Wedding D
Missouri Institute of Mental Health, St. Louis 63139.
Neuropsychol Rev. 1991 Sep;2(3):233-9. doi: 10.1007/BF01109046.
There is a vast and growing literature in psychology demonstrating the general limits of human judgment and clinical inference. These findings clearly apply in the new specialty of clinical neuropsychology, and there is little empirical research to support the widespread belief that judgmental accuracy correlates substantially with experience, professional stature, or reputation as a neuropsychologist. However, the demand characteristics of expert testimony in the forensic arena may encourage individual neuropsychologists to state or intimate that they have unique or special expertise in understanding brain-behavior relationships, or in predicting outcomes following cerebral insult or injury. These claims will be increasingly difficult to substantiate as attorneys become more conversant with the literature on human judgment.
心理学领域有大量且不断增加的文献表明了人类判断和临床推理的普遍局限性。这些研究结果显然适用于临床神经心理学这一新专业领域，而且几乎没有实证研究能支持一种广泛存在的观点，即判断准确性与经验、专业地位或作为神经心理学家的声誉有很大关联。然而，法医领域专家证词的需求特性可能会促使个别神经心理学家宣称或暗示他们在理解脑与行为的关系，或预测脑损伤或受伤后的结果方面拥有独特或特殊的专业知识。随着律师们对有关人类判断的文献越来越熟悉，这些说法将越来越难以得到证实。
