Abstract
The author presents the results of a comparison between a standardized interviewing instrument and the traditional free-style medical interview that involved two groups of interviewers. The author's ratings of their conduct of the interviews, their styles, and their points of emphasis indicated that the standardized instrument was more comprehensive in its coverage of psychiatric pathology. On the other hand, the free-style interview allowed significant individual variation in emphasis, which contributes to differences among observers and impedes comparability of the work of different researchers.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
