Allegiance effects in assessment: Unresolved questions, potential explanations, and constructive remedies

Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 361-365

  Lilienfeld, Scott O ^a   Jones, Meredith K ^a  

^a EMORY UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Allegiance effect; Meta analysis; Risk assessment; SORAG; Static 99; VRAG

Indexed keywords

EID: 55149083762     PISSN: 09695893     EISSN: 14682850     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2850.2008.00148.x     Document Type: Note

References (23)

1. Blair, P. R., Marcus, D. K., & Boccaccini, M. T. (2008). Is there an allegiance effect for assessment instruments? Actuarial risk assessment as an exemplar. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 15, 346-360.
2. Chan, A., & Altman, D. G. (2005). Identifying outcome reporting bias in randomized trials on PubMed: Review of publications and survey of authors. British Medical Journal, 330, 753.
3. Conn, V. S., Valentine, J. C., Cooper, H., & Rantz, M. J. (2003). Grey literature in meta-analyses. Nursing Research, 52, 256-261.
4. Cooper, H., DeNeve, K., & Charlton, K. (1997). Finding the missing science: The fate of studies submitted for review by a human subjects committee. Psychological Methods, 2, 447-452.
5. Gilovich, T. (1991). How we know what isn't so: The fallibility of human reason in everyday life. New York: Free Press.
6. Hyman, R., & Honorton, C. (1986). A joint communique: The psi ganzfeld controversy. Journal of Parapsychology, 50, 351-364.
7. Joseph, J., & Baldwin, S. (2000). Four editorial proposals to improve social sciences research and publication. International Journal of Risk and Safety in Medicine, 13, 117-127.
8. Klein, D. F. (1999). Dealing with the effects of therapy allegiances. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 6, 124-126.
9. Lilienfeld, S. O., Wood, J. M., & Garb, H. N. (2000). The scientific status of projective techniques. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 1, 27-66.
10. Luborsky, L., Diguer, L., Seligman, D. A., Rosenthal, R., Krause, E. D., Johnson, S., et al. (1999). The researcher's own therapy allegiances: A "wild card" in comparisons of treatment efficacy. Clinical Psychology: Science & Practice, 6, 95-106.
11. Lykken, D. T. (1968). Statistical significance in psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 70, 151-159.
12. Lykken, D. T. (1991). What's wrong with psychology anyway? In D. Cicchetti & W. M. Grove (Eds.), Thinking clearly about psychology. Volume 1: Matters of public interest (pp. 2-39). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
13. Meehl, P. E. (1990). Why summaries of research on psychological theories are often uninterpretable. Psychological Reports, 66, 195-244.
14. Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2, 175-220.
15. O'Donohue, W. T., Lilienfeld, S. O., & Fowler, K. A. (2007). Science is an essential safeguard against human error. In S. O. Lilienfeld & W. T. O'Donohue (Eds.), The great ideas of clinical science: 17 principles that every mental health professional should understand (pp. 3-27). New York: Routledge.
16. Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638-641.
17. Rosenthal, R. (1994). Interpersonal expectancy effects: A 30-year perspective. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 3, 176-179.
18. Simes, R. J. (1986). Publication bias: The case for an international registry of clinical trials. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 4, 1529-1541.
19. Staines, G. L., & Cleland, C. M. (2007). Bias in meta-analytic estimates of the absolute efficacy of psychotherapy. Review of General Psychology, 11, 329-347.
20. Stern, J. M., & Simes, R. J. (1997). Publication bias: Evidence of delayed publication in a cohort study of clinical research projects. British Medical Journal, 315, 640-645.
21. Tavris, C., & Aronson, E. (2007). Mistakes were made (but not by me): Why we justify foolish beliefs, bad decisions, and hurtful acts. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
22. Thase, M. (1999). What is the investigator allegiance effect and what should we do about it? Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 6, 113-115.
23. Wood, J. M., Lilienfeld, S. O., Garb, H. N., & Nezworski, T. M. (2000). The Rorschach tests in clinical diagnosis: A critical review, with a backward look at Garfield (1947). Journal of Clinical Psychology, 56, 395-430.