@article{ref1,
title="Sex-related patient and therapist effects on clinical judgment",
journal="Sex roles",
year="1976",
author="Gomes, Beverly and Abramowitz, Stephen I.",
volume="2",
number="1",
pages="1-13",
abstract="The purpose of this investigation was to submit the claim of sex-related bias in clinical judgment to more thorough empirical testing than had been the case in previous research. Patient sex and stereotypic sex-role were factorially varied in a clinical protocol that was sent with related materials to 640 sex-stratified, randomly selected Members and Fellows of APA Division 29 (Psychotherapy). Approximately 30% ( N =182) of those contacted returned usable data, including information about their own sex-role traditionalism and evaluation of the hypothetical patients' psychological well-being. Results confirmed the effectiveness of the stereotypic sex-role manipulation. However, no consistent effects were found for any of the four variables of interest considered in isolation or in combination, thereby refuting allegations of covert sex-related discrimination perpetrated under the aegis of psychological appraisal. Favorableness of clinical impressions was not mediated by therapists' self-reported attitudes toward the patients. The study's generally unexpected outcome was tentatively attributed to enhanced professional sensitization to the sociocultural barriers to full psychological functioning in women.<p />",
language="en",
issn="0360-0025",
doi="10.1007/BF00289293",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00289293"
}