). · 1.55 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The evidence-based practice movement has become an important feature of health care systems and health care policy. Within this context, the APA 2005 Presidential Task Force on Evidence-Based Practice defines and discusses evidence-based practice in psychology (EBPP). In an integration of science and practice, the Task Force's report describes psychology's fundamental commitment to sophisticated EBPP and takes into account the full range of evidence psychologists and policymakers must consider. Research, clinical expertise, and patient characteristics are all supported as relevant to good outcomes. EBPP promotes effective psychological practice and enhances public health by applying empirically supported principles of psychological assessment, case formulation, therapeutic relationship, and intervention. The report provides a rationale for and expanded discussion of the EBPP policy statement that was developed by the Task Force and adopted as association policy by the APA Council of Representatives in August 2005
    American Psychologist 06/2006; 61(4):271-285. · 6.87 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jul 16, 2014