The effects of human versus computer authorship on consumers' perceptions of psychological reports

摘要

This study examined the impact on school personnel of a psychological report purported to have been authored by a computer-based test interpretation (CBTI) system versus a psychologist. Identical reports, differing only in terms of authorship, were rated by school personnel in terms of perceived overall quality, credibility, and diagnostic interpretations. Subjects also indicated how much confidence they had in their evaluations of the psychological report they read. Data analyses indicated that authorship had virtually no effect on subjects' appraisal of the psychological report. The results of this study do not support the concerns of numerous authors who have theorized that report readers might inaccurately attribute an “aura” of scientific accuracy to computer- versus clinician-generated psychological reports. Suggestions for future research are provided.