Do "we just know"? Masked assessors' ability to accurately identify children with prenatal cocaine exposure.
Academic Article
Overview
abstract
This study evaluated perceptions of masked assessors to determine whether there are subtle differences in cocaine-exposed and unexposed children who might be identified by those interacting with children. As part of a longitudinal study, developmental assessors were masked to 163 4-year-old children's actual in utero cocaine exposure status and developmental history. After each battery, assessors documented their guesses of the child's cocaine exposure. Thirty-seven percent of the children who were exposed were misclassified as unexposed, whereas 74% of those unexposed were incorrectly classified as exposed. Although the sample did not differ on assessment scores when results were analyzed by actual cocaine exposure status ( >.3), children who did less well on assessments were more likely to be labeled by assessors as cocaine-exposed ( <.001). Results highlight the potential of stereotyping and negative attributions that might distort observations, both in unmasked studies of prenatal cocaine exposure and in clinical settings.