publication . Other literature type . Article . 1996

Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy.

William M. Grove; Paul E. Meehl;
Open Access
  • Published: 01 Jan 1996
  • Publisher: American Psychological Association (APA)
Given a data set about an individual or a group (e.g., interviewer ratings, life history or demographic facts, test results, self-descriptions), there are two modes of data combination for a predictive or diagnostic purpose. The clinical method relies on human judgment that is based on informal contemplation and, sometimes, discussion with others (e.g., case conferences). The mechanical method involves a formal, algorithmic, objective procedure (e.g., equation) to reach the decision. Empirical comparisons of the accuracy of the two methods (136 studies over a wide range of predictands) show that the mechanical method is almost invariably equal to or superior to ...
free text keywords: Sociology and Political Science, Law, Social Psychology, Know-how, Interview, Sentence, Contemplation, media_common.quotation_subject, media_common, Meta-analysis, Prison, Actuarial science, Comparative research, Life history, Psychology, Cognitive psychology
Any information missing or wrong?Report an Issue