Can Social Workers Estimate the Likelihood of Future Actions and Events? A Forecasting Accuracy Study

IF 1.8 3区 社会学 Q1 SOCIAL WORK
David Wilkins, Melissa Meindl
{"title":"Can Social Workers Estimate the Likelihood of Future Actions and Events? A Forecasting Accuracy Study","authors":"David Wilkins, Melissa Meindl","doi":"10.1093/bjsw/bcad234","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Social workers routinely make decisions and formulate care plans in the course of their work with children and families. These decisions and care plans are based at least in part on the professional judgement of the worker. An important component of judgemental quality is the extent to which explicit or implicit forecasts about the likelihood of different future actions and events are made with accuracy. In this article, we report an analysis of 21,193 forecasts made by 581 child and family social workers in England about the likelihood of different future actions and events following referrals to children’s services. We found that the more likely social workers said an action or event was to happen (as the forecast likelihood increased towards 100 per cent), the more often it occurred. However, we also found that social workers tend to over-estimate the likelihood of almost all specified future actions and events. Social workers were most accurate when forecasting something to be very unlikely, and less accurate when they forecast something to be likely or very likely. We consider these findings in relation to false positive and negative errors in child protection, and the theory of judgemental rationalism.","PeriodicalId":48259,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Social Work","volume":"72 8","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Social Work","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcad234","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Social workers routinely make decisions and formulate care plans in the course of their work with children and families. These decisions and care plans are based at least in part on the professional judgement of the worker. An important component of judgemental quality is the extent to which explicit or implicit forecasts about the likelihood of different future actions and events are made with accuracy. In this article, we report an analysis of 21,193 forecasts made by 581 child and family social workers in England about the likelihood of different future actions and events following referrals to children’s services. We found that the more likely social workers said an action or event was to happen (as the forecast likelihood increased towards 100 per cent), the more often it occurred. However, we also found that social workers tend to over-estimate the likelihood of almost all specified future actions and events. Social workers were most accurate when forecasting something to be very unlikely, and less accurate when they forecast something to be likely or very likely. We consider these findings in relation to false positive and negative errors in child protection, and the theory of judgemental rationalism.
社会工作者能否估计未来行动和事件的可能性?预测精度研究
社会工作者在为儿童和家庭服务的过程中,通常会做出决定并制定护理计划。这些决定和护理计划至少部分是基于工作人员的专业判断。判断质量的一个重要组成部分是对未来不同行动和事件的可能性作出的明确或隐含预测的准确性。在这篇文章中,我们报告了对英国581名儿童和家庭社会工作者所做的21,193项预测的分析,这些预测是关于转到儿童服务机构后不同未来行动和事件的可能性。我们发现,社会工作者越有可能预测一个行动或事件会发生(当预测的可能性增加到100%时),它发生的频率就越高。然而,我们也发现社会工作者倾向于高估几乎所有指定的未来行动和事件的可能性。社会工作者在预测不太可能发生的事情时最准确,而在预测可能发生或非常可能发生的事情时则不太准确。我们认为这些发现与儿童保护中的假阳性和阴性错误以及判断理性主义理论有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.00
自引率
22.20%
发文量
208
期刊介绍: Published for the British Association of Social Workers, this is the leading academic social work journal in the UK. It covers every aspect of social work, with papers reporting research, discussing practice, and examining principles and theories. It is read by social work educators, researchers, practitioners and managers who wish to keep up to date with theoretical and empirical developments in the field.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信