SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE CASE OF RESIST/REFUSE DYNAMICS: CONFIRMATORY BIAS AND ABDUCTIVE INFERENCE IN CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS. Garber, B. D. Family Court Review, 58(2):386–402, Association of Family and Conciliation Courts - Wiley Blackwell, USA, 2020. ![SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE CASE OF RESIST/REFUSE DYNAMICS: CONFIRMATORY BIAS AND ABDUCTIVE INFERENCE IN CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper abstract bibtex Had Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s fictional detective, the great Sherlock Holmes, actually engaged in deductive reasoning, he would have solved many fewer crimes. In fact, Holmes’ logical progression from astute observation to hypotheses is a model of a type of inductive reasoning. This paper argues that mental health professionals tasked to evaluate why a child is resisting/refusing contact with one parent must approach each family the way that Holmes approached each case, without a presumed suspect, moving systematically from detail to hypothesis, well-versed in the full range of dynamics that may be at play, and erring in favor of parsimony rather than pathology. By contrast, the custody evaluator who approaches these matters through a deductive process, seeking data that support an a priori theory, is vulnerable to confirmatory bias and doing harm to the child whose interests are paramount. The literature concerned with resist/refuse dynamics is reviewed, yielding 13 non-mutually exclusive variables that evaluators must consider so as to more fully identify why a particular child is resisting or refusing contact with one parent. On this basis, the hybrid model is expanded to include the full spectrum of contributing dynamics. Specific recommendations are made for judicial officers in the interest of writing orders for custody evaluations that minimize the risk of confirmatory bias.
@article{Garber2020SHERLOCK,
author = {Garber, Benjamin D.},
title = {SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE CASE OF RESIST/REFUSE DYNAMICS: CONFIRMATORY BIAS AND ABDUCTIVE INFERENCE IN CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS},
journal = {Family Court Review},
publisher = {Association of Family and Conciliation Courts - Wiley Blackwell},
address = {USA},
year = {2020},
volume = {58},
number = {2},
pages = {386--402},
isbn = {ISSN: 1531-2445 (print); 1744-1617 (online)},
abstract = {Had Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s fictional detective, the great Sherlock Holmes, actually engaged in deductive reasoning, he would have solved many fewer crimes. In fact, Holmes’ logical progression from astute observation to hypotheses is a model of a type of inductive reasoning. This paper argues that mental health professionals tasked to evaluate why a child is resisting/refusing contact with one parent must approach each family the way that Holmes approached each case, without a presumed suspect, moving systematically from detail to hypothesis, well-versed in the full range of dynamics that may be at play, and erring in favor of parsimony rather than pathology. By contrast, the custody evaluator who approaches these matters through a deductive process, seeking data that support an a priori theory, is vulnerable to confirmatory bias and doing harm to the child whose interests are paramount. The literature concerned with resist/refuse dynamics is reviewed, yielding 13 non-mutually exclusive variables that evaluators must consider so as to more fully identify why a particular child is resisting or refusing contact with one parent. On this basis, the hybrid model is expanded to include the full spectrum of contributing dynamics. Specific recommendations are made for judicial officers in the interest of writing orders for custody evaluations that minimize the risk of confirmatory bias.},
keywords = {Alienation; Child Custody; Confirmatory Bias; Co-parenting; divorce; Enmeshment; Estrangement; Polarization; Resist/Refuse; Triangulation; Endorsed by Professional Association; Evaluation},
url = {https://1drv.ms/b/s!AqneSWcIBOtatf0NGkLGbQ7oWZ0Q3g?e=6KReq9},
language = {English}
}
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"bA59MDBLDzPuLBRB5","bibbaseid":"garber-sherlockholmesandthecaseofresistrefusedynamicsconfirmatorybiasandabductiveinferenceinchildcustodyevaluations-2020","author_short":["Garber, B. D."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Garber"],"firstnames":["Benjamin","D."],"suffixes":[]}],"title":"SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE CASE OF RESIST/REFUSE DYNAMICS: CONFIRMATORY BIAS AND ABDUCTIVE INFERENCE IN CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS","journal":"Family Court Review","publisher":"Association of Family and Conciliation Courts - Wiley Blackwell","address":"USA","year":"2020","volume":"58","number":"2","pages":"386–402","isbn":"ISSN: 1531-2445 (print); 1744-1617 (online)","abstract":"Had Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s fictional detective, the great Sherlock Holmes, actually engaged in deductive reasoning, he would have solved many fewer crimes. In fact, Holmes’ logical progression from astute observation to hypotheses is a model of a type of inductive reasoning. This paper argues that mental health professionals tasked to evaluate why a child is resisting/refusing contact with one parent must approach each family the way that Holmes approached each case, without a presumed suspect, moving systematically from detail to hypothesis, well-versed in the full range of dynamics that may be at play, and erring in favor of parsimony rather than pathology. By contrast, the custody evaluator who approaches these matters through a deductive process, seeking data that support an a priori theory, is vulnerable to confirmatory bias and doing harm to the child whose interests are paramount. The literature concerned with resist/refuse dynamics is reviewed, yielding 13 non-mutually exclusive variables that evaluators must consider so as to more fully identify why a particular child is resisting or refusing contact with one parent. On this basis, the hybrid model is expanded to include the full spectrum of contributing dynamics. Specific recommendations are made for judicial officers in the interest of writing orders for custody evaluations that minimize the risk of confirmatory bias.","keywords":"Alienation; Child Custody; Confirmatory Bias; Co-parenting; divorce; Enmeshment; Estrangement; Polarization; Resist/Refuse; Triangulation; Endorsed by Professional Association; Evaluation","url":"https://1drv.ms/b/s!AqneSWcIBOtatf0NGkLGbQ7oWZ0Q3g?e=6KReq9","language":"English","bibtex":"@article{Garber2020SHERLOCK,\n author = {Garber, Benjamin D.},\n title = {SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE CASE OF RESIST/REFUSE DYNAMICS: CONFIRMATORY BIAS AND ABDUCTIVE INFERENCE IN CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS},\n journal = {Family Court Review},\n publisher = {Association of Family and Conciliation Courts - Wiley Blackwell},\n address = {USA},\n year = {2020},\n volume = {58},\n number = {2},\n pages = {386--402},\n isbn = {ISSN: 1531-2445 (print); 1744-1617 (online)},\n abstract = {Had Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s fictional detective, the great Sherlock Holmes, actually engaged in deductive reasoning, he would have solved many fewer crimes. In fact, Holmes’ logical progression from astute observation to hypotheses is a model of a type of inductive reasoning. This paper argues that mental health professionals tasked to evaluate why a child is resisting/refusing contact with one parent must approach each family the way that Holmes approached each case, without a presumed suspect, moving systematically from detail to hypothesis, well-versed in the full range of dynamics that may be at play, and erring in favor of parsimony rather than pathology. By contrast, the custody evaluator who approaches these matters through a deductive process, seeking data that support an a priori theory, is vulnerable to confirmatory bias and doing harm to the child whose interests are paramount. The literature concerned with resist/refuse dynamics is reviewed, yielding 13 non-mutually exclusive variables that evaluators must consider so as to more fully identify why a particular child is resisting or refusing contact with one parent. On this basis, the hybrid model is expanded to include the full spectrum of contributing dynamics. Specific recommendations are made for judicial officers in the interest of writing orders for custody evaluations that minimize the risk of confirmatory bias.},\n keywords = {Alienation; Child Custody; Confirmatory Bias; Co-parenting; divorce; Enmeshment; Estrangement; Polarization; Resist/Refuse; Triangulation; Endorsed by Professional Association; Evaluation},\n url = {https://1drv.ms/b/s!AqneSWcIBOtatf0NGkLGbQ7oWZ0Q3g?e=6KReq9},\n language = {English}\n}\n\n","author_short":["Garber, B. D."],"key":"Garber2020SHERLOCK","id":"Garber2020SHERLOCK","bibbaseid":"garber-sherlockholmesandthecaseofresistrefusedynamicsconfirmatorybiasandabductiveinferenceinchildcustodyevaluations-2020","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://1drv.ms/b/s!AqneSWcIBOtatf0NGkLGbQ7oWZ0Q3g?e=6KReq9"},"keyword":["Alienation; Child Custody; Confirmatory Bias; Co-parenting; divorce; Enmeshment; Estrangement; Polarization; Resist/Refuse; Triangulation; Endorsed by Professional Association; Evaluation"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/f/v9y3N5nSNJCGbutCQ/pasg_all_fields_new.bib","dataSources":["2znj6DDoAPkzAbPbu","dpJ65KQZAq5QWGLhR","fKeAv25rm3KGeNNgj","PnAcKDiPuitiWMt8Q"],"keywords":["alienation; child custody; confirmatory bias; co-parenting; divorce; enmeshment; estrangement; polarization; resist/refuse; triangulation; endorsed by professional association; evaluation"],"search_terms":["sherlock","holmes","case","resist","refuse","dynamics","confirmatory","bias","abductive","inference","child","custody","evaluations","garber"],"title":"SHERLOCK HOLMES AND THE CASE OF RESIST/REFUSE DYNAMICS: CONFIRMATORY BIAS AND ABDUCTIVE INFERENCE IN CHILD CUSTODY EVALUATIONS","year":2020}