The results of the clinical versus statistical prediction meta-analysis support the longstanding finding that statistical methods are superior to clinical methods in making predictions. In this reaction, the authors discuss the findings from the perspective of the context of discovery and the context of justification, the client model-building process, bias in clinician judgment, and evidenced-based practice, and they speculate about why more clinicians have not made statistical methods part of their practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ægisdóttir, S., White, M. J., Spengler, P. M., Maugherman, A. S., Anderson, L. A., Cook, R. S., et al. (2006). The meta-analysis of clinical judgment project: Fifty-six years of accumulated research on clinical versus statistical prediction. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 341-382.
2.
American Psychological Association. (2005, August). APA policy statement on EBPP. Retrieved September 19, 2005, from http://www.apa.org/practice/ebp.html
3.
Arkes, H. R. (1981). Impediments to accurate clinical judgment and possible ways to minimize their impact. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 49, 323-330.
4.
Arkes, H. R. (1991). Costs and benefits of judgment errors: Implications for debiasing. Psychological Bulletin, 110, 486-498.
5.
Corning, A. F., & Malofeeva, E. V. (2004). The application of survival analysis to the study of psychotherapy termination. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51, 354-367.
6.
Goldman, L. (1971). Using tests in counseling. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear.
7.
Levant, R. F. (2005). Report of the 2005 Presidential Task Force on evidence-based practice. Retrieved September 19, 2005, from the American Psychological Association Web site: http://www.apa.org/practice/ebp.html
8.
Meehl, P. E. (1954). Clinical vs. statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence.Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
9.
Pepinsky, H. B., & Pepinsky, P. N. (1954). Counseling theory and practice. New York: Ronald Press.
10.
Reichenbach, H. (1938). Experience and prediction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
11.
Sawyer, J. (1966). Measurement and prediction, clinical and statistical. Psychological Bulletin, 66, 178-200.
12.
Soldz, S., & McCullough, L. (2000). Reconciling empirical knowledge and clinical experience: The art and science of psychotherapy.Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
13.
Spengler, P. M., & Strohmer, D. C. (2001, August). Empirical analyses of a scientist-practitioner model of assessment. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.
14.
Spengler, P. M., Strohmer, D. M., Dixon, D. N., & Shivy, V. A. (1995). A scientist-practitioner model of psychological assessment: Implications for training, practice, and research. The Counseling Psychologist, 23, 506-534.
15.
Wampold, B. E., Lichtenberg, J. W., & Waehler, C. A. (2002). Principles of empirically supported interventions in counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 30, 197-217.
16.
Wiggins, J. S. (1988). Personality and prediction: Principles of personality assessment. Malabar, FL: Krieger.
