Abstract
No observation can be incorporated satisfactorily in a body of knowledge unless its reliability, however defined, is also known. In psychiatry, the concept of reliability has in great measure been transplanted from clinical psychology, but its optimal application to meet psychiatric needs requires some attention.For the purposes of psychiatry, reliability can conveniently be measured as the amount of agreement between different observers examining the same subjects (or a comparable series of subjects). The results may be expressed as the percentage of subjects in which agreement on the relevant variables is reached, or, in the case of two or more closely matched series being employed, by comparing the reported incidence of the phenomena under study. In one or other form this simple principle has been applied in a number of reliability studies, of which the majority have been concerned with the vital question of the reliability of nosological diagnosis (Ash, 1949; Mehlman, 1952; Hunt, Wittson and Hunt, 1953; Seeman, 1953; Foulds, 1955; Schmidt and Fonda, 1956; Pasamanick, Dinitz and Lefton, 1959), while Reid and Finnesinger (1952) have contributed an interesting semantic analysis of the concepts involved.
Publisher
Royal College of Psychiatrists
Reference29 articles.
1. PSYCHIATRIC DIAGNOSIS
2. On the Unreliability of Reliability and Some Other Consequences of the Assumption of Probabilistic Patient-States†
3. PSYCHIATRIC ORIENTATION AND ITS RELATION TO DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT IN A MENTAL HOSPITAL
4. Relationship between Amount of Presenting Symptomatology and Severity of Disability;ibid.,1955
5. Idem , Wittson C. , and Hunt E. , “A Theoretical and Practical Analysis of the Diagnostic Process” in: Hoch and Zubin , Current Problems in Psychiatric Diagnosis, 1951. New York: Proc. A.M.A., 1953.
Cited by
132 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献