Clinical predictions made by mental health practitioners are compared with those using statistical approaches. Sixty-seven studies were identified from a comprehensive search of 56 years of research; 92 effect sizes were derived from these studies. The overall effect of clinical versus statistical prediction showed a somewhat greater accuracy for statistical methods. The most stringent sample of studies, from which 48 effect sizes were extracted, indicated a 13% increase in accuracy using statistical versus clinical methods. Several variables influenced this overall effect. Clinical and statistical prediction accuracy varied by type of prediction, the setting in which predictor data were gathered, the type of statistical formula used, and the amount of information available to the clinicians and the formulas. Recommendations are provided about when and under what conditions counseling psychologists might use statistical formulas as well as when they can rely on clinical methods. Implications for clinical judgment research and training are discussed.
Homework assignments have been studied extensively in psychotherapy research, but there is little data on the way in which homework is transferred to clinical practice. A survey was conducted of 827 practicing psychologists nationwide regarding their use and attitudes toward homework. Overall, 68% of the present sample indicated that they "often" or "almost always" used homework assignments. Factor analysis revealed that practitioners have a range of attitudes that can be classified as reflecting the notion that homework has (a) a negative impact on in-session therapeutic work and (b) a positive effect on therapy outcomes. More positive attitudes were reported among those with a cognitive-behavioral theoretical orientation. Nevertheless, the use of homework among psychodynamic/analytic practitioners reported in the present sample was unexpected and suggests that theoretical and empirical work is required to examine homework's effects in a range of psychotherapy approaches.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.