On the practice of routinely appending neuropsychological data to reports

Richard I. Naugle · A. John McSweeny

11 citations0/0 files storedThe Clinical Neuropsychologist

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Psychological Testing and Assessment Ethics in Clinical Research Psychology Research and Bibliometrics

Abstract

Freides' (1993) suggestion that all quantitative data from neuropsychological evaluations accompany reports has several professional and practical implications. The authors consider the possible ethical ramifications of doing so and caution that routinely appending raw quantitative data may not be advisable. Electronic methods of data transmission can be used to provide quantitative information quickly when necessary. Commentary from readers is invited.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

References

1993Proposed standard of professional practice: Neuropsychological reports display all quantitative data

Cited by

2001Neuropsychological testing of adults: further considerations for neurologists 2002Responsive assessment and the freedom to think for ourselves.1996More thoughts on the practice of routinely appending raw data to reports: Response to freides and matarazzo

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.