遭遇偏见:研究专家心理学家在专业考试中评估过程中的偏见和成见》(Encountering Bias: Examining Biases and Stereotypes in the Evaluation Process Among Expert Psychologists during Specialization Exams)。

IF 1.7 4区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Avshalom Galil, Maayan Abargil, Zahira Ziva Cohen, Abira Reizer
{"title":"遭遇偏见:研究专家心理学家在专业考试中评估过程中的偏见和成见》(Encountering Bias: Examining Biases and Stereotypes in the Evaluation Process Among Expert Psychologists during Specialization Exams)。","authors":"Avshalom Galil, Maayan Abargil, Zahira Ziva Cohen, Abira Reizer","doi":"10.1177/00332941241269485","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The study of cognitive biases in job interviews has garnered significant attention due to its far-reaching implications for the economy and society. However, little research has focused on the biases exhibited by expert psychologists serving on psychology specialization examination committees. As such, this study has conducted a comprehensive examination of biases within the specialization exam in Israel. One additional objective of the research is to assess the levels of distress experienced by examinees following the examination. Questionnaires were administered to 418 psychologists participating in the clinical and educational psychology specialization exams. The findings unveiled several noteworthy outcomes. Firstly, several biases were identified, including ethnic stereotypes, biases stemming from cognitive load, and more. Secondly, examinees who presented a cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) case experienced a higher failure rate. Thirdly, a positive association was found between exam failure and personal distress and this effect was stronger for educational examinees compared to clinical examinees. The most intriguing discovery was that all biases, without exception, occurred among clinical psychologists, whereas educational psychologists displayed no biases. This outcome contrasted with initial expectations. Consequently, the present study aims to expand the existing knowledge about psychological biases and stereotypes by elucidate the reasons behind this discrepancy between the two disciplines while considering the advantages and disadvantages associated with a sense of \"expertise\" in the realm of adult diagnostics.</p>","PeriodicalId":21149,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Reports","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Encountering Bias: Examining Biases and Stereotypes in the Evaluation Process Among Expert Psychologists During Specialization Exams.\",\"authors\":\"Avshalom Galil, Maayan Abargil, Zahira Ziva Cohen, Abira Reizer\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00332941241269485\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The study of cognitive biases in job interviews has garnered significant attention due to its far-reaching implications for the economy and society. However, little research has focused on the biases exhibited by expert psychologists serving on psychology specialization examination committees. As such, this study has conducted a comprehensive examination of biases within the specialization exam in Israel. One additional objective of the research is to assess the levels of distress experienced by examinees following the examination. Questionnaires were administered to 418 psychologists participating in the clinical and educational psychology specialization exams. The findings unveiled several noteworthy outcomes. Firstly, several biases were identified, including ethnic stereotypes, biases stemming from cognitive load, and more. Secondly, examinees who presented a cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) case experienced a higher failure rate. Thirdly, a positive association was found between exam failure and personal distress and this effect was stronger for educational examinees compared to clinical examinees. The most intriguing discovery was that all biases, without exception, occurred among clinical psychologists, whereas educational psychologists displayed no biases. This outcome contrasted with initial expectations. Consequently, the present study aims to expand the existing knowledge about psychological biases and stereotypes by elucidate the reasons behind this discrepancy between the two disciplines while considering the advantages and disadvantages associated with a sense of \\\"expertise\\\" in the realm of adult diagnostics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21149,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Reports\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Reports\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941241269485\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Reports","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941241269485","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

求职面试中的认知偏差研究因其对经济和社会的深远影响而备受关注。然而,很少有研究关注心理学专业考试委员会中的心理学专家所表现出的偏见。因此,本研究对以色列专业考试中存在的偏见进行了全面考察。研究的另一个目的是评估考生在考试后所经历的痛苦程度。对参加临床和教育心理学专业考试的 418 名心理学家进行了问卷调查。研究结果揭示了几个值得注意的结果。首先,发现了几种偏见,包括种族成见、认知负荷引起的偏见等。其次,提交认知行为疗法(CBT)案例的考生失败率较高。第三,研究发现,考试失败与个人苦恼之间存在正相关,与临床考生相比,教育类考生的这种效应更强。最引人入胜的发现是,所有的偏见无一例外地都发生在临床心理学家身上,而教育心理学家却没有表现出任何偏见。这一结果与最初的预期形成了鲜明对比。因此,本研究旨在通过阐明两个学科之间存在差异背后的原因,同时考虑与成人诊断领域的 "专业 "意识相关的利弊,从而扩展现有的有关心理偏见和刻板印象的知识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Encountering Bias: Examining Biases and Stereotypes in the Evaluation Process Among Expert Psychologists During Specialization Exams.

The study of cognitive biases in job interviews has garnered significant attention due to its far-reaching implications for the economy and society. However, little research has focused on the biases exhibited by expert psychologists serving on psychology specialization examination committees. As such, this study has conducted a comprehensive examination of biases within the specialization exam in Israel. One additional objective of the research is to assess the levels of distress experienced by examinees following the examination. Questionnaires were administered to 418 psychologists participating in the clinical and educational psychology specialization exams. The findings unveiled several noteworthy outcomes. Firstly, several biases were identified, including ethnic stereotypes, biases stemming from cognitive load, and more. Secondly, examinees who presented a cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) case experienced a higher failure rate. Thirdly, a positive association was found between exam failure and personal distress and this effect was stronger for educational examinees compared to clinical examinees. The most intriguing discovery was that all biases, without exception, occurred among clinical psychologists, whereas educational psychologists displayed no biases. This outcome contrasted with initial expectations. Consequently, the present study aims to expand the existing knowledge about psychological biases and stereotypes by elucidate the reasons behind this discrepancy between the two disciplines while considering the advantages and disadvantages associated with a sense of "expertise" in the realm of adult diagnostics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychological Reports
Psychological Reports PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
171
×
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