Making Sense of Client Data: Clinical Experience and Confirmationism Revisited
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to examine if the order in which case file material is presented to clinicians and length of clinical experience affect clinical judgment. Using think-aloud procedures, 36 clinicians (trainees and veterans) diagnosed the case files of a middle-aged hospital outpatient. In one version, a neutral but vivid datum was placed near the start; in the second version it was placed toward the end. Protocols generated were coded on the dependent variables, confirmation and disconfirmation of earlier inferences, and dispositional and situational inferences. MANOVA results indicate that there is an interactive order-by-experience effect on proportion of confirmatory inferences articulated by participants. Other analyses indicate that order of information presentation but not level of practitioner experience is related to the variance in the proportion of contextual and dispositional inferences articulated by participants. Implications for praxis and for training programs are examined.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it