Clinical expertise and reasoning with uncertain categories |
| |
Authors: | Brett K Hayes Tsan-Hsiang Jessamine Chen |
| |
Institution: | (1) School of Psychology, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, 2052, Australia |
| |
Abstract: | Expert clinical psychologists, clinical psychology graduates, and nonclinical graduate students were presented with clinical
and nonclinical cases in which the diagnosis or category membership of a character was uncertain; they then made feature predictions
about the character. For each case, there was a diagnosis or category that was highly probable and a less likely alternative
that either did (relevant condition) or did not (neutral condition) alter predictions. For clinical cases, clinical experts
and graduate clinicians gave different predictions for the relevant and neutral conditions, indicating that they had considered
the uncertain nature of the diagnosis in their predictions. Although they acknowledged that the diagnosis was uncertain, nonclinical
students ignored the less likely diagnostic alternatives when making predictions. For the nonclinical cases, all three groups
made predictions based on only the most likely category alternative. The results showed that clinical training and/or experience
promote multiple-category reasoning, but that this effect is domain specific. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 PubMed SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|