Abstract
Studies are reviewed in which clinicians made judgments (e.g., diagnoses) and then rated the degree of confidence that they had in each of their judgments. Clinicians are generally thought to be overconfident and unable to specify correctly which of their judgments are most likely to be valid. However, a comprehensive review of the confidence literature reveals little support for the hypothesis that clinicians are overconfident. Also, confidence ratings were related positively to the validity of judgments in a number of studies. Finally, experienced clinicians tended to make more appropriate confidence ratings than did inexperienced judges.
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.
