Clinicians' Personal Theories of Developmental Disorders Explain Their Judgments of Effectiveness of Interventions.

Evidence-based psychotherapy requires clinicians to consider theories of psychopathology and evidence about effectiveness, and their experience when choosing interventions. Research on clinical decision making indicates that clinicians' theories of disorders might be personal and inform judgments and choices beyond current scientific theory and evidence. We asked 20 child therapists to draw models of how they believed that biological, psychological, environmental, and behavioral factors interact to cause and maintain four common developmental disorders.

How do practising clinicians and students apply newly learned causal information about mental disorders?

Rationale, Aims And Objectives: New causal theories explaining the aetiology of psychiatric disorders continuously appear in the literature. How might such new information directly impact clinical practice, to the degree that clinicians are aware of it and accept it? We investigated whether expert clinical psychologists and students use new causal information about psychiatric disorders according to rationalist norms in their diagnostic reasoning. Specifically, philosophical and Bayesian analyses suggest that it is rational to draw stronger inferences about the presence of a disorder when a client's presenting symptoms are from disparate locations in a causal theory of the disorder than when they are from proximal locations.

Causal client models in selecting effective interventions: a cognitive mapping study.

An important reason to choose an intervention to treat psychological problems of clients is the expectation that the intervention will be effective in alleviating the problems. The authors investigated whether clinicians base their ratings of the effectiveness of interventions on models that they construct representing the factors causing and maintaining a client's problems. Forty clinical child psychologists drew causal models and rank ordered interventions according to their expected effectiveness for 2 cases.

Causal diversity effects in information seeking.

When trying to determine the root cause of an observed effect, people may seek out information with which to test a candidate hypothesis. In two studies, we investigated how knowledge of causal structure influences this information-seeking process. Specifically, we asked whether people would choose to test for pieces of evidence that were far apart or close together in the learned causal structure of a disease category.