Jove
Visualize
Contact Us

Related Experiment Videos

Accepting error to make less error.

H J Einhorn

    Journal of Personality Assessment
    |January 1, 1986
    PubMed
    Summary

    Clinical and statistical prediction methods differ in their handling of random error. Statistical approaches, by accepting error, often yield more accurate predictions than deterministic clinical methods.

    Related Concept Videos

    You might also read

    Related Articles

    Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

    Sort by
    Same author

    Cue definition and residual judgment.

    Organizational behavior and human performance·1974
    Same author

    Methodological considerations relevant to discrimination in employment testing.

    Psychological bulletin·1971
    Same author

    The use of nonlinear, noncompensatory models in decision making.

    Psychological bulletin·1970
    See all related articles
    JoVE
    x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
    ABOUT JoVE
    OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
    AUTHORS
    Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
    LIBRARIANS
    TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
    RESEARCH
    JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
    EDUCATION
    JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
    Terms & Conditions of Use
    Privacy Policy
    Policies

    Area of Science:

    • Decision Analysis
    • Predictive Modeling
    • Clinical vs. Statistical Reasoning

    Background:

    • Clinical and statistical prediction approaches operate under distinct assumptions regarding random error and expected accuracy.
    • Understanding these differences is crucial for optimizing diagnostic and treatment strategies.

    Purpose of the Study:

    • To delineate the fundamental assumptions underlying clinical and statistical prediction methods.
    • To analyze the inherent errors, risks, and benefits associated with each approach.
    • To propose a decision analysis framework for comparing the two methodologies.

    Main Methods:

    • Comparative analysis of clinical (deterministic, causal) and statistical (probabilistic) approaches to prediction.
    • Illustration through examples from probability learning and equal weighting in linear models.
    • Development of a decision analysis framework to evaluate the trade-offs of each approach.

    Main Results:

    • Clinical approach: deterministic, causal, focused on diagnosis/treatment; prone to errors like myths, magic, and illusions of control.
    • Statistical approach: accepts error as inevitable, leading to potentially greater predictive accuracy; associated with lost opportunities and illusions of lack of control.
    • Each approach involves a gamble with specific risks and benefits.

    Conclusions:

    • The choice between clinical and statistical prediction involves inherent trade-offs related to assumptions about error and accuracy.
    • Recognizing the distinct error patterns (myths vs. lost opportunities) is key to informed decision-making.
    • A decision analysis framework can aid in selecting the most appropriate approach based on context and goals.

    Related Experiment Videos