Causal explanations affect judgments of the need for psychological treatment

Nancy S. Kim and Stefanie T. LoSavio

Judgment and Decision Making, 2009, vol. 4, issue 1, pages 82-91

Abstract: Knowing what event precipitated a client's abnormal behaviors makes the client appear more normal than if the event is not known (Meehl, 1973). Does such knowledge also influence judgments of the need for psychological treatment, and if so, does it matter whether the precipitating event was inside or outside the client's control? We presented undergraduates with cases of hypothetical clients exhibiting abnormal behaviors and manipulated whether they were also told of a precipitating event explaining those behaviors. Knowing the precipitant significantly reduced perceptions of clients' need for treatment, but only when the precipitating event was outside the client's control. These findings call into question the notion that it need always be beneficial for an outside reasoner to uncover the root cause of a client's psychological problems, particularly when the root cause is still unknown to the client. The rationality of the effect and additional implications for decision-making are discussed.

Keywords: understanding; explanation; clinical judgment; treatment. (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2009
View list of references

Downloads: (external link)
http://journal.sjdm.org/81028/jdm81028.pdf (application/pdf)
http://journal.sjdm.org/81028/jdm81028.html (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: http://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:jdm:journl:v:4:y:2009:i:1:p:82-91

Access Statistics for this article

Judgment and Decision Making is edited by Jonathan Baron

More articles in Judgment and Decision Making from Society for Judgment and Decision Making
Series data maintained by Jonathan Baron ().