On the Application of Bootstrapping and Monte Carlo Simulations to Clinical Studies: Psychometric Intelligence Research and Juvenile Delinquency

Kohske Ogata

doi:10.4236/psych.2021.128072

Abstract

The common problems in the methodology of clinical psychology research are sampling issues, both in the case of biased clinical groups and inappropriate control groups. This study aimed to mitigate this problem by using the following procedures: 1) using a bootstrapping approach for the biased clinical sample; 2) generating a random number dataset as a control population; 3) resampling both the bootstrapped targeted datasets and the normed control population; and 4) conducting a repeated analysis to create averaged statistics using the Monte Carlo simulation. The dataset used in the present study included 273 children with a history of delinquency and was assessed using the WISC-IV. Compared with conventional analyses, the proposed approach in the present study was found to generate the characteristics of the targeted clinical group on the basis of averaged statistics. Given that the norm had been identified in past research on psychometric intelligence, the use of bootstrapping and Monte Carlo simulations led to more robust findings compared with the use of conventional clinical studies.

Highlights

This study aimed to mitigate this problem by using the following procedures: 1) using a bootstrapping approach for the biased clinical sample; 2) generating a random number dataset as a control population; 3) resampling both the bootstrapped targeted datasets and the normed control population; and 4) conducting a repeated analysis to create averaged statistics using the Monte Carlo simulation
The results outlined above indicate that lager sample sizes and higher resampling times could improve the accuracy of the comparison using the Monte Carlo simulation
The findings indicated that the results for the clinical group had significantly lower scores than the norm (M = 100) for verbal comprehension index (VCI) (t [272] = 25.4, p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 1.54), for perceptual reasoning index (PRI) (t [272] = 13.8, p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.83), for working memory index (WMI) (t [272] = 15.2, p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.92), and for processing speed index (PSI) (t [272] = 10.3, p < 0.001, Cohen’s d = 0.62)

Summary

Introduction

A Common Dilemma Faced by Clinical Psychologists Despite the controversies associated with the Boulder model 2000), clinical psychologists and education/training directors still generally use the scientist-practitioner model for their professional psychological activities (Norcross, Gallagher, & Prochaska, 1989; O’Sullivan & Quevillon, 1992). Psychologists practicing in the clinical field frequently share a common dilemma with regard to research methodology: sampling issues. Clinical psychologists working in psychiatric hospitals routinely assess psychiatric patients using some psychological tests. They can accumulate the test data regarding psychiatric patients with comparative ease. The data they obtained have methodological shortcomings for scientific research

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion