This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (1) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Strohmer, D. C. Articles by Arm, J. R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same

Reaction to Ægisdóttir et al.

Jennifer R. Arm

University of Memphis

The results of the clinical versus statistical prediction meta-analysis support the longstanding finding that statistical methods are superior to clinical methods in making predictions. In this reaction, the authors discuss the findings from the perspective of the context of discovery and the context of justification, the client model-building process, bias in clinician judgment, and evidenced-based practice, and they speculate about why more clinicians have not made statistical methods part of their practice.

The Counseling Psychologist, Vol. 34, No. 3, 383-390 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/0011000005285879


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Aegisdottir, P. M. Spengler, and M. J. White Should I Pack My Umbrella? Clinical Versus Statistical Prediction of Mental Health Decisions The Counseling Psychologist, May 1, 2006; 34(3): 410 - 419. [Abstract] [PDF]