Abstract

It was hypothesized that clinical judges would make ineffective use of base rate information and that their level of experience in the forensic psychology field or with risk assessment would have no bearing on their ability to make accurate clinical judgments. A convenience sample of 43 members of two professional psychological organizations was used to determine the effects of base rates and experience on predictions made from a “blind” analysis of the Historical, Clinical, Risk-20 (HCR-20). Consistent with the hypotheses, base rate neglect was prevalent in the current study and prior experience had no effect on predictive accuracy.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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 call

Disclaimer: 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.