Computer utilization and clinical judgment in psychological assessment reports

2005 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth O. Lichtenberger
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Assessment ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Computer Utilization ◽  
Assessment Reports

Psychological Assessment and Clinical Judgment 1

2019 ◽  
pp. 125-140
Author(s):  
Howard N. Garb ◽  
Scott O. Lilienfeld ◽  
Katherine A. Fowler
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Assessment ◽  
Clinical Judgment

scholarly journals Psychological Assessment Reports in Selection Decisions: The Role of Spatial Contiguity Principle

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 12-41
Author(s):  
Roxana Spînu ◽  
Dragoș Iliescu
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Assessment ◽  
Eye Tracker ◽  
Job Description ◽  
Assessment Report ◽  
Selection Decisions ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Integrated Or ◽  
Experimental Group ◽  
Assessment Reports

Two ways of building psychological assessment reports were explored in two separate cvasi-experimental studies.In the first study, depending on their assigned experimental group, participants received either an integrated or a spatially distant type of report. They were subsequently invited to choose, based on the reports and a corresponding job description, the better candidate for a fictitious job, out of two options. The obtained results suggest that there is no significant difference between the two groups, c2(1) = 0.10, p = .921, fc = 0.009, p = 1.000. Thus, the way in which the reports were structured did not influence in any way the participants’ decision. For the second experiment, which had a similar approach, an eye-tracker was used. Participants were asked to solve the same task, while their eye movements were recorded. The only significant between-group difference was in regards to the integrated transitions the participants made between the graphic and the text, t(29) = 4.45, p = .000, d = 1.59. No significant difference was observed regardingthe number offixations or the duration of fixationsbetween the two groups. Based on these results, we argue that the two contrasted ways of building an assessment report do not influence the accuracy of decisions made.

Factor Analysis of Measures of Articulation, Language, Auditory Processing, Reading-Spelling, and Maxillofacial Structure

1977 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-324
Author(s):  
Anita F. Johnson ◽  
Ralph L. Shelton ◽  
William B. Arndt ◽  
Montie L. Furr
Keyword(s):  
Factor Analysis ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Auditory Processing

This study was concerned with the correspondence between the classification of measures by clinical judgment and by factor analysis. Forty-six measures were selected to assess language, auditory processing, reading-spelling, maxillofacial structure, articulation, and other processes. These were applied to 98 misarticulating eight- and nine-year-old children. Factors derived from the analysis corresponded well with categories the measures were selected to represent.

Debates in Dysphagia Management: How Do You Use Evidence-Based Practice in Your Dysphagia Patient Care?

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 121-123
Author(s):  
Jeri A. Logemann
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Patient Care ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Clinical Judgment ◽  
Clinical Decision Making ◽  
Evidence Based Practice ◽  
Clinical Decision ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Clinical Method ◽  
Do So

Evidence-based practice requires astute clinicians to blend our best clinical judgment with the best available external evidence and the patient's own values and expectations. Sometimes, we value one more than another during clinical decision-making, though it is never wise to do so, and sometimes other factors that we are unaware of produce unanticipated clinical outcomes. Sometimes, we feel very strongly about one clinical method or another, and hopefully that belief is founded in evidence. Some beliefs, however, are not founded in evidence. The sound use of evidence is the best way to navigate the debates within our field of practice.

Effects of Systematic Training in Psychological Assessment on Competence in Writing Reports

2002 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 407-416
Author(s):  
Heike Eckert ◽  
Karl Westhoff
Keyword(s):  
Psychological Assessment ◽  
Individual Feedback ◽  
Systematic Training

Abstract: In practice every graduate in psychology is expected to be competent in writing psychological reports. First we discuss the basic determinants of the acquisition of this competence. Then we describe how these basic determinants are taken into consideration in the study. The effects of several measures to improve this training are tested. They relate to structure, contents and realization in the sequence of lectures and seminars. Three hypotheses on the effectiveness of our training were tested by evaluation of the examination reports written in 5 consecutive years (N1 = 229, N2 = 119). The results show that a systematic acquisition of knowledge and competence can be supported by different didactic aids as individual feedback, checklists with rules on how to proceed and also checklists for mistakes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document