Clinical and “Actuarial” Evaluation of Organic Brain Damage by Psychologists and Non-Psychologists Using the Memory-for-Designs

Abstract

This study examined the effects of type of training and level of education on clinical judgment, as demonstrated in “clinical” and “actuarial” evaluation of the Graham-Kendall Memory-for-Designs (1960). Protocols of 6 organic and 6 non-organic patients matched for age and IQ were evaluated by 18 judges. Nine of the judges were psychologists and nine had degrees in some field other than psychology. In each group 3 judges had PhDs, 3 had Master's degrees, and 3 had Bachelor's degrees. There was no significant difference (p > .01) between the 2 groups in clinical or actuarial diagnoses of brain damage regardless of level of education, and inter-rater reliability was all but identical. Results were consistent with other research on clinical judgment.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arnoff

F. M.

Some factors influencing the reliability of clinical judgment. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1954, 10, 272–275.

Cline

V. B.

Ability to judge personality with a stress interview and sound film technique. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1955, 50, 223–225.

Downie

N. M.

, & Heath

R. W.

Basic statistical methods. New York: Harper & Row, 1959.

Goldberg

L. R.

The effectiveness of clinicians' judgments: the diagnosis of organic brain damage from the Bender-Gestalt test. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1959, 23, 25–33.

Graham

F. K.

, & Kendall

B. S.

Performance of brain-damaged cases on a Memory-for-Designs test. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1946, 41, 303–314.

Graham

F. K.

, & Kendall

B. S.

Memory-for-Designs test: revised general manual. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1960, 11, 147–188. (Monogr. Suppl. 2-V11)

Grebstein

Relative accuracy of actuarial prediction, experienced clinicians and graduate students in a clinical judgment task. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1963, 27, 127–132.

Hiler

E. W.

, & Nesvig

An evaluation of criteria used by clinicians to infer pathology from figure drawings. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1965, 29, 520–529.

Howard

K. I.

, & Orlinsky

D. E.

Psychotherapeutic processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 1972, 23, 615–668.

10.

Hunt

W. A.

, & Jones

N. E.

Clinical judgment of some aspects of schizophrenic thinking. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1958, 14, 235–239.

11.

Hunt

W. A.

Jones

N. E.

, & Hunt

E. B.

Reliability of clinical judgment as a function of clinical experience. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1957, 13, 377–378.

12.

Johnson

, & McNeal

B. F.

Statistical versus clinical prediction: length of neuropsychiatric hospital stay. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 1967, 72, 335–340.

13.

Kelly

Smits

Jones

Leventhal

, & Rhodes

Critique of the designs of process and outcome research. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1970, 14, 337–341.

14.

Korman

, & Blumberg

Comparative efficiency of some tests of cerebral damage. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1963, 27, 303–309.

15.

Luft

Differences in predicting based on hearing versus reading verbatum clinical interviews. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1951, 15, 115–119.

16.

Oskamp

Clinical judgment from the MMPI: simple or complex?

Journal of Clinical Psychology, 1967, 23, 411–415.

17.

Perez

, & Satz

Effects of feedback on clinical prediction. Proceedings, 79th Annual Convention, APA, 1971, 6, 465–466.

18.

Stricker

Actuarial, naive clinical, and sophisticated clinical prediction of pathology from figure drawings. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1967, 31, 492–494.

19.

Truesdell

A. B.

, & Bath

J. A.

Clinical and actuarial predictions of academic survival and attrition. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1957, 4, 50–53.