Learn Before
Case Study

Explain why the researchers' conclusion that the intervention is an 'empirically supported treatment' shows an incomplete understanding of the concept. Describe what further comparisons are necessary to fully satisfy the definition of an empirically supported treatment and why these are important for clinical decision-making.

Case context: A research team evaluates a new cognitive intervention for mild cognitive impairment. They conduct a study comparing a group receiving the intervention to a control group that receives no treatment. The results show that the intervention group exhibits significantly greater improvement. The researchers conclude that their intervention is an empirically supported treatment and immediately advocate for its adoption in clinical practice, arguing that it is superior to no intervention.

Question: Explain why the researchers' conclusion that the intervention is an 'empirically supported treatment' shows an incomplete understanding of the concept. Describe what further comparisons are necessary to fully satisfy the definition of an empirically supported treatment and why these are important for clinical decision-making.

Sample answer: The researchers' conclusion is premature because beating a no-treatment control is only one criterion. According to the definition of an empirically supported treatment, a therapy must be proven more effective than no treatment, a placebo, or an alternative treatment. By only comparing their intervention to a no-treatment control, the researchers cannot rule out placebo effects or establish whether their therapy is better than existing alternative treatments. For sound clinical decision-making, they must compare it to a placebo or an active alternative treatment to ensure clinical decisions are guided by accurate evidence rather than intuition.

Key points:

  • Beating a no-treatment control group is insufficient to declare a treatment empirically supported.
  • The treatment needs to be compared to a placebo or an alternative treatment.
  • Placebo comparisons help rule out non-specific treatment effects.
  • Alternative treatment comparisons establish whether the new therapy is better than existing options.
  • Rigorous empirical testing ensures clinical decisions are based on accurate evidence instead of intuition.

Rubric: The response must explain that beating a no-treatment control is insufficient on its own. It must identify the need to compare the treatment to a placebo or an alternative treatment. It must also explain that these comparisons are necessary to rule out placebo effects or show relative efficacy, ensuring clinical decisions are based on accurate evidence rather than intuition.

0

1

Updated 2026-05-26

Contributors are:

Who are from:

Tags

KPU

Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU

Related