Meta-analysis of the relation between mental health professionals' clinical and educational experiences and judgment accuracy : review of clinical judgment research from 1997 to 2010

Cardinal Scholar

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Spengler, Paul M.
dc.contributor.author Pilipis, Lois A.
dc.date.accessioned 2011-06-27T19:20:37Z
dc.date.available 2011-06-28T05:30:06Z
dc.date.created 2010-12-18
dc.date.issued 2010-12-18
dc.identifier.uri http://cardinalscholar.bsu.edu/handle/123456789/194623
dc.description.abstract Researchers have addressed many clinician and client attributes in relation to the accuracy of judgments made by mental health professionals. One such moderator addressed clinicians’ judgment accuracy in relation to experience. Contrary to what many clinicians expect, a number of studies have failed to demonstrate a positive correlation between judgment accuracy and experience (e.g., Berman & Berman, 1984; Ruscio & Stern, 2005; Schinka & Sines, 1974). In Spengler et al. (2009), the relationship between judgment accuracy and experience was assessed via a largescale meta-analysis that examined studies of clinical judgment and experience from 1970 to 1996. The result was a small but reliable, homogeneous effect demonstrating a positive correlation between judgment accuracy and experience. The Spengler et al. meta-analysis found relatively few significant moderator effects influencing the experience-accuracy effect, namely the type of judgment made by clinicians, the criterion validity of accuracy measures used, and publication source. In the present study, results from clinical judgment and experience studies from 1997 to 2010 were combined in a meta-analysis. An update and extension allowed for cross-validation of the Spengler et al. meta-analysis with more recent research as well as an exploration of additional moderator variables, such as profession type and inclusion of non-mental health participants. The overall effect was .16, with a 95 percent confidence interval that was above zero (CI = .05 to .26). This overall effect indicated experience significantly impacted judgment accuracy, consistent with expectations. The overall effect was shown to be heterogeneous, indicating the Q statistic was sufficiently large to reject the null hypothesis regarding homogeneity of the effect size distribution. Exploratory analyses revealed the presence of two significant moderator variables, namely judgment type and publication source. Limitations included lack of variability of judgment type and difficulty with or complete inability to assess other potential moderators of interest, such as feedback and utilization of test protocols for the stimulus measure. Other limitations included utilization of a less exhaustive search strategy, in which some relevant studies may have been missed. Despite limitations, the results of the present metaanalysis largely replicated those of the Spengler et al. meta-analysis.
dc.description.sponsorship Department of Counseling Psychology and Guidance Services
dc.subject.lcsh Clinical competence.
dc.subject.lcsh Clinical psychology -- Practice.
dc.title Meta-analysis of the relation between mental health professionals' clinical and educational experiences and judgment accuracy : review of clinical judgment research from 1997 to 2010 en_US
dc.description.degree Thesis (Ph. D.) en_US
dc.date.liftdate 2011-06-28
dc.identifier.cardcat-url http://liblink.bsu.edu/catkey/1629106


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Doctoral Dissertations [3210]
    Doctoral dissertations submitted to the Graduate School by Ball State University doctoral candidates in partial fulfillment of degree requirements.

Show simple item record

Search Cardinal Scholar


Browse

My Account