Journal of clinical child and adolescent psychology : the official journal for the Society of Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology, American Psychological Association, Division 53 · 2026
Navigating Informant Discrepancies in Practice: A Qualitative Study on How Psychologists Manage Multi-Informant Data.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Taehee, Kim Mihyun, Lease Michele
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to bridge the research-practice gap by exploring how practicing psychologists perceive and manage informant discrepancies when conducting comprehensive assessments of children and adolescents. We also sought to understand the challenges faced and resources utilized in addressing these discrepancies.
METHOD: Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with thirteen licensed psychologists who work with youth in diverse applied settings (e.g. school, private clinic, hospital). Using the Needs-to-Goals Gap framework as our conceptual foundation, we employed both deductive and inductive coding approaches in qualitative thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Our study found that psychologists perceive informant discrepancies as common and expected features of assessment, yet they experience substantial clinical strain in certain cases - particularly when discrepancies arise in high-stakes clinical decisions or cannot be readily explained by available data (Themes 1-2). When interpreting multi-informant assessments, psychologists employed several interpretive approaches, including seeking consistency across informants, acknowledging divergent perspectives, and exploring potential confounds such as reporting biases (Themes 3-5). Psychologists described decision-making with discrepant information as an iterative process, with discrepant data often being used to inform diagnostic impressions and treatment planning (Themes 6-7). However, identified discrepancies were not always carried forward into treatment goals; instead, participants sometimes prioritized the primary presenting concerns that prompted the referral, reflecting a potential gap between need assessment and goal setting. Participants also described persistent challenges in communicating discrepancies with informants and noted limited access to practical resources or structured guidance for navigating discrepant information in practice (Themes 8-9).
METHOD: Semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with thirteen licensed psychologists who work with youth in diverse applied settings (e.g. school, private clinic, hospital). Using the Needs-to-Goals Gap framework as our conceptual foundation, we employed both deductive and inductive coding approaches in qualitative thematic analysis.
RESULTS: Our study found that psychologists perceive informant discrepancies as common and expected features of assessment, yet they experience substantial clinical strain in certain cases - particularly when discrepancies arise in high-stakes clinical decisions or cannot be readily explained by available data (Themes 1-2). When interpreting multi-informant assessments, psychologists employed several interpretive approaches, including seeking consistency across informants, acknowledging divergent perspectives, and exploring potential confounds such as reporting biases (Themes 3-5). Psychologists described decision-making with discrepant information as an iterative process, with discrepant data often being used to inform diagnostic impressions and treatment planning (Themes 6-7). However, identified discrepancies were not always carried forward into treatment goals; instead, participants sometimes prioritized the primary presenting concerns that prompted the referral, reflecting a potential gap between need assessment and goal setting. Participants also described persistent challenges in communicating discrepancies with informants and noted limited access to practical resources or structured guidance for navigating discrepant information in practice (Themes 8-9).