Ch 7. intuition, Personal experience, Case examples, Testimonials, and Authority Flashcards
(14 cards)
Two factors that influence dependability of evidence
Quality
Quantity
Greater both the quality and quantity of evidence, more we can depend in the evidence and claim it a fact
Quality of evidence
High-quality: Usually dependable and credible because less influenced by wishful thinking and bias
Low-quality: Proceed with caution because more likely to be influenced by bias or wishful thinking
Quantity of evidence
None: Proceed with caution
One: Good start
Many: Worth our attention, especially if found from different researchers (i.e. Schlosser et al. review of FC)
Question to ask to find evidence
- What is your proof?
- Where’s the evidence?
- How do you know that’s true?
- Are you sure it’s true?
- Why do you believe that?
Evidence
Information for justifying dependability of a claim/conclusion
Grounds for belief, testimony or fact and ending to prove/disprove a conclusion
Sources of evidence
Intuition
Personal experience
Case studies
Testimony
Appeal to authority
Intuition
A thing that one knows or considers likely from instinctive feelings rather than conscious reasoning
Arriving at a conclusion without any conscious awareness or reasoning of how it was obtained
Issues:
May lead to rationalization (making reasons from a conclusion)
Cannot be proven (gut feeling)
Not dependable (subjective and difficult to verify)
System 1 thinking (habits, associations and pattern recognition based on prior experience)
Fast, no effort, focus, nondeliberate and WM unnecessary
Could be wrong (difficult to think of a time when our intuition was wrong confirmation bias)
Hasty generalization (happened once, happen again?)
Is it valid?:
Possibly use as a good starting point and follow up. Is a good indicator but not decision-maker
Expert intuition
Expert: Recognized as having skills and abilities to perform at highest level within profession
Expert intuition occurs when accurate and rapid decisions are made without awareness of reasons or evaluations of validity of reasons
Conditions needed for expert intuition
- Deep knowledge
- Lots of personal experience
- Many trials and errors
- Years of studying and experience to develop sufficient knowledge base and pattern recognition ability and ability to ignore irrelevant information
- Works in environment that provides consistent and valid cues
- Receives corrective feedback
- Intellectual humility, knowing what you don’t know
Needs a lot of system 2 thinking for expert intuition to become system 1 thinking
Personal experience
Knowledge and skills acquired by a period of practical experience of something, especially that which is gained in specific profession (Clinical experience)
Issues:
Single personal experience or accumulation of personal experience is not enough to give a representative sample of experiences
Leads to hasty generalization (Drawing conclusions about many from a few)
Personal exp demonstrates possibility not probability
Analogy of elephant and blind person
Personal exp may be biased and influenced by wishful thinking, personal expectations, misinterpretations and faulty memories
Is Personal exp. a valid source of evidence for HP?
Can result in greater efficiency and skills, since the more we do it, the more it becomes system 2 process
But is a questionable basis of evidence for determining treatment effectiveness due to:
Limited ability to see all causal factors such as things happening outside of client’s life
Clinical bias in favor of positive results (confirmation bias and wishful thinking)
But could be improved by collecting objective, scientific data and fostering conditions for a true expert.
Case examples/studies
Small, detailed samples using detailed, catchy descriptions of a story about one or several individuals/events to support a conclusion
Could be narrative like Biklens or more stat-based like Shane and Kearns’ study
Issues:
Shows that event is possible, but not that its the typical or norm
Puts a personal face on stats (stories over statistics)
BUT may also motivate others to conduct further research (Schlosser et al)
Is case studies a valid source of evidence for HP?
Case studies can provide important information as the first step, but in order to trust it, must be paired with additional research
Simplified levels of evidence
1: Randomized clinical trials
2: Cohort studies and single subject designs
3: Case studies and expert opinions
Testimonials
Commercials, ads, recommendations or quoting someone (informal) that represents one’s own beliefs and experience
All testimonials are personal experience, but not all personal experience are testimonials
Verbal and legal documentary evidence to serve as expert testimony in court (formal)
Issues:
1. Selectivity
2. Includes personal interests
3. Omits information
4. Human factor
** if in research study, it is not a testimonial**
Is testimonials a valid source of evidence for HP?:
May be valid under legal conditions, but testimonials as treatment evidence may not be as trustworthy but lacking if not supported by other evidence
Appeal to authority
Authority: Sources that are supposed to know more than most of us about a given topic, the experts
Questions to ask:
1. How much expertise do they have about the subject?
2. Is this a topic the expert has studied for a while?
3. Was author in a positive to have especially good access to related facts?
4. Is there good reason to believe that authority is relatively free from distorting influences and COI?
Expert = authority for this class, although expert used for HP and authority used in other contexts
Is experts a source of evidence for HP?:
Person with expertise in specific area may be able to provide valued information in that area, especially when supported by other evidence (level 3 evidence) so not the strongest/best
