Christoph Flückiger, Caroline Kolle, Jan Schürmann-Vengels, Ralf Rummer, Mathias Allemand
{"title":"心理治疗师的第一临床印象是否存在根本性偏差?实验方法。","authors":"Christoph Flückiger, Caroline Kolle, Jan Schürmann-Vengels, Ralf Rummer, Mathias Allemand","doi":"10.1037/cou0000766","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fifty years ago, the Rosenhan experiment was one of the most impactful psychological studies across decades. One of the main claims of the experiment was that clinicians could be negatively biased in their first clinical impressions, which would negatively impact further clinical decisions. We conducted two experiments (<i>N</i> = 56 and 64) in which psychotherapists were asked to give their first clinical impressions in two consecutive cases after a brief presentation of the case (case description and video excerpt) and a short recall task of the information provided. The attentional focus in the recall task served as an independent variable. Therapists had to adopt either a symptom-focused or a strength-focused attentional focus to recall the cases, that is, therapists rated their first case in either the symptom-focused or the strength-focused condition and the second case in the opposite condition. In both studies, therapists in the symptom-focused conditions rated patients as slightly more distressed, less resilient, and less psychosocially integrated in comparison to the strength-focused conditions. However, even statistically significant, these effects were rather small to clinically negligible. Our preliminary results suggest that the first clinical impressions of contemporary psychotherapists are vulnerable in both experiments to be slightly, but not as dramatically, distorted as the Rosenhan experiment would suggest at the time. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48424,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Counseling Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"45-55"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are psychotherapists' first clinical impressions fundamentally biased? An experimental approach.\",\"authors\":\"Christoph Flückiger, Caroline Kolle, Jan Schürmann-Vengels, Ralf Rummer, Mathias Allemand\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/cou0000766\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Fifty years ago, the Rosenhan experiment was one of the most impactful psychological studies across decades. One of the main claims of the experiment was that clinicians could be negatively biased in their first clinical impressions, which would negatively impact further clinical decisions. We conducted two experiments (<i>N</i> = 56 and 64) in which psychotherapists were asked to give their first clinical impressions in two consecutive cases after a brief presentation of the case (case description and video excerpt) and a short recall task of the information provided. The attentional focus in the recall task served as an independent variable. Therapists had to adopt either a symptom-focused or a strength-focused attentional focus to recall the cases, that is, therapists rated their first case in either the symptom-focused or the strength-focused condition and the second case in the opposite condition. In both studies, therapists in the symptom-focused conditions rated patients as slightly more distressed, less resilient, and less psychosocially integrated in comparison to the strength-focused conditions. However, even statistically significant, these effects were rather small to clinically negligible. Our preliminary results suggest that the first clinical impressions of contemporary psychotherapists are vulnerable in both experiments to be slightly, but not as dramatically, distorted as the Rosenhan experiment would suggest at the time. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48424,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Counseling Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"45-55\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Counseling Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000766\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Counseling Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/cou0000766","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
Are psychotherapists' first clinical impressions fundamentally biased? An experimental approach.
Fifty years ago, the Rosenhan experiment was one of the most impactful psychological studies across decades. One of the main claims of the experiment was that clinicians could be negatively biased in their first clinical impressions, which would negatively impact further clinical decisions. We conducted two experiments (N = 56 and 64) in which psychotherapists were asked to give their first clinical impressions in two consecutive cases after a brief presentation of the case (case description and video excerpt) and a short recall task of the information provided. The attentional focus in the recall task served as an independent variable. Therapists had to adopt either a symptom-focused or a strength-focused attentional focus to recall the cases, that is, therapists rated their first case in either the symptom-focused or the strength-focused condition and the second case in the opposite condition. In both studies, therapists in the symptom-focused conditions rated patients as slightly more distressed, less resilient, and less psychosocially integrated in comparison to the strength-focused conditions. However, even statistically significant, these effects were rather small to clinically negligible. Our preliminary results suggest that the first clinical impressions of contemporary psychotherapists are vulnerable in both experiments to be slightly, but not as dramatically, distorted as the Rosenhan experiment would suggest at the time. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Counseling Psychology® publishes empirical research in the areas of counseling activities (including assessment, interventions, consultation, supervision, training, prevention, and psychological education) career development and vocational psychology diversity and underrepresented populations in relation to counseling activities the development of new measures to be used in counseling activities professional issues in counseling psychology In addition, the Journal of Counseling Psychology considers reviews or theoretical contributions that have the potential for stimulating further research in counseling psychology, and conceptual or empirical contributions about methodological issues in counseling psychology research.