Statistical significance testing, construct validity, and clinical versus actuarial judgment: An interesting (seeming) paradox

Applied and Preventive Psychology

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 27-29

  Faust, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF RHODE ISLAND   (United States)

Author keywords

Actuarial prediction; Meta science; Psychological theories; Significance testing

Indexed keywords

EID: 3242815481     PISSN: 09621849     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.appsy.2004.03.001     Document Type: Note

References (14)

1. Cronbach L.J. Meehl P.E. Construct validity in psychological tests Psychological Bulletin 52 1955 281-302
2. Faust, D. (1984). The limits of scientific reasoning. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
3. Faust D. Holistic thinking is not the whole story Assessment 10 2003 428-441
4. Faust D. Meehl P.E. Using meta-scientific studies to clarify or resolve questions in the philosophy and history of science Philosophy of Science 69 2002 S185-S196
5. Grove W.M. Meehl P.E. Comparative efficiency of informal (subjective, impressionistic) and formal (mechanical, algorithmic) prediction procedures: The clinical-statistical controversy Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 2 1996 293-323
6. Grove W.M. Zald D.H. Lebow B.S. Snitz B.E. Nelson C. Clinical vs. mechanical prediction: A meta-analysis Psychological Assessment 12 2000 19-30
7. Lichtenstein, S., Fischhoff, B., & Phillips, L. D. (1982). Calibration of probabilities: The state of the art to 1980. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic, & A. Tversky (Eds.), Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases (pp. 306-334). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
8. Meehl, P. E. (1954). Clinical versus statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
9. Meehl P.E. Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 46 1978 806-834
10. Meehl, P. E. (1991). Selected philosophical and methodological papers (C. A. Anderson & K. Gunderson Eds.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
11. Meehl P.E. Cliometric metatheory: The actuarial approach to empirical, history-based philosophy of science Psychological Reports 71 1992 339-467
12. Meehl, P. E. (1996). Clinical versus statistical prediction: A theoretical analysis and a review of the evidence. (Reprint of Meehl, 1954, with new Preface). Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
13. Meehl, P. E. (1997). The problem is epistemology, not statistics: Replace significance tests by confidence intervals and quantify accuracy of risky numerical predictions. In L. L. Harlow, S. A. Mulaik, & J. H. Steiger (Eds.), What if there were no significance tests? (pp. 393-425). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
14. Meehl, P. E. (1998, May 23rd). The power of quantitative thinking. Speech delivered upon receipt of the James McKeen Cattell Fellow award at the Meeting of the American Psychological Society. Washington, DC.