| A methodology derived from a process tracing technique was developed to examine the consistency of two operationally defined heuristics. The investigation focused upon how 20 psychologists employed the two heuristics in arriving at diagnostic decisions through the use of DSM-IV diagnostic criteria. Subjects rendered diagnoses based upon the criteria they collected by means of searching through cards on information boards. It was found that only a few psychologists utilized highly consistent search patterns. However, many subjects changed their search pattern according to the task demand of the board. Weighted boards tended to elicit search strategies that were conducted between categories of information. Non-weighted boards tended to elicit search strategies that were conducted within categories of information. While the design of the methodology itself was partially responsible for these results, the findings parallel those found in the literature indicating that task demand affects search strategy, and that heuristic strategies are a function of a combination of individual differences and task demand. This may have implications in intake settings in terms of the amount of information present, and how effectively a clinician manages relevant and irrelevant information. The methodology of the current study was unable to establish a significant correlation between use of a heuristic and correct versus incorrect diagnosis. However, there was some evidence for the use of the representativeness heuristic on certain information boards which had incorrect diagnoses. Suggestions for further research include the implementation of verbal protocols and investigating how amount of information may impact quality of diagnostic decision making. |
