| Abstract: | ![]()
Investigated the influence of confederates' verbal evaluations of psychological test data on clinical psychology graduate students' evaluations. 30 clinical psychology graduate students rated 8 artificially constructed Rorschach protocols by means of a Q sort and a diagnosis checklist. One half of the Ss verbally rated the protocols after 3 confederates who posed as graduate students had purportedly rated them; the other half rated the protocols after 2 confederates who posed as graduate students and one as a PhD clinical psychologist had purportedly rated them. The confederates' evaluations varied from being not discrepant to highly discrepant with the actual diagnoses of the protocols. Ss' evaluations on both dependent measures were influenced by the confederates' prior evaluations, especially when the confederate was designated as having higher status. (20 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved) |
