Should this child be removed from home? Hypothesis generation and information seeking as predictors of case decisions

Lower levels of agreement with the intervention were associated with less unwarranted assumptions, a greater number of hypotheses generated, and more requests for information concerning the case.

Abstract

Two vital aspects of the investigative process in child abuse and neglect (CAN) cases are (a) generating as many plausible hypotheses as possible and (b) seeking out as much uncontaminated information as possible. Alternatively, unwarranted assumptions about the nature of CAN cases can impair investigative decision making. We examined whether the numbers of (a) unwarranted assumptions, (b) hypotheses generated, and (c) requests for additional information concerning a hypothetical reported case of CAN predicted level of agreement with a premature decision to remove a child from home among a group of CAN professionals. As expected, lower levels of agreement with the intervention were associated with (a) less unwarranted assumptions, (b) a greater number of hypotheses generated, and (c) more requests for information concerning the case. Compared with a group of undergraduates, a significantly greater percentage of CAN professionals requested information, and a significantly smaller percentage of professionals made unwarranted assumptions. Interestingly, however, no significant difference in mean level of agreement with the intervention was observed between professionals and undergraduates. Directions for future research are discussed.