ABSTRACT
It is often assumed that judgment accuracy improves as clinical training and experience increase, but the few studies on this topic within neuropsychology have yielded negative findings. In an extension of prior research, we obtained information on background training and experience from a nationally representative sample of clinical neuropsychologists and had each practitioner appraise one from among a series of 10 cases. Except for a possible tendency among more experienced practitioners to overdiagnose abnormality, no systematic relations were obtained between training, experience, and accuracy across a series of neuropsychologic judgments. Comparable results were obtained when analysis was limited to the top versus bottom 20% of the sample. This and other studies raise doubt that clinical neuropsychologists train and practice under conditions conducive to experiential learning. The potential benefits of further research on experience and judgment accuracy are discussed.
